Es gibt keinen Unterschied zwischen dem Nutzen des Nachbarn und dem Essen von ihm, aber "dem Treten des Fußes" [Der Nutzen ist strenger als das Essen nur insofern, als derjenige, der Nutzen bringt, das Eigentum des anderen nicht betreten darf, während einer, der Nutzen bringt bevows food kann] und (ein weiterer Unterschied) Gefäße, die nicht für die Zubereitung von Speisen verwendet werden, [es ist gestattet, sie an jemanden zu verleihen, der sich an Essen beugt (aber nicht an jemanden, der sich vor Nutzen auszeichnet). Und das nur an einem Ort, an dem solche Schiffe nicht vermietet werden; aber an einem Ort, an dem sie vermietet werden, ist es verboten (selbst für jemanden, der Essen schwört). Für (ihm ist verboten) jeden Nutzen, der zu Nahrung führt. Denn wenn dieser ihm nicht geholfen hätte (indem er ihm das Gefäß geliehen hätte), würde ihm der Nutzen einer Perutah für Lebensmittel fehlen. Denn mit dieser Perutah (gerettet) kann er Essen kaufen.] Es gibt keinen Unterschied zwischen Gelübden und Geschenken, aber das muss man für Gelübde gut machen, aber er muss nicht gut für Geschenke machen. [("Gelübde" :) Wenn jemand sagt: "Ich nehme es auf mich (dh ich schwöre), ein Brandopfer zu bringen", wonach er es (das Tier) trennte und es verloren ging, muss er ein anderes bringen einer. ("Geschenke" :) Wenn man sagt: "Dieses Tier wird als Brandopfer gegeben", und es ging verloren, braucht er kein anderes mitzubringen, denn er hat es nicht auf sich genommen. Aber was die Haftung für Verspätungen betrifft, so sind beide gleich, wie geschrieben steht (5. Mose 23, 24): "... was Sie dem Herrn, Ihrem G-tt, geschworen haben, das Geschenk, das Sie mit Ihrem Mund gesprochen haben, usw. . "
Bartenura on Mishnah Megillah
אין בין המודר הנאה – One who is forbidden by vow to derive any benefit is not more severe than one [who is forbidden] by vow from [consuming] food other than entering one’s ground, for one [who is forbidden] by vow to derive any benefit , is prohibited to enter into his [home],[whereas] one [who is forbidden] by vow from [consuming] food is permitted [to enter into his home].
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Megillah
There is no difference between one who is prohibited by vow from benefiting from his fellow and one who is prohibited by vow from [benefiting from] his food, except in the matter of setting foot [on his property] and of vessels which are not used for [preparing] food. There are two things which are permitted to one who is under a vow not to derive food benefit from his neighbor which are not permitted to one who may not benefit from his neighbor at all: walking on his property and the use of things not involved in the making of food. For more information look at Nedarim 4:1.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Megillah
וכליים שאין עושין בהן אוכל נפש – It is permitted to lend them (i.e., the utensils) to one [who is forbidden] by vow from [consuming] food, and especially in a place where they do not hire and similar cases, but in a place where we hire and similar things, it is prohibited, for all benefit that brings one towards [eating] food, for if he did not derive this benefit which is wanting at least the equivalent of a Perutah/penny, it is the benefit of food, for since it is appropriate for that Perutah/penny [to be used] to purchase food.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Megillah
There is no difference between vowed offerings and freewill-offerings except that he is responsible for vowed offering but not responsible for freewill-offerings. Vowed offerings are stated using the language “Behold, I will bring an animal as an offering.” If a person sets aside an animal to be a vowed offering and the animal cannot for whatever reason be sacrificed (for instance, it gets lost or dies) he must bring a substitute. However, if he makes a freewill-offering using the language, “I will bring this animal as a sacrifice” and the animal is lost, he need not bring another. In all other respects, there is no difference between the two types of offerings.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Megillah
נדר – He who says, “behold this burnt offering is upon me,” and afterwards, he set it aside and it was lost, he is liable for his property which may be resorted to in the event of non-payment.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Megillah
נדבה – He who says, “behold this burnt offering is upon me,” and it was lost, he is not liable for his property which may resorted to in the event of non-payment, for he did not accept it upon himself, but [regarding] the matter of "בל תאחר"/that he should not be late (see Deuteronomy 23:22: “When you make a vow to the LORD your God, do not put off fulling it/לא תאחר לשלמו , [for the LORD your God will require it of you, and you will have incurred guilt.]”); both are equivalent, as it says (Deuteronomy 23:24): “…and perform what you have voluntarily vowed to the LORD your God, having made the promise with your own mouth,” for behold, vows and donations are mentioned in this matter.
