Nedarim 77: Vows on Shabbat

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 77

To download, click/tap here: PDF

As we learned on yesterday’s daf, the Mishna (76b) notes that the nullification of a neder –  hafarat nedarim – taken by a woman by her father or her husband, can be done on Shabbat. 

Our daf cites a Mishna from Massekhet Shabbat (157a) that reiterates this rule, adding that hatarat nedarim – annulment of a vow by a Jewish court or Rabbi – is only performed on Shabbat if it is a neder that affects Shabbat itself. 

What is the relationship between vows and shabbat? And how come we took the greatest vow in our history at Mt Sinai,  on shabbat?

Nedarim 76: מִיּוֹם אֶל יוֹם

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 76

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Our Mishnah states that the revoking of  nedarim can be performed the entire day. This can be a leniency and a stringency. How is this? If she made a neder on Friday night, he may revoke it Friday night and Shabbos day until it gets dark (nightfall). If, however, she made a neder right before it got dark, he may revoke it as long as it is not yet dark. If it got dark and he did not yet revoke it, he may not revoke it any longer. 

Our Daf cites a braisa: The revoking of her nedarim can be performed the entire day. Rabbi Yosi the son of Rabbi Yehudah and Rabbi Elozar the son of Rabbi Shimon say: They (her husband and father) have twenty-four hours (from the moment her neder was heard) to revoke it. 

We explore the notion of time linear vs cyclical as well as the metaphor of : מִיּוֹם אֶל יוֹם

Or "one day at a time" psychologically and spiritually 

(in recovery).

Nedarim 75: Reb Eliezer’s Mikva Exempla

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 75

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The Mishna on our daf teaches that all agree that there is no significance to a statement made by a man who tells his wife in advance that he ratifies all vows that she takes for the foreseeable future.

If, however, he tells her in advance that he is nullifying all of her nedarim, Rabbi Eliezer rules that he has the ability to do so, while the Hakhamim disagree, arguing that he only has the ability to annul her vows after he hears that she has accepted them.

They said to Rabbi Eliezer: If a mikvah, which raises those that were tamei from their tumah (and renders them tahor), but cannot prevent a tahor from becoming tamei (if he touches a sheretz while in a mikvah, he will become tamei); so, a person, who cannot raise those things that are tamei from their tumah (if he swallows a ring that is tamei and then regurgitates it, it will remain tamei), certainly the halacha should be that a person cannot prevent something that is tahor from becoming tamei (if he swallows a ring that is tahor and enters a room that contains a corpse, the ring will become tamei).

The rabbis speak about the power of a t’vilah to return a person from a state of impurity to a state of purity. But this process does not render a person immune to future impurity, nor does it render an object impure if that object is swallowed by a person before immersion.

The Minchas Chinuch (263:3) asks: How can Rabbi Akiva in Chulin (72a) rule that a fetus inside of its mother’s womb can Biblically contract tumah? Shouldn’t the fetus be regarded as a “swallowed item,” and therefore, be shielded by the mother’s body from becoming tamei?

He answers that the fetus is considered like a thigh of its mother and therefore is rendered tamei just like any other one of the mother’s limbs.

We review the issue of tum’ah beluah and recent problems with ultrasonography of potential fetal kohanim.

Nedarim 74: חֲבָל עָלֶיךָ בֶּן עַזַּאי

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 74

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Chief among Ben 'Azzai's teachers was Joshua b. Hananiah, whose opinions he expounded (Parah i. 1), proved to be correct (Yeb. iv. 13), or defended against R.Akiba (Yoma ii. 3; Ta'anit iv. 4; Tosef., Sheb. ii. 13).

R. Akiba himself was not really Ben 'Azzai's teacher, although the latter occasionally calls him so, and, in our daf, says of himself "חֲבָל עָלֶיךָ בֶּן עַזַּאי"

that he did not stand in closer relation as pupil to Akiba he expressed the same regret in regard to Ishmael b. Elisha (Ḥul. 71a).

In his halakic opinions and Biblical exegesis, as well as in other sayings, Ben 'Azzai follows RAkiba; and, from the tone in which he speaks of R.Akiba elsewhere the Amoraim concluded that his relations with Akiba were both those of pupil and of colleague.

We explore this relationship, especially regarding his tragic end in the Pardes (for men see my Dad Ditty Yevamot 111)

Nedarim 73: Deaf Husband

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 73

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Perhaps the phrase “and her husband hears it” Num 30:8 regarding oaths:

ח  וְשָׁמַע אִישָׁהּ בְּיוֹם שָׁמְעוֹ, וְהֶחֱרִישׁ לָהּ:  וְקָמוּ נְדָרֶיהָ, וֶאֱסָרֶהָ אֲשֶׁר-אָסְרָה עַל-נַפְשָׁהּ--יָקֻמוּ.

8 and her husband hear it, whatsoever day it be that he heareth it, and hold his peace at her; then her vows shall stand, and her bonds wherewith she hath bound her soul shall stand.                                                                                                          

does not mean that hearing is indispensable to the nullification of a vow, so that even a deaf man can nullify his wife’s vows. 

Rava said: Come and hear a baraita interpreting that verse: “And her husband hears it”; this excludes the wife of a deaf man.

We cite the Sire then explore the wonderful review of modern responsa regarding sign language and its impact on the halachic definition of deaf mute...

Nedarim 72: Rabbi's Daughters

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 72

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The Mishna states: It was the custom of Torah scholars before their daughters would leave their authority, he (the father) would say to her (his daughter): All nedarim that you made in my house are revoked. And similarly, the husband would say before she entered his authority: All nedarim that you made before you entered my authority are revoked. This is because once she enters into his authority (as a nesuah), he cannot revoke her vows (that were made beforehand).  

We explore recent stories about rabbi’s daughters from the Netziv’s wife Reyna Batya to current autobiographies and movies about the struggles of being a public figure’s child.

Nedarim 71: Veto Power

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 71

To download, click/tap here: PDF

A new Mishna offers definitive words regarding the vows of a betrothed woman.  It states that a betrothed woman who is divorced the same day and then immediately betrothed again - even if this happens with one hundred men - her father and her last husband nullify her vows.  The principle is that a father and a husband nullify the vows of a young woman who has not entered into her own jurisdiction either through full marriage or through reaching the age of majority for at least one moment.

We continue our exploration of the veto power of fathers over daughters

Nedarim 70: Jephthah

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 70

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Our next mishnah continues to discuss the ability of fathers and husbands to annul their daughters’ or wives’ vows.

If the father dies, his authority does not pass over to the husband. If the husband dies, his authority passes over to the father.

The mishnah is still discussing the betrothed young girl. Generally, both the father and husband must jointly annul her vows. If, while she is in this status, her father dies, her husband still cannot annul her vows on his own. This is because she is only betrothed and not fully married. A husband’s right to annul his wife’s vows on his own begins only at the point of marriage. In contrast, should her betrothed husband die, her father may annul her vows. This is because she was never fully married, nor has she reached majority age.

We further explore women’s vows especially the story of Jepthah.

Nedarim 69: Vows(Islamic Style)

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 69

To download, click/tap here: PDF

We have been discussing the rules of hafarat nedarim – the right of a girl’s father or a woman’s husband to nullify her vows upon hearing them. The halakhot that appear in Sefer Bamidbar (30:14-16) consider two other possible reactions: either silence, or hakamat ha-neder – ratification, or affirming that the vow should take effect. In both of these cases – i.e., if the father or husband hears the neder and does nothing for the day, or else says, “Yes, I want that neder to take effect,” the vow can no longer be removed by the father or the husband.

We explore in a digressive manner the laws of vows and annulment in a sister religion, Islam.

Nedarim 68: Nisroknah

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 68

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The Gemara cites a lengthy, five-part Beraisa which discusses the applications of "Nisroknah." The RAN explains the Chidush of each part. Some of the Ran's comments are difficult to follow. At some points he writes that if the father or the husband did Hafarah and then died, the woman's Neder is considered to have been weakened, while elsewhere he writes that if the father or the husband did Hafarah and then died, the Hafarah is ineffectual and does not weaken the Neder.

We continue our exploration of vows and oaths including the way the Dead Sea community interpreted the biblical verse (Num 30:17)

Nedarim 67: Conspiring InLaws

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 67

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The first topic in the 10th perek is the status of a betrothed young woman, who is under both her father's authority and the authority of her betrothed. The Sages derived from the verses in the Torah that address the nullification of vows that a betrothed young woman's vows are nullified only if both her father and her husband nullify them. 

Underlying this Mishna is the teaching (Numbers 30) that women's vows can be nullified by their fathers and husbands.  Upon learning of the vows of their daughters and wives, fathers and husbands can either ratify or nullify those vows but only on the same day that they hear of them.  

We explore when conflict arises between in-laws and Halachic and social psychological insights to conflict resolution.

Nedarim 66: Beauty

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 66

To download, click/tap here: PDF

A new Mishna teaches about dissolving a vow to enhance the honour of the person making the vow or his family. The example of someone vowing that an "ugly woman" is konam for him when in fact she is beautiful - or that she is black when she is white, or short when she is tall, is repeated from an earlier daf. Another example - this one of a woman who is 'beautified’.

The man who named her as konam to him is confronted by Rabbi Yishmael who helps him realize that this beautified woman should in fact be permitted to him - and his vow is dissolved.

Another example is shared regarding the perception of beauty: a woman had a false tooth (we learn that it was likely made of wood and thus rotten and 'ugly') replaced by a gold tooth made by Rabbi Yishmael, thus dissolving the vow, and allowing her to marry.

We explore the notion of beauty in Rabbinics and feminist critiques thereof

Nedarim 65: Secret Vows

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 65

To download, click/tap here: PDF

A story is told of King Zedkiah who found King Nebuchadnezzar eating a live rabbit.  Nebuchadnezzar  had King Zedkiah swear an oath, shavuah, that he would not tell anyone of this transgression.  Later, when he was physically suffering, Zedkiah asked the judges of the Sanhedrin to dissolve his oath, and they did so, allowing Zedkiah to share what he saw.  Nebuchadnezzar learned that people were treating him with less respect and he demanded to know why Zedkiah was permitted to dissolve his oath without the subject of the oath in his presence.  Realizing their errors, the judges all moved from sitting on cushions to sitting on the floor, demonstrating acknowledgement of their halachic breach.    We explore this relationship from historical and archaeological perspectives.

Nedarim 64: Limits of Honor

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 64

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The new perek (9) begins with the following MISHNA:

Rabbi Eliezer says: When halakhic authorities are approached with regard to the dissolution of a vow, they may broach dissolution with a person who took a vow by raising the issue of how taking the vow ultimately degraded the honor of his father and mother, asking him the following: Had you known that your parents would experience public shame due to your lax attitude toward your vow, would you still have taken the vow?

We explore the Halacha of Kibbud Av v’em as well as the limits of the command.

Nedarim 63: First Rains

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 63

To download, click/tap here: PDF

If one takes a vow until the rains, or until there are rains, the vow remains in effect until the second rain of the rainy season falls. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Until the time of the second rainfall arrives, even if rain does not fall. If one takes a vow until the rains end, the vow remains in effect until the entire month of Nisan has ended; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir.

Rebbi Meir says that the first rain is the third of Cheshvan, the second rain is the seventh and the third rain is the twenty third.

Rebbi Yehudah holds that the first rain is the seventh of Cheshvan, the second rain is the seventeenth and the third rain is the twenty third.

Rebbi Yosi holds that the first rain is the seventeenth of Cheshvan, the second rain is the twenty third and the third rain is Rosh Chodesh Kislev.

The time of the first rain is when we start reciting v'Sen Tal u’Matar.

We explore the history of the recitation of the rain prayer and how it differed historically and among different communities.

Nedarim 62: כִתְרָהּ שֶׁל תּוֹרָה

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 62

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The Gemara relates an incident: A certain man found Rabbi Tarfon eating figs from his field at the time when most of the knives had been set aside. He placed Rabbi Tarfon in a sack, lifted him up, and carried him to throw him into the river. Rabbi Tarfon said to him: Woe to Tarfon, for this man is killing him. When that man heard that he was carrying the great Rabbi Tarfon, he left him and fled. Rabbi Abbahu said in the name of Rabbi Ḥananya ben Gamliel: All the days of that righteous man, Rabbi Tarfon, he was distressed over this matter, saying: Woe is me, for I made use of the crown of Torah, as Rabbi Tarfon was only released out of respect for his Torah learning.

We explore other versions of this story (Yerushalmi) and the notion of misusing the crown of torah (discussing the RAMBAM’s view of being paid for teaching Torah).

Nedarim 61: Harvest

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 61

To download, click/tap here: PDF

A new Mishna tells of a vow that forbids something to a person until the grain harvest, or until the grape harvest, or until the olive harvest, the vow is in effect until that date arrives.  The principle is that a time-fixed event ends a vow upon its arrival.    However, if a person vows that s/he is forbidden from something "until it will be [the grain or the grape or the olive harvest]", that vow is valid until the event ends.  And if an event has no fixed time associated with it, then the vow is in effect only until the occasion arrives.

The Mishna goes on to say that if a person says "until the summer (kayitz)", or "until it will be summer" regarding the end of his/her vow, that vow is honoured until the people begin to bring fruit into their homes in baskets.  If s/he says, "Until the summer has passed", however, the vow stays in effect until people put away the knives that cut harvested figs.  Thus a custom helps the rabbis to determine when the summer begins and ends; when a vow begins and ends.

We explore the connection between Shavuot and harvest festivals as well as the inner metaphor of harvesting in spiritual traditions.

Nedarim 60: Time Division

For the source text click/tap here: Nerdarim 60

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The Mishna of our new perek 8 stated: [If his vow was for] “this year,” wine is forbidden (to him) for the rest of the year. The Gemora inquires: If one said, “Wine shall be konam upon me with regard to my tasting for a day,” what is the halachah? Is the law akin to a case where he said “today” (and the neder would lapse at nightfall), or is it like the case of “one day” (where the neder would be effective for twenty-four hours)? 

The Gemora attempts to resolve this: Come and hear from our Mishna: If one said, “Wine shall be konam upon me with regard to my tasting today,” wine is forbidden (to him) only until nightfall. But (we may infer), if he said, “a day,” it is as if he said, “one day” (and the neder would be effective for twenty-four hours). The Gemora disagrees: Let us consider the latter part of the Mishna: If the terminology of his vow was “for one day,” wine is forbidden (to him) from day to day (i.e., a day of twenty-four hours). But (we may infer), if he said, “a day,” it is as if he said “today” (and the neder would lapse at nightfall). 

We explore the halachic notion of time and the division of time as applied to the molad.

Nedarim 59: כׇּל הַנּוֹדֵר — כְּאִילּוּ בָּנָה בָּמָה

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 59

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Our daf states:

… "say that there is another distinction between konamot and other cases where one may request dissolution by a halakhic authority.

Granted, in the case of konamot, there is a mitzva to request that a halakhic authority dissolve them, due to the statement of Rabbi Natan, as Rabbi Natan said:

Anyone who vows, it is as if he built a personal altaroutside the Temple, and one who fulfills that vow, it is as though he burns an offering upon it.

However, in the case of teruma, what mitzva is there to request that a halakhic authority dissolve its designation? Therefore, items forbidden by konamot are considered items that can become permitted, and teruma is not.

We explore the nature and history of Bamot in the biblical period as a basis for its use as a metaphor for breaking the oral law…

Nedarim 58: הַמְנַכֵּשׁ עִם הַכּוּתִי בַּחֲסִיּוֹת

For the source text click/tap here: Nedarim 58

To download, click/tap here: PDF

One who weeds ḥasayot with a Samaritan may eat a casual meal from them without tithing, as any untithed produce may be eaten in the framework of a casual meal. And when he completes the labor on the ḥasayot, places them into a pile, and they require tithing, he tithes them as produce that is definitely obligated in tithing, not as doubtfully tithed produce, as the assumption is that the Samaritan did not tithe the ḥasayot.

We explore the flora of the Allium family as well as the use of weeds as a metaphor in literature and healing.