Monday, December 11, 2006

Daf Yomi - Rosh Hashana 6 - Highlights

The Gemora learns that one who delays in bringing a korban has committed a sin but there will not be a sin in his wife. Rav Yochanan stated that a man’s wife will die a premature death if he is asked for money that he stole from others and he does not have the money to repay. One might have thought that his wife will die for the sin of delaying as well. The Torah teaches us that this is not the case.

The Gemora cites two verses to teach us that there is a positive commandment for one to fulfill his vow. There are also two verses teaching a negative commandment not to avoid fulfilling one’s vow. There are two verses to teach us that Beis Din should force a person to fulfill his vow. The Gemora questions the necessity for the two verses for each of those halachos.

...Read more

The Gemora answers that the two verses are referring to two different cases. One verse is discussing a case where one made a vow to offer a korban but he did not designate it and the other verse is referring to a case where he designated the animal but he did not yet bring it as a korban. The Gemora explains why both cases must be taught and why we wouldn’t be able to learn one from the other.

The Gemora questions this explanation by citing a Mishna in Kinnim which explains the difference between a neder and a nedovah. A neder is where one makes a vow obligating himself to bring a korban. A nedovah is where he designates a specific animal as a korban. There would be a difference in halacha if after the designation, the animal would die or get stolen. If he made a neder, he would be required to bring another one but if it was a nedovah, he would not be obligated to bring another one since his vow was that this animal would be a korban. How can we explain one of the verses to be referring to a case that he vowed to bring a korban but did not designate one, when both of the verses explicitly state nedovah and nedovah is where he designates the animal.

Rava answers that there can be a case of nedovah where he does not designate the animal and that is where he explicitly vowed to bring a korban with the stipulation that he will not be responsible if it dies or gets stolen. This vow would have the status of a nedovah.

Rava rules that one who vows to give charity is subject to the prohibition of delaying instantly, even before the passage of any of the festivals. The reason given for this is because the poor people are standing in front of us and it is essential that they receive the charity immediately.

Rava rules that one who vows to bring a korban and has not brought it after one festival has violated a positive commandment. The Gemora questions this from a testimony from Rabbi Pepayes. Rabbi Yehoshua and Rabbi Pepayes ruled that if one consecrates a pregnant cow for a shelamim or he consecrates a cow for a shelamim and it subsequently becomes pregnant, the offspring should be brought as a shelamim. Rabbi Pepayes testified that he ate a shelamim on Pesach and its offspring on Sukkos. The Gemora understands that he did not bring the offspring as a shelamim on Pesach since it might not have been old enough for a korban at the time (less than eight days old is considered premature), but why wasn’t the offspring brought as a shelamim on the Festival of Shavuos? Delaying until Sukkos would be violating the positive commandment of bringing the korban on the first festival. Rav Zvid answers that the offspring was sick on Shavuos and could not be brought. Rav ashi answers that when the Gemora stated that it was brought on the ‘Chag,’ it is referring to Shavuos and not to Sukkos.

Rava rules that once the three festivals have passed, he is liable every single day for the prohibition against delaying the bringing of the korban.

A braisa is cited which states that one who vows to bring a korban and a year passes by without three festivals or three festivals pass by without a year will be liable for transgressing the prohibition against delaying. We can understand how it’s possible to have three festivals pass by without a year but how can a year pass by without three festivals? The Gemora answers that if we hold that the prohibition of delaying is only if three festivals pass in sequence, then it is understandable how we can have a year pass before the three successive festivals; however if we maintain that the prohibition is even when the three festivals are not in sequence, how can a year pass without three festivals.

This question can be answered according to Rebbe who maintains that a year in halacha is 365 days even if there is a leap year. If one consecrated an animal after Pesach and the following year is a leap year, after 365 days the year will be complete but the three festivals are not.

According to the Chachamim who disagree with Rebbe and maintain that a year is not complete by counting 365 days, rather a year is not complete until the anniversary of the same day next year, there can still exist a case where a year can be completed before the three festivals are. We have learned in a braisa that Shavuos can sometimes be on the fifth of Sivan, sometimes the sixth and at times can fall out on the seventh of Sivan. Shavuos is always the fiftieth day after we begin counting the Omer. The reason the day will vary is because there are times that Nissan and Iyar will both contain thirty days. There can be times that they both consist of twenty-nine days. Sometimes, one will have thirty and one will be twenty-nine. If Shavuos was on the fifth of Sivan and a person made a vow on the sixth of Sivan to bring a korban, the year is completed the following year on the sixth of Sivan. If the following year, Shavuos was on the seventh of Sivan, the year will be completed before the three festivals.

Rabbi Zeira inquires if an inheritor is subject to the prohibition against delaying. An heir is obligated to bring the korbanos for his father. The Gemora is questioning that perhaps he is not subject to this prohibition since he was not the person who made the vow or since he is nonetheless required to bring the korban, he is included in the prohibition.

Rabbi Zeira inquires if a woman who made a vow to bring a korban is subject to the prohibition against delaying. A woman is not obligated to appear in the Beis Hamikdosh on the festivals and therefore she should not be included in the prohibition against delaying. Or since she is obligated in the mitzva of simcha and partake in the korbanos that are brought on the festivals, perhaps we can say that she is included in this prohibition.