Comentário sobre Nedarim 11:2

אם לא היתה פרנסתו אלא ממנו – that he believes in him until he will earn enough and will repay him.

Introduction This mishnah is the continuation of Rabbi Yose’s opinion, begun in yesterday’s mishnah. Yesterday Rabbi Yose said that if the wife vows not to adorn herself or not to bathe the husband cannot annul because these are not considered vows of self-denial. In our mishnah Rabbi Yose provides his definition of vows of self-denial.

הרי זה יפר דברי ר' יוסי – Rabbi Yossi, according to his reasoning who holds that the husband does not absolve every vow that has in it privations of the necessities of life, since he distinguishes between greater privation and lesser privation and between privation for a lengthy period of time to that of a short period of time, but all of the Mishnayot of this chapter go according to him and are not Halakha. Rather, the husband annuls/absolves all vows that have in them privations of the necessities of life, whether of one day and even one hour, whether for a lengthy period of time, whether the privation is great or whether the privation is small, and similarly absolves vows and oaths in matters that are between him and her, even though they are not privations of the necessities of life, as, for example, if she took an oath or a vow not to paint her eyelids or not to adorn herself. And similarly, if she vowed that she would not eat from the produce of this province, the husband annuls/absolves, for it is troublesome for him to bring her produce from another province, and these are things between him and her. But what is the difference between vows and oaths that are between him and her to vows and oaths that have in them privations of the necessities of life? Vows and oaths that have in them privations of the necessities of life he absolves/annuls for himself and for others, as for example, if she took a vow that she would not eat meat or drink wine, he absolves her and she is permitted ot eat and to drink and even after she becomes a widow or a divorcee and marries another [man]. But vows and oaths that are between him and her, as, for example, if she forbade upon herself sexual intercourse of every man in the world, or that she wouldn’t ever paint her eyelids or adorn herself, he absolves his part, and she would perform her marital duty and paint her eyelids and adorn herself all the time that she is under him , and when she is widowed or divorced, she would be forbidden in engaging in sexual relations with all men and to paint her eyelids and to adorn herself And so forth in a similar manner.

But these are vows of self-denial:
If she says, “Konam be the produce of the [whole] world to me”, he can annul. If the woman forbids upon herself all produce everywhere the husband may annul the vow because this is certainly considered a vow of self-denial.

“Konam be the produce of this region to me,” he should bring her that of a different region. In this case he cannot annul the vow because he may bring her produce from another region.

“[Konam be] the produce of this shopkeeper to me”, he cannot annul. But if he can obtain his sustenance only from him, he can annul, the words of Rabbi Yose. Similarly, if she vows not to eat the produce of a certain shopkeeper, he may not break the vow because he may bring her produce from other shopkeepers. However, if the husband has a deal with the shopkeeper from whom she swore not to receive benefit, whereby the shopkeeper provides him with food on credit, then he may annul the vow. Since the husband will not be able to bring his wife food from the other shopkeepers who do not give to him on credit, he will not be able to provide her with food, and therefore her vow will be one of self-denial. The Sages disagree with Rabbi Yose and hold that even though she has sworn not to receive benefit only from one specific person and she could receive from others, this is still considered a vow of self-denial and the husband may annul it.