I got a degree in physics because I wanted to understand reality in a deep and fundamental way. That, of course, led me to the Torah. Along the way, though, physics was a really good stepping stone. I never looked at graduate school as "advanced trade school". That is, as much as my mother -- she should rest in peace -- was disappointed that I didn't "use my degree", I felt that I got exactly what I wanted from my degree; namely, confirmation from experts in the field that I had properly learned and understood the subject matter.
Nonetheless, my plan had been to follow the traditional course of a postdoc or two followed by a tenure track position at a university teaching and doing research in theoretical physics. HaShem had a different plan; Baruch HaShem. Even more Baruch HaShem, I listened. Still... I have always wanted to teach physics, but I had to feed my family and pay tuition, so I opted for the much more lucrative field of programming. Now that I have gone from making a living to living, I finally have the opportunity to teach physics to a very motivated and smart group of young women at Sarah Hartmann Women's College of Touro, née Blitstein Teachers Institute; aka TI. I am a good teacher and liked by the students. There is one complaint that always surfaces at the beginning of each class: I don't teach "how do to the problems"; instead, I teach the principles of physics needed to understand the problems. I teach methods to analyze the problem to formulate a plan to solve them. Of course, I then work example problems to show how those principles are applied, follow the plan, and then solve the problem.
I feel that is what the Ran is doing in masechta Nedarim. Nedarim is unique in that we do not have Rashi. There is a commentary labeled as Rashi, but we all know it isn't Rashi. (ArtScroll calls it, "the meforash"; the explainer). What we do have is the Ran. I feel like the way I try to teach physics is the way the Ran explains Nedarim. The Ran does not guide you through the mishnah nor gemara phrase by phrase to help you read it. Rather, the Ran explains principles with which you can then learn the mishnah and gemara yourself. The Ran also takes each case and shows how it fits into the larger picture. The Ran also shows the underlying structure to reveal the basis for the gemara's discussions.
On daf 25b, the mishnah discusses vows that are based on a mistake (and therefore the vower is not held accountable for them). The gemara goes on to show how these same principles apply to oaths. The mishnah and gemara lists several examples of mistakes. The examples seem unconnected, but the Ran demonstrates the connection. There are two kinds of mistakes:
- The vow/oath could be fulfilled at the time he said it, but something happens outside his control that makes it impossible to fulfill the vow/oath. For example, "My vow will take effect if I eat peaches tomorrow." Then he forgets all about his vow and eats peaches the next day. Isn't that cool that Chazal recognize that forgetting something is not in your control?
- The vow/oath could never have been fulfilled, but when the person said it, he didn't realize that. This actually has three subcategories:
- He says the vow takes effect if he ate peaches today. He actually did eat peaches, but he forgot.
- He vows to not benefit his wife because she hit is son (from a previous marriage, presumably) or stole from him. But she didn't do either; he was misinformed.
- He vows to not eat meat or not drink wine for the next year. Of course, there will be Shabbosim and Yamim Tovim over the course of the year, but he didn't think about that when he made the vow.
Without the Ran, it would be very easy to just see several disconnected examples. With the Ran, one sees the beautiful tapestry woven by Chazal in their careful choice of cases. (More about Nedarim in this TftD.)
Comments