Talmud sobre Nedarim 3:1

אַרְבָּעָה נְדָרִים הִתִּירוּ חֲכָמִים, נִדְרֵי זֵרוּזִין, וְנִדְרֵי הֲבַאי, וְנִדְרֵי שְׁגָגוֹת, וְנִדְרֵי אֳנָסִים. נִדְרֵי זֵרוּזִין, כֵּיצַד. הָיָה מוֹכֵר חֵפֶץ וְאָמַר, קוֹנָם שֶׁאֵינִי פוֹחֵת לְךָ מִן הַסֶּלַע, וְהַלָּה אוֹמֵר, קוֹנָם שֶׁאֵינִי מוֹסִיף לְךָ עַל הַשֶּׁקֶל, שְׁנֵיהֶן רוֹצִין בִּשְׁלֹשָׁה דִינָרִין. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר, אַף הָרוֹצֶה לְהַדִּיר אֶת חֲבֵרוֹ שֶׁיֹּאכַל אֶצְלוֹ, אוֹמֵר, כָּל נֶדֶר שֶׁאֲנִי עָתִיד לִדֹּר הוּא בָטֵל, וּבִלְבַד שֶׁיְּהֵא זָכוּר בִּשְׁעַת הַנֶּדֶר:

Os sábios permitiram quatro votos (sem absolvição): votos do diligente, votos de exagero, votos de inconsciência, votos de constrangimento. "Os votos dos diligentes": como assim? Se alguém estivesse vendendo algo e dissesse: "Konam, se eu vender para você por menos de um sela" [isto é, este pão é konam para mim, se eu vender para você por menos de um sela. Um sela tem quatro dinares], e o outro disse: "Konam, que não lhe darei mais do que um siclo" [meio sela], ambos concordam em três dinares [e não pretendiam um voto formal; mas o vendedor "jurou" a fim de "estimular" o comprador a pagar mais e, do mesmo modo, fazer o vendedor aceitar menos, motivo pelo qual não é um voto real. E mesmo que "os pensamentos do coração não tenham importância", aqui, onde é evidente que essa é a intenção deles, sendo essa a prática de compradores e vendedores, nós entretemos "os pensamentos do coração". R. Eliezer b. Yaakov diz: Também alguém que deseja encorajar seu amigo a comer com ele. [A gemara explica que algo está faltando aqui e que é isso que se entende: se alguém deseja que seu amigo coma com ele, e o importuna, e o inclina, isso (também) é (na categoria de) "os votos de o diligente ". E se alguém deseja que seus votos do ano inteiro não "tomem", ele deve se levantar em Rosh Hashaná e] dizer: "Que todos os votos que eu farei sejam anulados". [Ele não precisa necessariamente fazê-lo em Rosh Hashaná, mas o mesmo acontece sempre que ele deseja e por qualquer período que ele designar] desde que esteja consciente [da condição (que o voto não "faz")] a hora do voto, [e ele deseja que a condição se aplique. Somente então o voto é nulo. Mas se ele não estava consciente da condição quando prometeu ou imediatamente depois, o voto "faz". E escusado será dizer que, se ele estava consciente da condição quando prometeu e desejou que a condição fosse nula e que o voto "fizesse", "fizesse". As leis dos juramentos e dos votos são semelhantes a esse respeito. A halachá está de acordo com R. Eliezer b. Yaakov.]

Jerusalem Talmud Nazir

Rebbi Mana understood it²⁵That the Sages and R. Jehudah do not agree about the weight of a person’s disclaimer as against two witnesses to his actions. from the following²⁶Mishnah Keritut 3:1.: “They told him, if he wishes, he says that he did it intentionally.” What can he say for an assigned slave girl²⁷Lev. 19:20–22, the case of a man sleeping with a slave girl assigned as a future wife to another free man. As long as the girl is not totally freed, she cannot marry the man to whom she is assigned. Therefore, her relations with another man are not adultery. A reparation offering is required from the man. This is one of the few cases in which a sacrifice is possible for deliberate sin.? In error²⁸If in the dark he thought that she was his wife., he is obligated; intentionally²⁹This is the case treated by the verse. If he denies the accusation by two witnesses, one cannot take his denial as assertion that he did it but already had remedied the situation., he is obligated! He can tell him, I touched her but did not finish³⁰This is a first explanation: A sacrifice is due only if there was an ejaculation of semen (v. 20). If he took the slave girl to bed but stopped before there was an ejaculation, no sacrifice is due., or as Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, I was forced to it by the spell she put on me³¹He disclaims responsibility by reason of temporary insanity caused by the girl’s charms. This is enough to support his disclaimer against even two witnesses.. For a nazir³²Exposed to the impurity of the dead; the case of the Mishnah. what can you say? In error, he is obligated; intentionally, he is obligated; forced, he is obligated! “Suddenly”, to include in error, “suddenly”, to include intentionally³³This is proof that the nazir must bring his sacrifices even if forced. The reference is to Num. 6:9. In all other sources, Sifry Num. 28 [= Num. rabba 10(31)], Babli Keritut 9a, the inference is from the double expression “if a person should die near him suddenly,unexpectedly …” “Suddenly” is taken to refer to accidental impurity, “unexpectedly” to outside force (Sifry) or outside force and intention (Babli).. “There was a condition in my mind that if I should become impure, my nezirut should burst away from me and a new nezirut would fall on me”; in any case he was not obligated to be a nazir until now³⁴Since the vow of nezirut could have been formulated in a way that eliminates the possibility of a sacrifice for impurity, the testimony of the witnesses can be explained away.. (“There was a condition in my mind that if I should become impure, my nezirut should burst away from me and a new nezirut would fall on me”; in any case he was not obligated to be a nazir until now.)³⁵A case of dittography. What do you have in case of an oath³⁶If two witnesses tell a person that he owes a sacrifice because he has violated an oath imposed on him by other people (Lev. 5:1,4). How can he be believed if he denies the accusation?? In error, he is obligated; intentionally, he is obligated³⁷Mishnah Keritut 2:2.! A condition may apply to words³⁸If he undertakes anything, he may add conditions. If others (usually a court of law) impose an oath on him, he swears according to their understanding, rather than his own.; there is no condition for oaths! It follows what Rebbi Abba said, Rav Jehudah: For error, its sacrifice, for intention, its sacrifice. But if he said, I thought that this was no oath, he is free³⁹Here, there may be a case in which no sacrifice can be demanded if the interested party denies their obligation.. Therefore, all these subjects cannot be stated, but the following can be stated⁴⁰In all cases discussed so far, the Sages cannot disagree with R. Jehudah; that is possible only in the cases dealt with in the next paragraph..

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jerusalem Talmud Chagigah

HALAKHAH: ¹⁵⁹This text essentially appears in the Venice edition of the Yerushalmi in Nedarim 3:1 as an unjustified corrector’s addition taken from here. Also the attribution there of R. Eliezer’s statement to Ḥananiah the nephew of R. Joshua is unjustified; Ḥananiah refers to the next paragraph. The authorship of R. Eliezer of a similar statement is confirmed in the Babli 10a. It was stated: Rebbi Eliezer says, they have support. I swore and shall keep it¹⁶⁰Ps. 119:106.. Sometimes I do not keep it. Rebbi Joshua says, they have support. Which I swore in My anger¹⁶¹Ps. 95:11.. I swore in My anger, I am changing My opinion.

Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Capítulo completo Próximo versículo