To Donate Click Here

Follow up to hatoras nedarim question | Part 2

Question:

Thank you. This is a follow up to your most recent response regarding hatoras nedarim (https://dinonline.org/2021/10/20/follow-up-to-hatoras-nedarim-question/).

1) According to your response it sounds like the hatoras nedarim would not have annulled my kabola of not learning (or any other distraction) during kaddish & chazaras hashatz etc (as whilst I made reference to learning commitments to the judges before the hatora, this would not be covered by ‘learning commitments’ (as on the contrary – the kabbola was to not be learning etc at such times!)); and since I was aware of the minhag tov at the time yet did not share it, it wasn’t annulled by the hatoras nedarim. Is this correct or would that have been included too?

2) Am I correct in understanding that the fact that I continued the kabalos since the hatoras nedarim several weeks ago does not reinstate them and that this would be similar to a kabola taken on under false pretenses (e.g. where one thought something was a halachic requirement and found out that it actually wasn’t) which never requires a hatara? This would be because any continuation of the kabbola that I did over the past several weeks was based on the assumption that the kabbola hadn’t been annulled. (Hope this makes sense!).

3) Would I need to make a new hatoras nedarim to not need to say tikkun klali at all? On the one hand I made reference to learning commitments (which I suppose tikkun klali would fall under) however at the time I only had in mind regarding saying tikkun klali before shkia; in which case the, idea of not saying tikkun klali at all, perhaps wasn’t covered by that announcement. Further, although kabbolas that I forgot about at the time of the hatora are included (following point number 2 in your previous response), it’s difficult to say that I had forgotten about the kabola of saying tikkun klali, as I was aware that I try to say it (and with the hatora, I only had in mind to reduce a kabbola of saying it by shkia rather than annulling the entire kabbola of saying tikkun klali bichlal). Essentially I’m asking whether my kabbola of saying tikkun klali (not just in time for shkia, but to not be ‘required’ to say it at all) has been annulled?

4) Note that none of the kabolas were said verbally, other than if people were to ask me about something, I may have responded that “I do such-and-such a thing” – am I correct in assuming that this doesn’t turn something into a verbal kabola?

Hope these all make sense!

 

Answer:

  1. Not learning during chazoras hashat was a kabola that you said, or just something that you did?
  2. Why is it false pretenses, you didn’t make a mistake and do the action in error, you just invalidated the neder aspect of it. It isn’t as if the whole idea was a mistake, (at least from what you are writing, you are saying that tikkun klali is not applicable to why you were saying it.)
  3. If you didn’t say that you were going to say it, and it only became a neder because you did it, it is enough that you told the dayan the general idea of the neder, as we already discussed. The idea of saying it in general and the fact that you meant to say it specifically before shkiya are all part of the same kabola, and if that was not made in a verbal way then what was said is sufficient.
  4. That doesn’t make I into a neder.

Hatzlocha

 

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *