(c) Apr 18 2001 RashiYomi Inc. MY COLLECTED & INDEXED MAIL JEWISH POSTINGS-Ver #1
Individual Postings 1st appeared(& were copied in html form) on the Email List Mail Jewish

From: rhendel@king.mcs.drexel.edu (Russell Hendel)
Date: Sun, 14 Jul 1996 17:17:43 -0400
Subject: Doing some new good thing 3 times---Is it a Neder or not?

[Luntz V24 #60 ]mentions a friend who davened Maariv during Shivah calls
for a week and found out she in effect had made a neder to always daven
maariv. However based on Yoreh Dayah 214:1 and the Shach, I have 3
heters for her not to see the Maariv as a neder. Since people frequently
do "extra good things" I think this is a very relevant matter (are those
people making a neder to do the good things forever. For example, does a
person who goes to shule for a year to say Kaddish, obligate himself to
always go to shule!?) I therefore list the 3 heters and invite
discussion

HETER 1: The SHACH (Footnote ALEPH) explicitly states that a stringency
has a Neder status only if the act was done "as a stringency or as
fence". Thus if a person is simply doing something because everyone else
is doing it(like davening maariv in a Shivah home) there is no Neder
status.

HETER 2: Suppose (SHACH) a person always fasts during the 10 days of
repentance and then one year there is a brith milah. The person does NOT
need a "freeing from the vow" to eat at the brith milah. The reason for
this is that although the person did in effect make a Neder not to eat
during the 10 days of repentance *it is assumed that he did so according
to the way world behaves* ...  since people who want to fast don't do so
on a Brith this person does not need to free himself of his vow.

By analogy a person davening maariv in a house of shivah may have taken
a neder but nevertheless does so *according to the way the world
behaves*.  In this case it is the custom of say women when they are in a
house for a religious purpose and everyone else is davening maariv to do
so but it is not clear that any obligation occurs outside the shivah
house.

HETER 3: The Yoreh Dayah explicitly states that "stringency leads to a
neder status" only if the person *intended to do it forever*(and I guess
if they did three times without intention then it is equivalant to doing
it forever). But it appears to me that the woman in question probably
had the following thoughts "Oh they are davening maariv; that is a good
thing to do; let me try it out also".  In other words I perceive her
intentions as intentions of trying out and not intentions of doing it
permanantly.

Let me give another example to clarify this: Suppose a person says to
himself: "People in first minyans(on Shabbos) are davening Kriash Shemah
on time...I think that is the proper thing to do...let me go this
month." Now, even though the person did it as a stringency and did it 3
times it appears to me he is not obligated by neder to always go to the
Hashcamah minyan since it is clear that his intention was only to try it
out.

I admit that if the woman came to the Rabbi and worded her question
Well they were davening maariv and I thought that beautiful and thought
I would do it" then it appears that she intended it forever (and hence
the Pesak that she can't get out of the Neder (see YD there)) however I
believe I have a strong argument that her intentions were only to try it
out.

At any rate I am curious what other people have to say about people who
go to Hashcamah three weeks in a row, or say go to shule for a year (to
say Kadish) etc. whether they have obligated themselves for life (and if
not why not).

Russell Jay Hendel, Ph.d. ASA   rhendel @ mcs . drexel . edu