Resources for Nedarim 83
The משנה says that if a lady makes herself אסור on all creations, the husband can’t be מפיר, and it also says she can eat לקט שכחה ופּאה. The גמרא has three ways to explain the relationship between these two lines. One of them is רבא. רבא says the משנה should be read כפּשוטו —she is אסור on everyone in the world including the husband and even though this sounds like עינוי נפש he still can’t be מפיר because she has the ability to eat לקט שכחה ופּאה. The קרן אורה here asks a very interesting question. There is a rule of מה שקנה אשה קנה בעלה. If so, as soon as she acquires the לקט שכחה ופּאה, her husband acquires it from her, or at least a חלק of it. If so, we should be back to square one—how can she be נהנה from לקט שכחה ופּאה if it’s owned by her husband? He gives three possibilities: either they were never מתקן for the husband to get her stuff when he isn’t paying מזונות (which is a מחלוקת ראשונים); or they were never מתקן for him to get her stuff when she is מודר הנאה from him; or, interestingly, the husband has no ability to be קונה לקט שכחה ופּאה since he isn’t poor. That is a חידוש because it would seem פּשוט she could give someone a present from her מתנות עניים.
Another fascinating question the קרן אורה asks is if in fact she is אסור on everyone and the only reason he can’t be מפיר is because she can eat לקט שכחה ופּאה, then how is that different than the case of a lady who makes a נדר that she won’t eat a particular type of fruit, where the husband can be מפיר because it is considered עינוי נפש to not be able to eat a particular fruit. לקט שכחה ופּאה are not from every fruit. For example, there is no חיוב of פּאה from figs. If so, making yourself אסור on all people which effectively means you cant eat figs should be the same as making a נדר that you wont eat figs which is considered עינוי נפש. He answers that since her עיקר נדר was not ענוי נפש, the husband can't be מפיר even though it seems to lead to עינוי נפש. This also seems to be a great חידוש.
The גמרא brings a ברייתא that says that a man can be מפיר the נזירות of his wife. Based on this, the גמרא asks that if a husband can be מפיר for one thing and not the other in the same נדר, maybe he can only be מפיר her not drinking wine but he cant be מפיר her not being טומאה למתים since that isn’t an עינוי נפש. The גמרא answers that not going to funerals is also an עינוי נפש since if she doesn’t go to other peoples funerals they won’t come to her’s. The מנחת שלמה points out even though the נדר may only be for a few days in which case this concern would not exist, the רמב"ם says that anytime something is עינוי נפש if done for a while is עינוי נפש even if done for a short time. He asks how could it be that ר׳ יוסי holds that washing oneself is not considered עינוי נפש and the fear that people might possibly not coming to a funeral is עינוי נפש? Furthermore, if she makes a נדר that all the בריות can't get benefit from her, he can't be מפיר, but if she won't go to a funeral then he can be מפיר? He leaves it as a question.
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
Rabbi Yaakov Blumenfeld - Shakla Vetarya