Kommentar zu Nedarim 11:5

הרי זה יחזור ויפר – for it is an errant absolution is not an absolution until he intends regarding the woman that vowed, as it is written (Numbers 30:12): “[And her husband learns of it, yet offers no objection-] thus failing to restrain her – [all her vows shall stand and all her self-imposed obligations shall stand],” until the abolution will be for herself of the person making the vow. And also, that he should intend to the vow that she made (Numbers 30:5): “and her father learns of her vow,” until he knows which vow that she made.

Introduction Our mishnah teaches that if a husband/father annuls a vow of his wife/daughter but is mistaken with regard to who vowed, what type of vow they took or what was being prohibited, he must annul the vow again in order for it to be annulled.

If his wife vowed, and he thought that his daughter had vowed, or if his daughter vowed and he thought that his wife had vowed; In this case the husband/father was mistaken with regard to who vowed.

If she took the vow of a nazirite, and he thought that she had vowed by a korban, or if she vowed by a korban, and he thought that she vowed a nazirite vow; In this case the mistake was with regard to the type of prohibition. For instance, she vowed by a nazirite vow but her husband/father thought that the vow was a vow using a korban to prohibit wine (i.e. “wine is a korban to me”), or vice versa. Although in both cases she would be forbidden to have wine, the husband still annulled the wrong type of vow.

If she vowed [to abstain] from figs, and he thought that she vowed [to abstain] from grapes, or if she vowed [to abstain] from grapes and he thought that she vowed from figs, he must annul [the vow] again. In this case the husband was mistaken with regard to what was being prohibited, figs or grapes. In all three cases, since the husband did not have full grasp of who was vowing, what type of vow they were taking, or what they were prohibiting, he must annul the vow again. If he does not, the vow is valid.