Wenn man sagt: "Ein Opfer", "Ein Brandopfer", "Ein Speisopfer", "Ein Sündopfer", "Ein Dankopfer", "Ein Friedensopfer" (soll sein), was ich esse von dir ist es verboten (von ihm zu essen). [Alle diese Opfergaben sind obligatorisch (und auch ein Dankopfer ist wie ein obligatorisches für "Vier müssen sich bedanken usw."), so dass wir (wenn wir nicht anders informiert wurden) denken könnten, dass dies nicht der Fall ist genannt "Gelübde in Bezug auf das, was gelobt wird".] R. Yehudah erlaubt es. [Da er es ohne "Chaf" ("Als Sündopfer usw.") sagt, ist es, als würde man beim Leben der schwören Opfer und durch das Leben des Brandopfers, so dass weder Gelübde noch Eid erlangt werden. Der erste Teil der Mischna bestätigt uns, dass sich die erste Tanna von R. Yehudah sogar in Bezug auf "Jerusalem" unterscheidet, wenn er sie ohne Chaf erwähnte Und der zweite Teil bestätigt uns, dass sich R. Yehudah von der ersten Tanna sogar in Bezug auf "Opfer", "Brandopfer" und "Essensopfer usw." unterscheidet, wenn er sie erwähnt ohne einen Chaf, der sie nicht als Gelübde hält.] "Das Opfer", "Als Opfer", "Ein Opfer", das ich nicht von dir essen werde—es ist verboten. [Obwohl all dies bereits erwähnt wurde, ist "Das Opfer" notwendig; denn wir könnten denken, dass er damit "durch das Leben des Opfers" (dh einen Eid) beabsichtigt, was unser Lernen betrifft (2: 2): "Das Opfer, das ich nicht von dir esse"— es ist erlaubt ", in diesem Fall sagt er:" Dieses Opfer ", was bedeutet" Durch das Leben des Opfers ".]" Lekorban, dass ich nicht von dir esse ", verbietet R. Meir es. [Denn es ist ausgelegt als "Lekorban yeheh" ("Lass es als Opfer sein"), aus welchem Grund ich nicht von dir essen werde. Die Halacha stimmt nicht mit R. Meir überein.] Wenn man zu seinem Nachbarn sagt: "Konam mein Mund, der spricht mit dir, "" meine Hand, die mit dir tut "," mein Fuß, der mit dir geht ", ist verboten. [Auch wenn Gelübde nicht mit etwas Immateriellem" nehmen "und Sprache immer noch immateriell ist, wenn er sagt: "Konam mein Mund, der mit dir spricht", er hält den Mund vom Sprechen ab, und der Mund ist greifbar. Ebenso sollen meine Hände vom Tun und meine Füße vom Gehen und dergleichen abgehalten werden.]
Bartenura on Mishnah Nedarim
האומר קרבן עולה מנחה חטאת תודה ושלמים – all of hese are obligatory sacrifices, and the thanksgiving-offering also is similar to an obligation, for four require givng thanks, but you might think I would say that this one takes a vow in something that is the legitimate subject of a vow.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Nedarim
Introduction
The first three sections of this mishnah teach that instead of stating “korban” a person can name different types of sacrifices and his vow will still be effective.
The final section of the mishnah teaches that a person can make parts of his body forbidden to other people.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Nedarim
ורבי יהודה מתיר – because they were said without the "כ"/KAF they are compared to someone who took an oath regarding the life of the burnt offering, and thee isn’t here either a vow nor an oath. But the first clause [of the Mishnah] teaches us that the first Tanna/teacher disputes that of Rabbi Yehuda, even regarding Jerusalem if he mentioned it without the "כ"/KAF and stated that it is a vow. But the concluding clause [of the Mishnah] comes to inform us that Rabbi Yehuda disputes that [opinion] of the first Tanna/Teacher, even with a sacrifice of a burnt-offering, etc., when he mentioned them without a "כ" /KAF – for it is not a vow.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Nedarim
If one says “A korban”, “A wholly burnt-offering”, “A meal-offering”, “A sin-offering”, “A thanksgiving-offering”, “A peace-offering, should be that which I eat from you” he is bound [by his vow]. Rabbi Judah permitted [him]. In this section, instead of just stating “korban”, the person vowing names other types of sacrifices. The mishnah teaches that these are equally effective in forming vows. Rabbi Judah holds that since he didn’t say “like a …”, the vow is not valid.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Nedarim
קרבן הקרבו כקרבן שאוכל לך אסור (May what I eat of yours be the Korban” “like the Korban,” [By] a Korban [do I vow] be what I eat with you, he is bound) – even though we we heard all of them already, “the KORBAN” is required for it, for you might I would say that he says, “By the life of the KORBAN.” But surely it is taught in the Mishnah further on in Chapter 2 [Mishnah 2], “Korban” be what I eat with you,” he is not bound, there it is speaking of a KORBAN/sacrifice, which implies the life of the Korban.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Nedarim
[If he says] “The korban”, “like a korban”, “korban”, should be that which I eat from you he is bound [by his vow]. All of these ways of phrasing a vow are also valid.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Nedarim
לקרבן אל אוכל לך רבי מאיר אוסר (for a KORBAN shall be what I eat with you) – that it is made like saying, “it shall be like a sacrifice,” therefore, I will not eat with you. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Meir.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Nedarim
If he says, “That which I shall not eat of yours should be a korban”, Rabbi Meir forbids [him]. In this case the person adds an additional negative to his statement. Instead of saying “that which I eat from you should be a korban”, he says “that which I shall not eat…”. Hence we might have interpreted the vow to meant that that which he doesn’t eat should be a korban, but that which he does eat should be permissible. Nevertheless Rabbi Meir rules that it is a valid vow, for the statement could also be interpreted to mean, “Your food is a korban to me, therefore I shall not eat from yours.”
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Nedarim
קונם פי מדבר עמך – but even though that the vows do not take effect on a matter lacking substance, and speech has no substance in it, nevertheless, when he says, “KONAM be my mouth with speaks to you,” he prohibits his mouth from speaking, and his mouth spoke something that has substance. And similarly, “my hands be forbidden from their actions,” and/or “my feet from their walking,” and all similar things to this.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Nedarim
If one says to his fellow, “Konam be my mouth which speaks with you”, “My hands which work for you” [or] “My feet which walk with you,’ he is forbidden. In these cases instead of stating that a certain object shall be prohibited, the person states that a certain part of his body shall not do something for his friend. Now usually one cannot make a prohibitive vow on an action. Prohibitive vows are only effective on things and not on intangibles. However, a person can make a prohibitive vow on a part of his body, since parts of bodies are things. For instance one can say “Konam be my mouth to you”, but not “Konam be my speech to you”; mouths have substance but speech does not.
