Talmud for Nedarim 1:1

כָּל כִּנּוּיֵי נְדָרִים כִּנְדָרִים, וַחֲרָמִים כַּחֲרָמִים, וּשְׁבוּעוֹת כִּשְׁבוּעוֹת, וּנְזִירוּת כִּנְזִירוּת. הָאוֹמֵר לַחֲבֵרוֹ, מֻדָּרְנִי מִמְּךָ, מֻפְרָשְׁנִי מִמְּךָ, מְרֻחָקְנִי מִמְּךָ, שֶׁאֵינִי אוֹכֵל לָךְ, שֶׁאֵינִי טוֹעֵם לָךְ, אָסוּר. מְנֻדֶּה אֲנִי לָךְ, רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא הָיָה חוֹכֵךְ בָּזֶה לְהַחֲמִיר. כְּנִדְרֵי רְשָׁעִים, נָדַר בְּנָזִיר, וּבְקָרְבָּן, וּבִשְׁבוּעָה. כְּנִדְרֵי כְשֵׁרִים, לֹא אָמַר כְּלוּם. כְּנִדְבוֹתָם, נָדַר בְּנָזִיר וּבְקָרְבָּן:

All epithets (kinuyei) of vows are like vows. [The gemara explains that the first part of our Mishnah is lacking and that this is what is meant: All yadoth ("hands") of vows are like vows; all epithets of vows are like vows. These are yadoth of vows: If one says to his neighbor: "I am 'bevowed' from you," "I am separate from you," etc. These are epithets of vows: "Konam," "Konach," "Konas," etc. "Hands of vows": (yadoth) of vows, by which the vows are held. "Kinyei nedarim" ("epithets of vows"), as in (Bava Metzia 58b) "hamechaneh shem lechavero" ("one who calls his friend by an epithet", the "epithet" (nickname) not being the name per se.] And (epithets) of dedications are like dedications, and (epithets) of oaths are like oaths, and (epithets) of Naziritism are like Naziritism. If one says to his neighbor: "I am 'bevowed' from you," "I am separate from you," "I am distanced from you," "That I not eat from you," "That I not taste from you," he is forbidden (to do so). [If he used one of these expressions: "I am 'bevowed' from you that I not eat from you and that I not taste from you," or: "I am separate from you that I not eat from you and that I not taste from you," or: "I am distanced from you that I not eat from you and that I not taste from you," these are "yadoth" ("hands") of vows, and he is forbidden to eat and taste from him. But if he said: "I am 'bevowed' from you" alone, his words imply only that he will not speak with him. And "I am separate from you" alone implies only that he will not deal with him. And "I am distanced from you" alone implies only that he will not sit in his four cubits. But he is not forbidden to eat with him unless he specifies with each one of these expressions: "that I not eat from you and that I not taste from you."] (If one said:) "I am removed ("menudeh") from you" — R. Akiva would compress 'his lips' on this towards stringency, [not wanting to say that it forbade (as a vow), but it being apparent that he held it to do so.] "As the vows of the wicked, a vow, with Nazirite and with offering, an oath." "As the vows of the upright," he has said nothing. [If he said: "I take it upon myself as the vows of the wicked, whose vows are Nazirite and offering — an oath not to eat this loaf," if he transgressed and ate it, he must be a Nazirite for thirty days, and bring a burnt-offering, and he is liable to stripes as one transgressing a vain oath; for he mentioned in his vow "Nazirite," "offering," and "oath." As to his saying: "As the vows of the wicked," this is because it is the wicked who make vows and oaths, not the upright, the upright fearing the transgression of non-fulfillment (of vows) and taking heed not to utter oaths. Therefore, if one says: "As the vows of the upright," he has said nothing.] "As their gifts, a vow, with Nazirite and with offering." [If he said: "As the gifts of the upright, I shall be a Nazirite, and this shall be an offering if I eat this loaf," if he ate it, he is liable to Naziritism and to an offering. For the upright sometimes take a vow of Naziritism to separate themselves from what is forbidden. And they give an offering as a gift, bringing their offering to the entrance of the azarah (the Temple court) and consecrating it there, so as not to go astray through it. The expression for a gift is "This (object) is" (a gift), and the expression for a vow "I take it upon myself," for which reason the upright give gifts, but do not vow, so that they not go astray.]

Jerusalem Talmud Gittin

HALAKHAH: “If somebody throws a bill of divorce to his wife,” etc. “He shall write,” “he shall deliver into her hand.” Not only into her hand; from where also into her garden or into her courtyard? The verse says “he shall deliver, he shall deliver.”⁴A shortened version of this argument is in the Babli, 77b. The argument follows R. Aqiba, who derives rules from every word which could be considered not absolutely necessary. Since “he shall deliver” is mentioned both in Deut. 24:1 and 24:3, he concludes that any legal delivery is acceptable. Is this following Rebbi Ismael? It is following Rebbi Aqiba. It was stated in the name of Rebbi Ismael⁵R. Ismael holds that “the Torah speaks in everybody’s language.” Therefore, if “hand” is to be interpreted as “possession”, a verse has to be found in which this sense is documented. This is Num. 21:26 which notes that Siḥon the Amorite “took all the land from the Moabite king’s hand”. Since land cannot be grasped in one’s hand, “hand” must mean “possession”. (A hint of this argument is in Sifry Deut. 269. The Babli, Baba Meṣi‘a 56b, following only R. Aqiba, accepts the interpretation of “hand” as “possession” only in extraordinary cases.), “he took all his land from his hand, up to the Arnon.” Did he take it out of his hand? What means “from his hand”? From his possession.

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jerusalem Talmud Nazir

HALAKHAH: “All substitute names¹Num. 6:2 reads: “A man or a woman who clearly intend to vow the vow of a nazir, to become a nazir for the Eternal.” This makes it clear that making a vow of nazir, like any other vow, is implicitly an invocation of God’s name. The speaking of any vow therefore is an invocation of God’s name and this should be avoided; cf. Nedarim 1:1, Note 1. In this the vow of nazir is not different from any other vow. for nazir vows are like nazir vows,” etc. “All substitute names for vows are like vows,” etc. It is written¹²From the list mentioned in the Mishnah. “Any person who vows,” why does the verse say “a vow”? From here that substitute names for vows are like vows. “Or he swears,” why does the verse say “an oath”? From here that substitute names for oaths are like oaths. One reads that⁶The text is quoted from Nedarim 1:1, Notes 12–22. at the start of the first Chapter of Nedarim, up to: Rebbi Ismael stated: “any person who vows a vow of nazir”. From there that a person can obligate himself as nazir while he currently is a nazir.

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jerusalem Talmud Nazir

“I am” is a handle⁴⁴As explained in Nedarim 1:1, Note 67, a handle of a vow is an expression of a vow used in disregard of the formal rules of vows. for nezirut, “I am obligated” is a handle for qorban⁴⁵Not that he vowed a sacrifice but that it should be forbidden to him as if it were a sacrifice; cf. Introduction to Tractate Nedarim.. ⁴⁶From here on, a parallel to the text is in Nedarim 1:1, Notes 75–77. Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rebbi Hoshaiah: one catches him because of a handle for qorbān. Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya asked, if he said, I shall not eat from you, does one catch him because of a handle of an oath? Rebbi Yose said, ⁴⁷In Nedarim, the text between people … people is missing. people usually say “an oath that I shall not eat from yours;” do they ever say “that I shall not eat from yours, an oath”? Rebbi Mattaniah said, people usually say “handle of an axe”; do they ever say “axe of a handle”?

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jerusalem Talmud Nazir

The Mishnah follows Rebbi Jehudah since it was stated in the name of Rebbi Jehudah, the ancient pious ones desired to bring a purification offering, but the Omnipresent did not let a sin happen to them; so they made a vow of nazir in order to be able to bring a purification offering. Rebbi Simeon says, they became sinners because they made a vow of nazir, for it was said: “He shall atone for himself for what he sinned about the person,” that one sinned against his own person because he barred himself from [drinking] wine. It turns out that the position of Simeon the Just parallels Rebbi Simeon. As it was stated: Simeon the Just said, I never ate the reparation offering of a nazir except once. Once a man came to me from the South, I saw that he was handsome, with beautiful eyes and good looks, and his hair in waves. I said to him, my son, what induced you to cut off that beautiful hair? He said to me: Rabbi, I was a shepherd in my village and I went to fill the water vessel with water when I saw my mirror image in the water and my instinct rushed over me and tried to remove me from the World⁹⁸Since the obligation is 29 days, the 30th day automatically is the day of celebration.. I said to it, wicked! You are rushing me to something which is not yours; it is upon me to sanctify you to Heaven! I embraced him, kissed him on his head and said, my son, there should be many more in Israel who fulfill the Omnipresent’s will like you. About you the verse says, “man or woman, if he clearly articulates vowing a vow of nazir, to be a nazir for the Eternal.” Rebbi Mana asked: Why following Simeon the Just, even following Rebbi Simeon? Did Simeon the Just never eat a purification offering for suet? Did Simeon the Just never eat a purification offering for blood? Simeon the Just holds that people make a vow while they are upset. Since they make the vow while they are upset, in the end, they wonder. But if he wonders, his sacrifices become similar to one of those who slaughtered profane animals in the Temple courtyard. But this one made a well thought-out dedication, when his mouth and his thoughts were in unison.

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Full Chapter Next Verse