«Vœux d'exagération» [hyperbole, où il sait lui-même qu'il n'en est pas ainsi]: s'il disait: «Konam, si je n'en voyais pas autant que j'ai quitté l'Égypte», «si je n'ai pas vu un serpent comme (épais comme) la poutre du pressoir à olives. " «Vœux d'inconscience»: s'il disait: «Konam, [ce pain à moi] si j'ai mangé ou si j'ai bu», et il se souvenait qu'il avait mangé ou bu [et au moment du vœu il pensait qu'il n'avait pas mangé ou bu, ce n'est pas un vœu.] S'il a dit "Konam, si je mange ou bois (de toi)", et qu'il a oublié et mangé ou bu, (ce n'est pas un vœu) [car à l'époque où le le vœu était d'avoir «pris», le temps de manger ou de boire, il avait oublié le vœu, pour qu'il soit permis. Ceci est dérivé des serments, où il est écrit (Lévitique 5: 4): "un homme avec un serment", étant exigé qu'il soit "un homme" au moment où le serment doit prendre effet; c'est-à-dire qu'il soit conscient du serment. Et il en va de même pour les vœux.] (S'il disait :) "Konam, ma femme a profité de moi parce qu'elle a volé mon sac à main" ou "parce qu'elle a battu mon fils", et il a découvert qu'elle ne l'avait pas volé ou battu , [ce sont des vœux involontaires, car découvrir qu'elle n'a pas volé annule le vœu rétroactivement]. S'il voyait des gens manger des figues, et qu'il disait: "Qu'ils vous soient interdits en tant que korban", puis il a découvert qu'ils (les mangeurs) étaient son père et sa mère, et d'autres avec eux—Beth Shammai dit: Ils (ses parents) sont autorisés, et ceux qui sont avec eux, interdits. Et Beth Hillel dit: Les deux sont autorisés. [Car «un vœu partiellement annulé est entièrement annulé», le vœu désirant que le vœu «prenne» comme il l'a fait; et comme une partie de celui-ci était involontaire, il est entièrement nul.]
Bartenura on Mishnah Nedarim
נדרי הבאי – exaggeration and additional speech, but he himself knows that it was not the case.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Nedarim
Introduction
The first section of the mishnah illustrates vows of exaggeration and the second illustrates vows that were made in error.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Nedarim
קונם אם לא ראיתי – KONAM upon me this loaf of bread if I did no see, etc. (i.e., a snake as s big as the beam of an olive press).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Nedarim
Vows of exaggeration: If one says, “Konam if I did not see on this road as many as departed from Egypt”; “If I did not see a snake [as thick as the] the beam of an olive press. Vows of exaggeration need not be kept, because the person did not really intend to take a vow. His only intention was to exaggerate.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Nedarim
נדרי שגגות – he said, KONAM upon me this loaf of bread.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Nedarim
Vows in error: [If one says, “Konam,] if I ate or drank”, and then remembered that he had; “If I eat or drink” and then forgot [his vow] and ate or drank; “Konam be any benefit which my wife has from me, because she stole my purse or beat my child, and it was subsequently learnt that she had not beaten him nor stolen”; If one saw people eating [his] figs and said to them, “Let the figs be a korban to you,” and then discovered the people to be his father or his brothers. If others were with them: (1) Beth Shammai says: his father and brothers are permitted, but the rest are forbidden. (2) Beth Hillel says: all are permitted. This section teaches the important principle that vows made in error are invalid, and that a person has not broken his vow if he broke it in error. Furthermore, vows made based on false assumptions, such as that one’s wife stole something or beat one’s child, or the false presumption that people eating one’s figs should not be eating them, are also invalid. The final question in the mishnah is whether or not a vow can be half-valid, in other words valid with regard to some people and invalid with regard to others. In the case of the figs, both Beth Shammai and Beth Hillel agree that the brothers and father can eat, because the person who vowed intended to prohibit the figs only to strangers. However, Beth Shammai holds that the figs are prohibited to others who are there eating with them. Beth Hillel holds that since part of the vow isn’t valid, the whole vow is invalid.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Nedarim
אם אכלתי אם שתיתי ונזכר שאכל ושתה – and at the time of the vow he thought that he did not eat and did not drink, it would not be a vow.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Nedarim
קונם שאיני אוכלך לך ואיני שותה, ושכח ואכל ושתה – that at the time that the vow takes place which is at the time of eating and/or drinking, he forgot the vow, it is permitted/annulled, as we derive it from an oath as it is written (Leviticus 5:4): “[Or when a person uttes an oath to bad or good purpose –] whatever a man may utter in an oath – [and though he has known it, the fact has escaped him, but later he realizes his guilt in any of these matters -]” that we require that he will be a man at the time when the oath takes place upon him, meaning to say, that he will be mindful from the oath, and the same law applies with regard to a vow.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Nedarim
קונם אשתי נהנית לי שגנבה את כיסו – these are vows made in error, for since it became known that she did not steal from him, it is found that there was no vow.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Nedarim
אלו ואלו מותרין – for a vow that was partially permitted is completely permitted, for he does not want that his vow would take place, but rather, similar to that he made the vow, and since part of it was in made inadvertently in error, all of it is nullified.
