Il n'y a pas de différence entre le beving avantage de son voisin et le bevoring food de lui, mais "le foulage du pied" [Bevowing avantage est plus strict que bevoring food uniquement en ce que celui qui fait le vœu en bénéficie ne peut pas entrer dans la propriété de l'autre, alors que celui qui bevows food may], et, (autre différence), des récipients qui ne sont pas utilisés pour la préparation des aliments, [il est permis de les prêter à celui qui fait le bevows food (mais pas à celui qui fait le vœu). Et ce, uniquement dans un endroit où ces navires ne sont pas loués; mais dans un endroit où ils sont loués, c'est interdit (même à celui qui fait vœu de nourriture). Pour (il est interdit) tout bénéfice résultant en nourriture. Car si celui-ci ne lui avait pas profité (en lui prêtant le vaisseau), il lui manquerait une perutah en nourriture. Car avec cette perutah (sauvée), il peut acheter de la nourriture.] Il n'y a pas de différence entre les vœux et les cadeaux, mais que l'on doit faire du bien pour les vœux, mais il n'a pas besoin de faire du bien pour les cadeaux. [("vœux" :) Si l'on dit: "Je prends sur moi (c'est-à-dire, je jure) d'apporter un holocauste", après quoi il l'a séparé (l'animal) et il a été perdu, il doit apporter un autre une. ("cadeaux" :) Si l'on dit: "cet animal est (donné) comme offrande brûlée", et il a été perdu, il n'a pas besoin d'en apporter un différent, car il ne l'a pas pris sur lui. Mais en ce qui concerne la responsabilité pour retard, ils sont tous les deux les mêmes, il est écrit (Deutéronome 23:24): "... ce que vous avez juré au Seigneur votre D.ieu, le cadeau que vous avez dit avec votre bouche, etc. . "
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.
