Commentaire sur Nedarim 11:4

קונם שאיני עושה על פי אבא – [It will be prohibited like] being dedicated to the Temple all what I do from coming [to work] for Father, meaning to say, that Father will not be able to benefit from the work of my hands.

Introduction The first part of the mishnah discusses a woman who vows not to provide benefit for either her own or her husband’s father or brother. The second part discusses a woman who vows not to provide benefit for her husband himself.

אינו יכול להפר – this is not one of the matters between him and her, and in this everyone agrees that she prohibits her benefit upon a particular person, the husband cannot absolve it. And such is the Halakha.

[If she vows,] “Konam that which I do for my father,” [or] “your father,” [or] “my brother,” [or] “your brother,” [the husband] cannot annul it. In all of these cases the woman vows that anything that she produces shall be forbidden to either her or her husband’s father or brother. Since none of these vows involves self-denial, the husband may not annul the vow.

על פיך אינו צריך להפר – because she is subjugated to him and even though that [stating that] something is dedicated to the Temple removes it from subjugation, the Rabbis strengthened her subjugation to the husband for [the use of] KONAM does not release from his subjugation.

[“Konam] “that which I do for you,” he need not annul it. Rabbi Akiva says: he should annul it, lest she make more than is fitting for him. Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri said: he should annul it, lest he divorce her and she thereby be forbidden to him. We learned in the fifth chapter of Ketuboth that a woman is obligated to perform certain duties for her husband and her handiwork belongs to him. Since she has this obligation, she may not vow that her husband may not benefit from her handiwork. In essence, she does not own her handiwork and therefore it is not hers to prohibit by vow. Rabbi Akiva points out that not all of the handiwork automatically goes to her husband. According to Ketuboth 5:9, she has a set amount of handiwork which she must do; anything over that amount she gets to keep. If so, the vow is potentially effective for this extra amount. Since if she does produce an extra amount, it will be difficult for a husband not to derive some benefit from it, he should annul the vow to avoid the potential problem. The reason that he has a right to annul the vow even though it is not a vow of self-denial is that this is something that comes between him and her. Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri points out that if the husband divorces his wife, the vow will become valid, since she is no longer obligated to provide him with her handiwork. Once divorced, he will also no longer be able to annul the vow. In such a case he would not be able to remarry her. To avoid this problem, Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri suggests that the husband annul the vow.

יפר שמא תעדיף עליו יותר מן הראוי לו (let him annul it lest she place a burden upon him more than is appropriate for him) – since [the vow] of dedicating something to the Temple takes effect on the excess part which is not under his subjugation, therefore, he must annul/absolve [her vow], and the absolution is effective for him because this is a matter that is between him and her, for it is impossible that the surplus will not be mixed in with that of her husband.

רבי יוחנן בן נורי אומר יפר שמא יגרשנה – and the essence/principal of her handiwork requires absolution lest he divorce her and her husband’s subjugation will be released, and then the vow will take effect and she will be forbidden from returning to him. And the Halakah is according to Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri. But when she says, “May my hands be sanctified to their Maker (i.e., God), her hands are already in existence and the dedication to the Temple takes effect.