Comentario sobre Nedarim 1:3
הָאוֹמֵר לֹא חֻלִּין לֹא אֹכַל לָךְ, לֹא כָשֵׁר, וְלֹא דְכֵי, טָהוֹר, וְטָמֵא, נוֹתָר, וּפִגּוּל, אָסוּר. כְּאִמְּרָא, כַּדִּירִין, כָּעֵצִים, כָּאִשִּׁים, כַּמִּזְבֵּחַ, כַּהֵיכָל, כִּירוּשָׁלָיִם, נָדַר בְּאֶחָד מִכָּל מְשַׁמְּשֵׁי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא הִזְכִּיר קָרְבָּן, הֲרֵי זֶה נָדַר בְּקָרְבָּן. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, הָאוֹמֵר יְרוּשָׁלַיִם, לֹא אָמַר כְּלוּם:
Si uno dice: "Lachullin; no comeré de ti" [El "lamed" está pronunciado por un patach, la denotación es: No chullin (comida mundana) será lo que como de ti, sino comida consagrada.] "No kasher (en forma) "[será, pero pasul (no apto), es decir, comida consagrada, que es susceptible de" aptitud "e" falta de aptitud ".]," No dachi "[No permitido, como en (Avodah Zarah 37a) : "Ayal kamtza (un tipo de langosta) dachan" ("está permitido"). Y a pesar de que los términos "permitido" y "prohibido" se aplican también en el contexto de (animales que son) neveilah (carcasa) y treifah (orgánicamente defectuosos), y dictaminamos que los votos "toman" solo con respecto a lo prometido y lo que se da (y no con respecto a algo prohibido en sí mismo), ya que "permitido" también se puede usar en el contexto de la comida consagrada, se enseñó que con los votos no calificados seguimos la opción estricta. Ya que deseaba el voto de "tomar" aquí, decimos que (en sus palabras) tenía la intención de lo que se prometió (y no lo que está prohibido en sí mismo)], "Puro" [Si dijo: "No es puro lo que como de ti "]," Inmundo "," Nothar "(sacrificios sobrantes)," Piggul "(sacrificios invalidados), está prohibido. [Si él dijo: "Inmundo, lo que como de ti", y así, con los demás, está prohibido (comer de él), ya que todas estas (expresiones) se aplican a la comida consagrada.] "Como imra" [ Como el cordero del sacrificio], "Como dirin" [el cobertizo de madera (Templo) o el cobertizo de ganado], "Como las ofrendas de fuego," Como el altar "[Como las ofrendas sobre el altar]," Como el santuario " [Como las ofrendas del santuario], "Como Jerusalén" [Como las ofrendas en Jerusalén. Otra interpretación: Como los muros de Jerusalén (él sostiene que estos muros proceden del excedente del tesoro del Templo)], Si él prometió con cualquier de los accesorios del altar [como tenedores, rociadores y sartenes. Si él dijo: "Como los tenedores, lo que como de ti" o "Como los rociadores, lo que como de ti", y así, con los demás], a pesar de que no dijo "Korban" ("Una ofrenda"), es como si hubiera jurado con "Korban". R. Yehudah dice: Si uno dice: "Jerusalén" [sin el chaf ( "As")], no ha dicho nada. [El primer tanna difiere, y el halac hah no está de acuerdo con R. Yehudah.]
Bartenura on Mishnah Nedarim
English Explanation of Mishnah Nedarim
[If one says, “May it be to me], as the lamb”, “As the Temple pens”, “As the wood [on the altar]”, “As the fire [on the altar]”, “As the altar”, “As the Temple” or “As Jerusalem”; [or] if one vowed by reference to the altar utensils, even though he did not mention “korban”, behold this one was vowed by a korban.
Rabbi Judah said: He who says “Jerusalem” has said nothing.
The normal way of making a prohibitive vow is for a person to say that a certain something is like a sacrifice, a “korban”, which is forbidden to him. Our mishnah talks about various ways in which a person can make a valid vow without actually saying the word “korban”. As we could see in the first two mishnayoth of Nedarim, people were hesitant to actually say the word “korban” and hence looked for substitutes.
Section one: In this section a person says something which is interpreted to mean “That which I eat from you should be to me like x”, and the “x” is prohibited to him and therefore he has prohibited the food upon himself. There are seven examples.
1) “Not-unconsecrated food”, meaning the food should be to the one swearing as if it were consecrated like a sacrifice.
2) “Not fit” interpreted to mean, not fit for people to eat but rather fit for sacrifice on the altar.
3) “Not pure” your food shall not be pure and permitted for me to eat, but rather set aside for sacrifice on the altar.
4) “Clean” your food shall be pure, as is a sacrifice, and hence not permitted to me.
5) “Unclean” your food shall be considered unclean to me, but clean for sacrifice on the altar.
(6+7) “Remnant” or “Piggul” your food shall be prohibited to me as remnant (sacrificial meat which has been kept too long after being sacrificed and is forbidden), or piggul (sacrificial meat prohibited because it was sacrificed with the wrong intent). Since both of these are forbidden, the vow is effective.
Section two: In this section the person swearing states that food that belongs to another should be to him like something in the Temple. Although he doesn’t say that the food is like a “korban”, these statements are sufficient to make the vow valid. The examples are 1) a sacrificial lamb; 2) pens in the Temple used to store the sacrifices; 3) the wood used to fuel the fire on the altar; 4) the fire itself; 5) the altar itself; 6) the Temple; 7) Jerusalem, which could be interpreted to refer to the sacrifices eaten in Jerusalem. A vow formula may also employ any of the utensils used at the altar. In all of these cases, even though he did not say that the food would be like a “korban”, the vow is valid and binding.
According to Rabbi Judah, saying that food should be “Jerusalem” is not sufficient because he may be referring to other things in Jerusalem besides the Temple. As we shall learn in the next mishnah, Rabbi Judah also holds that in order for the vow to be valid he has to say “Like x”, and not just “x” itself. Since he did not say “like Jerusalem”, the vow is not valid.