Resources and Review Tests for Nedarim 47
The גמרא brings the ספק of רמי בר חמא as to whether you can make a נדר which would make the חילופין of the thing you were מנדר to be אסור on the מודר. The ר"ן explains that this is really a general question as to whether חילופּי איסורי הנאה are אסורים or not. He further posits that there are some things that there is no ספק about: everyone agrees that you are not allowed to sell איסורי הנאה; everyone agrees that if you do sell איסורי הנאה it is not אסור מדאורייתא; everyone agrees that if you sell איסורי הנאה and give it to someone else it is not אסור even מדרבנן for them. The only question is whether חילופּי איסורי הנאה are אסור for you the מודר to use if you were מחליף them באיסור. Based on those assumptions, he explains the גמרא’s proof by מקדש בחילופּי ערלה to be the fact that he sold ערלה which he shouldn’t have done and then was מקדש a lady with the חליפּין which makes her חילופּי חילופין and yet we don’t make him be re- מקדשher. The proof is that if חילופּי ערלה was אסור then we should have made חילפּי חילופּין to be אסור as well. We defeat the proof by saying that while חליפּין may be אסור, the חליפּי חליפּין are מותר. The ר"ן’s פּשט seems to be a bit of a דוחק. In fact, the רא"ש says what seems to be a far more פּשוט reading: the proof is the fact that the קידושין made with חליפּי איסורי הנאה are valid! If חליפּי איסורי האנה were אסור, then the money he gave her was worthless so how is it a valid קידושין ? Therefore, it must be that חליפּי איסורי הנאה are מותר. Why does the ר"ן need to get into the fact that the woman in חליפּי חליפּין. The קרן אורה explains there is an underlying מחלוקת here based on the חקירה of the משנה למלך in הלכות אישות פּרק ה׳ הל׳ א. The משנה למלך’s חקירה is to whom does the כסף קידושין has to be worth something to: the woman or the man? For example, if someone is מקדש a lady with בשר בחלב but she is a חולה מסוכנת who is allowed to eat it. In that case it is worthless to him but worth something to her. Is that valid כסף קידושין ? In our case, you are giving חילופי איסור האנה to someone else. The ר"ן had said that everyone agrees that חליופּי איסורי הנאה are מותר on an אחר. If so, it is certainly מותר to her to benefit from the חילופּי ערלה but possibly אסור on him. The ר"ן holds that כסף קידושין has to be worth something to the woman. If so, the fact that it is a good קידושין is wholly irrelevant to our question since it is obvious that the חליפּי ערלה are מותר to her. The proof is from the fact that she is מותר to him and she is חילופּי חליופּין. However, the רא"ש holds that כסף קידושין has to be worth something to him, so if the קידושין is valid it must be that חילופּין are מותר. The עונג יו"ט in סימן קל"ה points out that it seems to be a given to the משנה למלך that if both the husband and wife were deathly ill, the קידושין would certainly work since it is worth something to both of them. The עונג יו"ט disagrees and says that איסורי הנאה are still not called your ממון, period. However, the משנה למלך holds that it is only not considered your money because you cant be נהנה from it. If you can be נהנה from it for whatever reason, it is considered yours.
New Daf Hashavua newsletter - Shavua Matters
Rabbi Yechiel Grunhaus - Points to Ponder
Daf HaShavua Choveres - compiled by Rabbi Pinchas Englander
Rabbi Ari Keilson - Maarei Mekomos