Daf A Week · Expert – Beit Midrash Analysis · Bite-Sized

Nedarim 69

Bite-SizedExpert – Beit Midrash AnalysisFebruary 15, 2026

Sugya Map

  • Issue: A father's ability to nullify his daughter's vow after her husband's death, specifically regarding the portion the husband would have nullified.
  • Nafka Mina: The conceptual nature of hafara (nullification) – whether it severs (migz gaiz) a part of the vow or merely weakens (mekalsh klish) its overall force.
  • Primary Sources: Baraita and Gemara (Nedarim 69a).

Text Snapshot

"שמע אביה והפר לה, ולא הספיק הבעל לשמוע עד שמת, חוזר האב ומפר חלקו של בעל. רבי נתן אמר: הן הן דברי ב"ש, אבל ב"ה אומרים אין יכול להפר." (Nedarim 69a) The phrase "חוזר האב" (the father returns) implies returning to the act of nullification, not re-nullifying his already nullified portion, but addressing the husband's share.

Readings

Rashi & Ran's Chiddush

Rashi and Ran elucidate the core machloket: Beit Shammai hold hafara is migz gaiz – the father's initial act completely severed his portion of the vow. Beit Hillel, however, maintain hafara is mekalsh klish – the vow's overall force is merely weakened, not surgically partitioned. Thus, when the husband's share reverts to the father, Beit Hillel require a comprehensive hafara again, encompassing the entire, albeit weakened, vow (Rashi Nedarim 69a s.v. אין יכול להפר; Ran Nedarim 69a s.v. אבל ב"ה אומרים אין יכול להפר כלל).

Friction

Kushya: If the father already nullified his share, why would Beit Hillel demand he re-nullify it? Terutz: Because for Beit Hillel, hafara only weakens the vow, maintaining its conceptual "wholeness." The father cannot nullify a mere "part" of a qualitatively diminished vow; he must re-address the whole.

Intertext

The migz gaiz vs. mekalsh klish distinction resonates conceptually with debates in Kiddushin (e.g., Kiddushin 5b) regarding the lasting effect of an initial, incomplete act of kiddushin which may or may not fully "cut off" a previous status.

Psak/Practice

The Gemara concludes: "שמע מינה מקלש קליש" (Nedarim 69a). The halakha follows Beit Hillel; a father must nullify the entire vow again, not just the husband's former share.

Takeaway

Hafara is a qualitative weakening of the entire vow's force, not a quantitative severing of parts. This mandates holistic re-nullification if circumstances change.