Please note that unless where otherwise indicated, we follow the explanation of the Ran, instead of Rashi, since the latter is purported to have written by someone other than Rashi. As a result, our notes and comments do not necessarily have a bearing on the practical Halachah.

1)

(a) There are two categories of Neder, Nidrei Hekdesh and Nidrei Isur. What is the definition of ...

1. ... Nidrei Hekdesh?
2. ... Nidrei Isur?

(b) What is the difference between them?

(c) With which of the two does this Masechta deal?

(d) How can this be proven from the Tana's insertion of Charamim in this Mishnah?

(a) What is Hatfasah?

(b) What do we learn from the Pasuk in Matos "Ish ki Yidor *Neder* la'Hashem" (with regard to Hatfasah)?

(c) Is a Neder that one makes without Hatfasah, valid?

(a) The Ikar Neder (with Hatfasah) comprises forbidding an object on oneself like a Korban.
What are 'Kinuyim'? Why are they so-called?

(b) Are Kinuyin d'Oraysa or de'Rabbanan (according to those who say that Kinuyin are expressions that the Chachamim initiated)?

(c) What are Yados Nedarim? Why are they called 'Yados'?

(a) How can we prove from our Mishnah 'u'Shevu'os ki'Shevu'os', that it is not necessary to mention Hashem's Name when making a Shevu'ah?

(b) How does Rabeinu Tam explain the Sugya in Shevu'os, where Rav Chanina bar Idi requires the Name of Hashem by Shevu'as ha'Eidus?

(c) What objection does the Ran raise to Rabeinu Tam's explanation, based on the fact that we learn the Din by Shevu'as Eidus from the Din of Sotah (from the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "Alah" "Alah"), who also mentions the Name of Hashem?

(d) So how does the Ran resolve the apparent discrepancy between the two Sugyos?

6)

(a) Besides Nedarim, Charamim and Shevu'os, which is the fourth area of vow where Kinuyim are effective?

(b) What is the significance of the continuation of the Mishnah 'Mudrani Mimcha, Mufreshani Mimcha, Meruchkani Mimcha she'Ani Ochel Lach, she'Ani To'em Lach, Asur'.
Under which category of Neder does this fall? What is the alternative wording of 'she'Ani Ochel Lach ... '?

(c) What makes this a Yad?

(d) What does Rebbi Akiva say about a case of 'Menudeh Ani Lach'?

7)

(a) In Nazir, the Tana only deals with Kinuyei Nezirus.
Why then does the Tana here see fit to insert all the Kinuyim (Charamin, Shevu'os and Nezirus, as well as Nedarim)?

(b) In that case, the Tana ought to have placed Kinuyei Shevu'os next to Kinuyei Nedarim.
Why does he put Kinuyei Charamim before Kinuyei Shevu'os?

(c) What do most Rishonim say about someone who attempts to make a Shevu'ah by forbidding the object on himself, or a Neder by forbidding himself on the object?

(d) How do they then explain the various Sugyos, which seem to validate them?

(a) What does the Ramban say about a Shevu'ah that one makes by forbidding the object on himself, or a Neder by forbidding himself on the object?

(b) Then why does our Sugya appear to insist that the two run along different lines and cannot be confused?

(a) One problem with our Mishnah is that it opens with Kinuyin and goes on to explain Yados.
What other problem do we have with the Tana's opening statement of Yados?

(b) We answer the second Kashya by amending the opening phrase of the Mishnah.
What do we add to the opening phrase?

(c) We then answer the first Kashya by citing a series of other Mishnahs. What do the following Mishnahs all have in common: ba'Meh Madlikin, u'va'Mah Ein Madlikin'?; 'ba'Meh Tomnin, u'va'Mah Ein Tomnin'; 'ba'Meh Ishah Yotz'ah, u'va'Mah Einah Yotz'ah'?

(d) What is then the problem with the following Mishnahs: 'Yesh Nochlin u'Manchilin, Nochlin ve'Ein Manchilin ... '; 'Yesh Mutaros le'Ba'aleihen, va'Asuros le'Yibmeihen, Mutaros le'Yibmeihen, va'Asuros le'Ba'aleihen ... '?

(a) What basic distinction can one draw between the two groups of Mishnahs that provides us with the initial answer to the above Kashya?

(b) What is then the problem from the Mishnah 'ba'Meh Beheimah Yotz'ah, u'va'Mah Einah Yotz'ah'?

(c) To resolve the Kashya therefore, we conclude that the Tana has no fixed procedure regarding which of the cases to discuss first. In spite of this however, it is possible that our Tana makes a point of mentioning Kinuyim first but of discussing Yados first.
Why is that?

Next daf