Torah Community Connections

Week 72 - Tuesday - 10 April 2001

NEDARIM: CHAPTER 9: MISHNAH 6

They may open with the Festivals and Sabbaths. At first they used to say, Those days are permitted, and all the other days are prohibited, until Rabbi Akiva came and taught that the vow which is partially revoked is entirely revoked.

Kehati

We have already learned (3:2, above) that if a person saw people eating his figs, and said, "May these figs be prohibited to you as a sacrifice," and his father and his brother were among these peop1e, and he prohibited them erroneously, and therefore the vow does not apply to them, Beit Hillel says, "these and these are permitted," i.e., that his vow does not apply to the other people either; the reason is explained there, that a vow which has been nullified in part is nullified in its entirety, i.e., since part of it was made in error, it is completely cancelled. This and the following two mishnayot which continue with the laws of annulling vows by an “opening” which the Sage opens for the person who took the vow, in order to totally cancel the vow, teach that “a vow which has been nullified in part is nullified in its entirety”.

They may open with the Festivals and Sabbaths – e.g., if a person took a vow to fast a few days, or not to eat meat during a certain period of time, they open an opening for him, to annul his vow, by making use of the Festivals and Sabbaths. They say to him: “If you had taken into account the Sabbaths and Festivals within the period included in your vow”, or “If you known that it is forbidden to fast on Sabbath or on a Festival, and that everyone is obligated to fulfill what is written, ‘And you shall rejoice in your feast’, and there is no rejoicing without meat and wine, and similarly, it is written regarding the Sabbath, ‘And call the Sabbath a delight’, would you have taken a vow?” And if he answers that he would not have taken the vow, or that he would have specified in his vow that it applied only to weekdays, the Sage annuls his vow.

At first they use to say, Those days – Sabbaths and Festivals, are permitted – to him by this opening and all the other days are prohibited – i.e., this opening is effective for releasing him from his vow only regarding Festivals and Sabbaths, but weekdays remain under the prohibition of his vow, until Rabbi Akiva came and taught that the vow which is partially revoked is entirely revoked – since there is an opening to nullify the Festivals and Sabbaths, the other days also are nullified. The Jerusalem Talmud learns this from the verse, "all that issues out of his mouth he should do" (Num. 30:3), which means only when his entire vow is binding, but when it has been partially nullified, it has been entirely nullified.

NEDARIM: CHAPTER 9: MISHNAH 7

How so? If one said, "Konam that I do not derive benefit from any of you," if one of them was declared permitted, they all are permitted; "that I do not derive benefit from this one and from that one," if the first was declared permitted, they all are permitted; if the last one was declared permitted, then the last one is permitted, and all are prohibited; if the middle one was declared permitted, from him and below are permitted, and from him and above are prohibited. "That I do not derive benefit from this one as a sacrifice, and from that one as a sacrifice," an opening is required for each one.

Kehati

This mishnah is a continuation of the previous mishnah, and elaborates on the law of "a vow which has been nullified in part, has been entirely nullified."

How so? About which vow do we say, since it was nullified partially, it is entirely nullified? If one said - to a number of people, using the wording, "Konam that I do not derive benefit from any of you" - i.e., he took a vow that he would not derive benefit from them, if one of them was declared permitted - if the vow was nullified regarding one of these people, e.g., his father, since the vow regarding him was made in error, as was taught above (3:2), or one of them was nullified by a Sage for reasons of regret they are all declared permitted - and he may derive benefit from all these people, for a vow which has been nullified partially is entirely nullified.

If a person said, "Konam - "that I do not derive benefit from this one and from that one" - the Gemara explains, e.g., he linked one with the other, i.e., he said, e.g., "Konam that I do not derive benefit from this one," and said in addition, "Y will be prohibited to me as this one, and Z as Y," if the first was declared permitted - by a Sage, they are all declared permitted - automatically, since the person taking the vow linked them all to the first one; if the last one was declared permitted - a Sage was only asked about the vow regarding the last one, and he was declared permitted, then the last one is permitted, and all - the rest of those prohibited by the vow, except for the last one, are prohibited - to him to derive benefit from them, for his vow is binding regarding them, since they are linked to the first one; if the middle one was declared permitted - by a Sage, from him and below - all those he specified in his vow from the middle one to the last, are permitted - automatically, and - but - from him and above - all those he specified in his vow before the middle one, are prohibited - to him to derive benefit from them, for each of them is linked to the one preceding him; we do not say in this case, "if it was nullified partially, it is entirely nullified," for even though he linked one to the other, this nevertheless is not one vow, rather he took an independent vow regarding each one of them.

"That I do not derive benefit from this one as a sacrifice, and from that one as a sacrifice" - if a person took a vow using this wording, i.e., he prohibited to himself as a sacrifice deriving benefit from certain people, and he included all of them in what he said at the beginning of his vow, "That I do not derive benefit," but then stated specifically about each one, "from this one as a sacrifice and from this one as a sacrifice," if the person taking the vow comes to be released from his vow, an opening is required for each one - an opening must be found for him regarding each one individually. If one was nullified, the others are not nullified; since he said, "from this one as a sacrifice and from this one as a sacrifice," he took a vow regarding each one independently.

Return to Mishna Yomit Index

Visit the Mishna Yomit Archives