Previous daf

1)

(a) Having just established that the Halachah is like Rebbi Akiva, and that a Yavam cannot annul the Nedarim of the Shomeres Yavam, why is it that the Yevamah's father can most probably annul the Nedarim that she declared whilst still in her father's domain, or even whilst she was betrothed to the Yavam's brother?

(b) What do Tosfos say in the Sugya on Daf 71a. (with reference to Beis Shamai, who say there that even when it comes to Nedarim that the Arus knew about before he died, the Arusah returns to her father's domain) that bears this out?

(c) What will be the Din with regard to the Nedarim that she declares whilst she a Shomeres Yavam.

(a) Can a husband uphold his wife's Nedarim in advance of her having declared them?

(b) In this regard, why does the Tana of our Mishnah use the Lashon 'mi'Ka'an (and not 'me'ha'Yom) ad she'Avo ... '?

(c) Rebbi Eliezer permits him however, to annul her Nedarim in advance. Why is that?

(d) Then why does he not also permit him to *uphold* them using the same logic?

(a) What do the Rabbanan learn from the Pasuk "Iyshah Yekimenu, ve'Iyshah Yeferenu"?

(b) We ask whether, according to Rebbi Eliezer, the Nedarim that a wife declares after her husband has already annulled them, take effect and are immediately annulled, or whether they simply do not take effect at all. What are the ramifications of the She'eilah?

(c) How does this case differ from that of ...

1. ... the first Perek, where if someone with two pieces of meat in front of him, one a piece of Shelamim after the Zerikas Damim, the other, a piece of Chulin, declares 'Zeh ka'Zeh', we conclude that 'be'Heteira ka'Matfis' (to go after what the object is now, not what it was initially)?
2. ... the Mishnah in Nazir, where a number of people followed the acceptance of Nezirus of the first Nazir with 'va'Ani', and where we learned above in Arba'ah Nedarim that when each attached his Neder to the one before him, if the first one annulled his Neder, then all of them are annulled?

4)

(a) 'Amar Rebbi Eliezer, Im Hafer Nedarim she'Ba'u li'Chelal Isur, Lo Yafer Nedarim she'Lo Ba'u li'Chelal Isur'. Presuming that 'Ba'u' means 'will not come', we try to prove from here that, according to Rebbi Eliezer, Nedarim that the husband annuls in advance, do not come into effect at all.
How do we answer this Kashya?

(b) In that case, what caused us to presume that 'Ba'u' meant that they will not come into effect at all?

(c) So how does the 'Kal va'Chomer' work now that 'Ba'u' is taken literally?

(a) In another Beraisa, Rebbi Eliezer proves that the husband can annul his wife's Nedarim through a 'Kal va'Chomer from his own Nedarim. Which 'Kal va'Chomer'?

(b) This seems to prove that the Nedarim that a husband annuls in advance, do not take effect at all (just like his own don't).
On what grounds do we refute this proof?

(c) Why can we not learn from the 'Kal va'Chomer' itself that his wife's Nedarim should not take effect?

(d) Then how can we Darshen the 'Kal va'Chomer' at all?

(a) What does Hillel Darshen from the Pasuk in Shemini "ve'ha'Nogei'a be'Nivlasan Yitma"?

(b) What happens to a ring which a Tahor person swallowed before entering a tent in which a corpse is lying? Does it become Tamei Meis?

(c) How do the Rabbanan use these two facts to query Rebbi Eliezer's 'Kal va'Chomer'?

(d) How would they query him according to the text 'Mikveh Yochi'ach, she'Ma'alah es ha'Temei'in mi'Tum'asan, ve'Ein Matzil es ha'Tehorin mi'Litam'ei'?

Next daf