A certain style of petach was used by a number of rabbis and yet, was discouraged by the Gemara for concern that people would not tell the truth. This petach took on different forms but the idea was that the chacham would say something like: “Had you known how terrible a sin it is to God to vow, would you have taken this vow?” Since it is unlikely someone would have the audacity to answer ‘yes’ to this question in front of a chacham, they ruled one cannot use it. There is a debate between Rava and Abaye regarding whether or not one can use this petach: “Had you known it was like building a bama and sacrificing a sacrifice, would you have vowed?” There is a debate regarding what part of that sentence they disagree about – the bama or the sacrifice. The Gemara brings several statements about the dangers of anger since the assumption is that most people vow in a moment of anger. A story is told of Ulla who witnessed a murder on his travels from Babylonia to Israel. Rabbi Yochanan questions a detail of the story – how one could have gotten angry in Israel and murdered another, as the verse says that God will bring anger outside of Israel. Anger causes one to dismiss the divine presence, causes folly and sin. Is it possible to dissolve a vow/oath if one vowed/swore in the name of God? Most of the amoraim say that it is not, but Rav Nachman rules at the end of the sugya that it is allowed. It is told about Rav Sechora who came to Rabbi Nachman to permit a vow and after Rav Nachman tried all kinds of openings without success, he became angry with Rav Sechora. When Rabbi Sechora left there, he came up with a petach himself that if he had known that it would make Rabbi Nachman angry with him, he would not have made a vow. Another similar story is told about the breaking of a vow of Rabbi Shimon the son of Rebbi.
Nedarim 22
Share this shiur:
Want to dedicate learning? Get started here:
Today’s daily daf tools:
Nedarim 22
אִילּוּ לָא חֲמָאת בָּהּ אִימַּהּ מִילִּין דַּעֲזִיבָה — בִּכְדִי לָא אַדַּרְתַּהּ! מִי אַדַּרְתַּהּ? אֲמַרָה לֵיהּ: לָא, וְשַׁרְיַיהּ.
Had her mother not seen inappropriate [aziva] matters or behavior in her that should be stopped, she would not have taken a vow with regard to her for nothing; had you known that the neighbors would say that, would you have taken a vow with regard to her? She said to him: No, and he dissolved the vow for her.
בַּר בְּרַתֵּיה דְּרַבִּי יַנַּאי סָבָא אֲתָא לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי יַנַּאי סָבָא, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אִילּוּ הֲוָה יָדְעַתְּ דְּפָתְחִין פִּינְקְסָךְ וּמְמַשְׁמְשִׁין בְּעוֹבָדָךְ, מִי נְדַרְתְּ? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: לָא, וְשַׁרְיֵיהּ.
The Gemara relates: The son of the daughter of Rabbi Yannai the Elder came before Rabbi Yannai the Elder to dissolve a vow. He said to him: Had you known that when you make a vow they open your record book [pinekas] in heaven and examine your actions, would you have vowed? He said to him: No, and he dissolved the vow for him.
אָמַר רַבִּי אַבָּא: מַאי קְרָאָה — ״וְאַחַר נְדָרִים לְבַקֵּר״. וְאַף עַל גַּב דִּפְתַח רַבִּי יַנַּאי לֵיהּ — אֲנַן לָא פָּתְחִינַן לֵיהּ בְּהָא.
Rabbi Abba said: What is the verse from which it is derived that taking a vow leads to one’s deeds being examined? It is “And after vows to make inquiry” (Proverbs 20:25). This is interpreted to mean that after one takes a vow, his actions are reviewed in heaven. The Gemara comments: And although Rabbi Yannai broached dissolution with him in this way, we do not broach dissolution in this manner for one who vows, by asking if he regrets it because his actions will be examined in heaven. This is because one might be embarrassed, upon hearing such a question, to say that he does not have regret, and he will claim untruthfully that he is regretful.
וְלָא פָּתְחִינַן בְּהָדָא אַחְרָנִייתָא, דְּאָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: מַאי פְּתַח לֵיהּ רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל לְהָהוּא סָבָא: ״יֵשׁ בּוֹטֶה כְּמַדְקְרוֹת חָרֶב וּלְשׁוֹן חֲכָמִים מַרְפֵּא״. כׇּל הַבּוֹטֶה — רָאוּי לְדוֹקְרוֹ בְּחֶרֶב, אֶלָּא — לְשׁוֹן חֲכָמִים מַרְפֵּא.
And we also do not broach dissolution in this other way, as Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: What type of dissolution did Rabban Gamliel broach for a certain elderly man who had taken a vow and came before him for dissolution? He informed him that it is written: “There is one who speaks like the piercing of a sword, but the tongue of the wise is health” (Proverbs 12:18), which is interpreted to mean: Anyone who verbally expresses the language of a vow, it is appropriate to pierce him with a sword, but he has another option: “The tongue of the wise is health,” since the Sages can release him from his vow. Quoting this verse with its interpretation is also not an acceptable method of broaching dissolution.
וְלָא פָּתְחִינַן בַּהֲדָא אַחְרָנִייתָא, דְּתַנְיָא, רַבִּי נָתָן אוֹמֵר: הַנּוֹדֵר — כְּאִילּוּ בָּנָה בָּמָה, וְהַמְקַיְּימוֹ — כְּאִילּוּ מַקְרִיב עָלָיו קׇרְבָּן. בְּרֵישָׁא פָּתְחִינַן. בְּסֵיפָא, אַבָּיֵי אָמַר: פָּתְחִינַן, רָבָא אָמַר: לָא פָּתְחִינַן.
We also do not broach dissolution using this other method, as it is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Natan says: One who vows is considered as if he built a personal altar outside the Temple, which is prohibited, and one who fulfills this vow is considered as if he sacrifices an offering on it. With the first clause, we may broach dissolution by informing the one who vowed that vowing is akin to building an altar outside the Temple, but with regard to the latter clause there is a dispute among the Sages. Abaye said: We do broach dissolution by telling someone that fulfilling a vow is like sacrificing an offering on a forbidden altar, while Rava said: We do not broach dissolution with it.
רַב כָּהֲנָא מַתְנֵי לַהּ לְהָא שְׁמַעְתָּא בְּהָדֵין לִישָּׁנָא. רַב טַבְיוֹמֵי מַתְנֵי הָכִי: בְּסֵיפָא לָא פָּתְחִינַן. בְּרֵישָׁא, אַבָּיֵי אָמַר: פָּתְחִינַן, רָבָא אָמַר: לָא פָּתְחִינַן. וְהִלְכְתָא: לָא פָּתְחִינַן לָא בְּרֵישָׁא וְלָא בְּסֵיפָא.
Rav Kahana taught this halakha in this wording, i.e., the wording that was just cited. However, Rav Tavyumei taught this halakha in this way: With regard to what is written in the last clause, all agree that we do not broach dissolution in this way. With regard to what is written in the first clause, there is a dispute among the Sages. Abaye said: We do broach dissolution in this manner, while Rava said: We do not broach dissolution in this manner either. The Gemara concludes: And the halakha is that we do not broach dissolution using either the language in the first clause or the language in the latter clause.
וְלָא פָּתְחִינַן בְּהָא נָמֵי דִּשְׁמוּאֵל. דְּאָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמְּקַיְּימוֹ — נִקְרָא רָשָׁע. אָמַר רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ, מַאי קְרָא: ״וְכִי תֶחְדַּל לִנְדֹּר לֹא יִהְיֶה בְךָ חֵטְא״, וְיָלֵיף ״חֲדָלָה״ ״חֲדָלָה״. כְּתִיב הָכָא: ״וְכִי תֶחְדַּל לִנְדֹּר״, וּכְתִיב הָתָם: ״שָׁם רְשָׁעִים חָדְלוּ רֹגֶז״.
And furthermore, we also do not broach dissolution with this statement of Shmuel, as Shmuel said: With regard to one who vows, although he fulfills it, he is called wicked. Rabbi Abbahu said: What is the verse from which this is derived? It is “But if you refrain [teḥdal] from vowing there will be no sin in you” (Deuteronomy 23:23), and he derives the word ḥadala here from the word ḥadala elsewhere. It is written here: “But if you refrain [teḥdal] from vowing,” and it is written there: “There the wicked cease [ḥadlu] from troubling” (Job 3:17). The parallel language demonstrates that vowing is an act of the wicked.
אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף, אַף אֲנַן נָמֵי תְּנֵינָא: ״כְּנִדְרֵי כְשֵׁרִים״ — לֹא אָמַר כְּלוּם, ״כְּנִדְרֵי רְשָׁעִים״ — נָדַר בְּנָזִיר וּבְקׇרְבָּן וּבִשְׁבוּעָה.
Rav Yosef said: We, too, learn in the mishna (9a): If one says he vows like the vows of the virtuous, he has not said anything. If he says: Like the vows of the wicked, he has vowed with regard to becoming a nazirite, or with regard to obligating himself in an offering, or with regard to taking an oath. From here it is also apparent that vowing is an act of the wicked.
אָמַר רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָנִי אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹנָתָן: כׇּל הַכּוֹעֵס כׇּל מִינֵי גֵיהִנָּם שׁוֹלְטִין בּוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְהָסֵר כַּעַס מִלִּבֶּךָ וְהַעֲבֵר רָעָה מִבְּשָׂרֶךָ״, וְאֵין ״רָעָה״ אֶלָּא גֵּיהִנָּם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״כֹּל פָּעַל ה׳ לַמַּעֲנֵהוּ וְגַם רָשָׁע לְיוֹם רָעָה״.
§ Apropos the verse “There the wicked cease from troubling,” the Gemara cites a related statement: Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said that Rabbi Yonatan said: Anyone who gets angry, all kinds of Gehenna rule over him, because anger causes him to transgress all kinds of severe sins, as it is stated: “Therefore remove vexation from your heart and put away evil from your flesh” (Ecclesiastes 11:10), and the evil mentioned is nothing other than Gehenna, as it is stated: “The Lord has made everything for His own purpose and even the wicked for the day of evil” (Proverbs 16:4), which is interpreted to mean that ultimately the day of the evildoer in Gehenna will arrive.
וְלֹא עוֹד אֶלָּא שֶׁהַתַּחְתּוֹנִיּוֹת שׁוֹלְטוֹת בּוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְנָתַן ה׳ לְךָ שָׁם לֵב רַגָּז וְכִלְיוֹן עֵינַיִם וְדַאֲבוֹן נָפֶשׁ״, אֵיזֶהוּ דָּבָר שֶׁמְּכַלֶּה אֶת הָעֵינַיִם וּמַדְאִיב אֶת הַנֶּפֶשׁ — הֱוֵי אוֹמֵר: אֵלּוּ הַתַּחְתּוֹנִיּוֹת.
And not only that, but also hemorrhoids will control him, as it is stated: “But the Lord shall give you there a trembling heart, and failing of eyes, and languishing of soul” (Deuteronomy 28:65). Which is the matter of sickness that causes failing of the eyes in pain and causes languishing of the soul? You must say this is referring to hemorrhoids.
עוּלָּא בְּמִיסְּקֵיהּ לְאַרְעָא דְּיִשְׂרָאֵל אִיתְלְווֹ לֵיהּ תְּרֵין בְּנֵי חוֹזָאֵי בַּהֲדֵיהּ. קָם חַד שַׁחְטֵיהּ לְחַבְרֵיהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ לְעוּלָּא: יָאוּת עֲבַדִי? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אִין, וּפְרַע לֵיהּ בֵּית הַשְּׁחִיטָה. כִּי אֲתָא לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: דִּלְמָא חַס וְשָׁלוֹם אַחְזִיקִי יְדֵי עוֹבְרֵי עֲבֵירָה? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: נַפְשְׁךָ הִצַּלְתָּ.
The Gemara relates: Ulla, on his ascent to Eretz Yisrael, had two residents of Ḥozai join him. Because of a brawl between them, one arose and slaughtered the other. The assailant said to Ulla: Did I act properly? He said to him: Yes, and open the place of the slaughter, i.e., cut it more so that he will die faster. When Ulla came before Rabbi Yoḥanan, Ulla said to him: Perhaps, Heaven forbid, I strengthened the hands of sinners by commending him, although I did so merely because I was afraid that he would kill me. He said to him: You saved yourself by doing so, as it is permitted for one to say words like this in order to save his own life.
קָא תָמַהּ רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, מִכְּדִי כְּתִיב: ״וְנָתַן ה׳ לְךָ שָׁם לֵב רַגָּז״ בְּבָבֶל כְּתִיב? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הָהוּא שַׁעְתָּא
With regard to the narrative itself, Rabbi Yoḥanan wondered: Now, it is written in the passage of curses: “But the Lord shall give you there a trembling heart” (Deuteronomy 28:65) and this is written with regard to Babylonia, because in the exile an individual possesses a trembling and angry heart. How is it possible that in Eretz Yisrael a person can get so angry as to murder another? Ulla said to him: At that moment when the incident occurred
לָא עָבְרִינַן יַרְדְּנָא.
we had not yet crossed the Jordan River, and we were still outside of Eretz Yisrael. Therefore, the curse of a heart of anger was relevant.
אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר רַב הוּנָא: כׇּל הַכּוֹעֵס, אֲפִילּוּ שְׁכִינָה אֵינָהּ חֲשׁוּבָה כְּנֶגְדּוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״רָשָׁע כְּגֹבַהּ אַפּוֹ בַּל יִדְרֹשׁ אֵין אֱלֹהִים כׇּל מְזִמּוֹתָיו״. רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה מִדִּיפְתִּי אָמַר: מְשַׁכֵּחַ תַּלְמוּדוֹ וּמוֹסִיף טִיפְּשׁוּת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״כִּי כַעַס בְּחֵיק כְּסִילִים יָנוּחַ״, וּכְתִיב: ״וּכְסִיל יִפְרֹשׂ אִוֶּלֶת״. רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק אָמַר: בְּיָדוּעַ שֶׁעֲוֹנוֹתָיו מְרוּבִּין מִזְּכִיּוֹתָיו, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וּבַעַל חֵמָה רַב פָּשַׁע״.
Rabba bar Rav Huna said: Anyone who gets angry, at that moment even the Divine Presence is not important to him, as it is stated: “The wicked, in the height of his anger says: He will not require; all his thoughts are: There is no God” (Psalms 10:4). Rabbi Yirmeya of Difti said: Anyone who gets angry forgets his learning and increases foolishness, as it is stated: “For anger rests in the bosom of fools” (Ecclesiastes 7:9), and it is written: “But a fool unfolds folly” (Proverbs 13:16). Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: With regard to one who gets angry, it is acknowledged that his sins are more numerous than his merits, as it is stated: “And a wrathful man abounds in transgression” (Proverbs 29:22).
אָמַר רַב אַדָּא בְּרַבִּי חֲנִינָא: אִלְמָלֵא (לֹא) חָטְאוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל לֹא נִיתַּן לָהֶם אֶלָּא חֲמִשָּׁה חוּמְשֵׁי תוֹרָה וְסֵפֶר יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בִּלְבַד, שֶׁעֶרְכָּהּ שֶׁל אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל הוּא. מַאי טַעְמָא: ״כִּי בְּרֹב חׇכְמָה רׇב כָּעַס״.
Rav Adda, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: Had Israel not sinned in earlier times they would have been given the five books of the Torah and the book of Joshua alone. They needed the book of Joshua because it includes the arrangement of Eretz Yisrael. Since it contains the division of Eretz Yisrael among the tribes, it was required for all generations, but the other books of the prophets primarily detail the history of how Israel angered God and He sent prophets to admonish them. What is the reason, i.e., what is the allusion to this idea? It is stated: “For in much wisdom is much vexation” (Ecclesiastes 1:18). All the wisdom that the Jews possess from the books of the Bible is the result of their angering God.
אָמַר רַבִּי אַסִּי: אֵין נִזְקָקִין לֶ״אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל״, חוּץ מִ״קּוּנָּם אִשְׁתִּי נֶהֱנֵית לִי שֶׁגָּנְבָה אֶת כִּיסִי וְשֶׁהִכְּתָה אֶת בְּנִי״, וְנוֹדַע שֶׁלֹּא גָּנְבָה וְשֶׁלֹּא הִכַּתּוּ.
§ Rabbi Asi said: One does not attend to a request to dissolve a vow in which the name of the God of Israel is invoked because such a declaration is especially stringent, except for a case where one swears by the God of Israel and adds: Benefiting from me is konam for my wife because she stole my purse or she hit my son, and then it became known that she did not steal or did not hit his son. In such a case, the vow can be dissolved because the vow was made in error, but in other cases such a vow is not dissolved.
הָהִיא דַּאֲתַאי לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב אַסִּי, אָמַר לַהּ: בְּמַאי נְדַרְתְּ? בֵּ״אלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל״. אֲמַר לַהּ: אִי נְדַרְתְּ בְּ״מוֹהִי״ שֶׁהִיא כִּינּוּי בְּעָלְמָא — מִזְדְּקִיקְנָא לִךְ, הַשְׁתָּא דְּלָא נְדַרְתְּ בְּ״מוֹהִי אֶלָּא בֵּ״אלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל״, לָא מִזְדְּקִיקְנָא לִךְ.
The Gemara relates: There was a certain woman who came before Rav Asi. He said to her: With what language did you vow? She said to him: By the God of Israel. He said to her: If you would have vowed and said: By mohi, which is merely a substitute name, I would have attended to your request and dissolved the vow, but now that you did not vow by mohi but rather, by the God of Israel, I will not attend to your request and dissolve the vow.
רַב כָּהֲנָא אִיקְּלַע לְבֵי רַב יוֹסֵף, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: לִטְעוֹם מָר מִידֵּי. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: לָא מָרֵי כּוֹלָּא, לָא טָעֵימְנָא לֵיהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: לָא מָרֵי כּוֹלָּא, לָא טָעֲימַתְּ לֵיהּ. הָנִיחָא לְרַב כָּהֲנָא, דְּאָמַר: ״לָא מָרֵי כּוֹלָּא״. אֶלָּא לְרַב יוֹסֵף, אַמַּאי אֲמַר ״לָא מָרֵי כּוֹלָּא״? הָכִי הוּא דְּקָאָמַר לֵיהּ: ״לָא מָרֵי כּוֹלָּא״ הוּא דְּקָאָמְרַתְּ, הִלְכָּךְ לָא טָעֲימַתְּ לֵיהּ.
The Gemara relates another incident: Rav Kahana happened to come to the home of Rav Yosef. Rav Yosef said to him: Let the Master eat something. He said to him: No, by the Master of all I will not eat it. Rav Yosef said to him: No, by the Master of all you will not eat it. The Gemara comments: Rav Kahana’s statement: No, by the Master of all I will not eat it, is well understood. But for Rav Yosef, why did he say: No, by the Master of all you will not eat it? What was the purpose of his vow? The Gemara answers: This is what he said to him: No, by the Master of all you will not eat it is what you said; therefore, you may not eat it, since a vow taken in such solemn fashion may not be dissolved.
אָמַר רָבָא אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: הִלְכְתָא, פּוֹתְחִין בַּחֲרָטָה, וְנִזְקָקִין לֵ״אלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל״.
Rava said that Rav Naḥman said: The halakha is that it is permitted for a halakhic authority to broach dissolution based on regret, and that one also attends to a request to dissolve a vow in which the name of the God of Israel is invoked.
מִשְׁתַּבַּח לֵיהּ רָבָא לְרַב נַחְמָן בְּרַב סְחוֹרָה דְּאָדָם גָּדוֹל הוּא. אָמַר לוֹ: כְּשֶׁיָּבֹא לְיָדְךָ, הֲבִיאֵהוּ לְיָדִי. הֲוָה לֵיהּ נִדְרָא לְמִישְׁרֵא. אֲתָא לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב נַחְמָן.
§ Rava praised his student Rav Seḥora to Rav Naḥman by saying that he is a great man. Rav Naḥman said to him: When Rav Seḥora comes to you, bring him to me. Rav Seḥora had a vow that he wanted to dissolve, so Rava sent Rav Seḥora to Rav Naḥman. He came before Rav Naḥman.
אֲמַר לֵיהּ: נְדַרְתְּ אַדַּעְתָּא דְּהָכִי? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אִין. אַדַּעְתָּא דְּהָכִי? אִין. כַּמָּה זִימְנִין. אִיקְּפַד רַב נַחְמָן. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: זִיל לְקִילְעָךְ.
Rav Naḥman, who wanted to dissolve the vow, said to him: Did you vow with such a matter in mind? He said to him: Yes, so Rav Naḥman did not dissolve the vow. He then asked again: Did you vow with such a matter in mind, and suggested another possibility. He said to him: Yes. This happened several times, and every time Rav Naḥman attempted to broach an opening, Rav Seḥora replied that he had that in mind when he made the vow. Rav Naḥman became upset with him because it appeared that Rav Seḥora was making it unnecessarily difficult for him to dissolve the vow. Rav Naḥman said to him: Go to your tent [kilakh] because I do not want to talk to you.
נְפַק רַב סְחוֹרָה וּפְתַח פִּיתְחָא לְנַפְשֵׁיהּ. רַבִּי אוֹמֵר: אֵיזֶה הִיא דֶּרֶךְ יְשָׁרָה שֶׁיָּבוֹר לוֹ הָאָדָם. כֹּל שֶׁהִיא תִּפְאֶרֶת לְעוֹשֶׂיהָ וְתִפְאֶרֶת לוֹ מִן הָאָדָם. וְהַשְׁתָּא דְּאִיקְּפַד רַב נַחְמָן — אַדַּעְתָּא דְּהָכִי לָא נְדַרִי. וּשְׁרָא לְנַפְשֵׁיהּ.
Rav Seḥora went out and made the following opening for himself that would enable the dissolution of his vow, based on a mishna in tractate Avot (2:1): Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: What is the proper path that a person should choose? He should choose any path that is considered a glory to the one who does it and a glory from his fellow men. Rav Seḥora then reasoned that now that Rav Naḥman became upset at him, he would not have made the vow with knowledge of this fact, since he would not receive glory from his fellow men, and based on this he dissolved the vow for himself.
רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בְּרַבִּי הֲוָה לֵיהּ נִדְרָא לְמִישְׁרֵא. אֲתָא לְקַמַּיְיהוּ דְּרַבָּנַן, אָמְרִי לֵיהּ: נְדַרְתְּ אַדַּעְתָּא דְּהָכִי? אָמַר: אִין. אַדַּעְתָּא דְּהָכִי? אִין. כַּמָּה זִימְנִין,
The Gemara relates a similar incident: Rabbi Shimon, son of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, had a vow to dissolve. He came before the Sages for dissolution. They said to him: Did you vow with the knowledge of this particular fact? He said: Yes. They proposed another possibility: Did you vow with the knowledge of this other particular fact? He said to them: Yes. This happened several times,
Today’s daily daf tools:
Delve Deeper
Broaden your understanding of the topics on this daf with classes and podcasts from top women Talmud scholars.
New to Talmud?
Check out our resources designed to help you navigate a page of Talmud – and study at the pace, level and style that fits you.
The Hadran Women’s Tapestry
Meet the diverse women learning Gemara at Hadran and hear their stories.
When I started studying Hebrew at Brown University’s Hillel, I had no idea that almost 38 years later, I’m doing Daf Yomi. My Shabbat haburah is led by Rabbanit Leah Sarna. The women are a hoot. I’m tracking the completion of each tractate by reading Ilana Kurshan’s memoir, If All the Seas Were Ink.
Pennsylvania, United States
In January 2020, my chevruta suggested that we “up our game. Let’s do Daf Yomi” – and she sent me the Hadran link. I lost my job (and went freelance), there was a pandemic, and I am still opening the podcast with my breakfast coffee, or after Shabbat with popcorn. My Aramaic is improving. I will need a new bookcase, though.
Atlanta, Georgia, United States
In January 2020 on a Shabbaton to Baltimore I heard about the new cycle of Daf Yomi after the siyum celebration in NYC stadium. I started to read “ a daily dose of Talmud “ and really enjoyed it . It led me to google “ do Orthodox women study Talmud? “ and found HADRAN! Since then I listen to the podcast every morning, participate in classes and siyum. I love to learn, this is amazing! Thank you
Atlanta, United States
Last cycle, I listened to parts of various מסכתות. When the הדרן סיום was advertised, I listened to Michelle on נידה. I knew that בע”ה with the next cycle I was in (ב”נ). As I entered the סיום (early), I saw the signs and was overcome with emotion. I was randomly seated in the front row, and I cried many times that night. My choice to learn דף יומי was affirmed. It is one of the best I have made!
אפרת, Israel
I read Ilana Kurshan’s “If All the Seas Were Ink” which inspired me. Then the Women’s Siyum in Jerusalem in 2020 convinced me, I knew I had to join! I have loved it- it’s been a constant in my life daily, many of the sugiyot connect to our lives. My family and friends all are so supportive. It’s incredible being part of this community and love how diverse it is! I am so excited to learn more!
Jerusalem, Israel
Palo Alto, CA, United States
With Rabbanit Dr. Naomi Cohen in the Women’s Talmud class, over 30 years ago. It was a “known” class and it was accepted, because of who taught. Since then I have also studied with Avigail Gross-Gelman and Dr. Gabriel Hazut for about a year). Years ago, in a shiur in my shul, I did know about Persians doing 3 things with their clothes on. They opened the shiur to woman after that!
Haifa, Israel
I learned daf more off than on 40 years ago. At the beginning of the current cycle, I decided to commit to learning daf regularly. Having Rabanit Michelle available as a learning partner has been amazing. Sometimes I learn with Hadran, sometimes with my husband, and sometimes on my own. It’s been fun to be part of an extended learning community.
Honolulu, Hawaii, United States
I started learning at the beginning of this Daf Yomi cycle because I heard a lot about the previous cycle coming to an end and thought it would be a good thing to start doing. My husband had already bought several of the Koren Talmud Bavli books and they were just sitting on the shelf, not being used, so here was an opportunity to start using them and find out exactly what was in them. Loving it!
Borehamwood, United Kingdom
I was exposed to Talmud in high school, but I was truly inspired after my daughter and I decided to attend the Women’s Siyum Shas in 2020. We knew that this was a historic moment. We were blown away, overcome with emotion at the euphoria of the revolution. Right then, I knew I would continue. My commitment deepened with the every-morning Virtual Beit Midrash on Zoom with R. Michelle.
Zichron Yaakov, Israel
Jerusalem, Israel
After being so inspired by the siyum shas two years ago, I began tentatively learning daf yomi, like Rabbanut Michelle kept saying – taking one daf at a time. I’m still taking it one daf at a time, one masechet at a time, but I’m loving it and am still so inspired by Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran community, and yes – I am proud to be finishing Seder Mo’ed.
Bet Shemesh, Israel
A few years back, after reading Ilana Kurshan’s book, “If All The Seas Were Ink,” I began pondering the crazy, outlandish idea of beginning the Daf Yomi cycle. Beginning in December, 2019, a month before the previous cycle ended, I “auditioned” 30 different podcasts in 30 days, and ultimately chose to take the plunge with Hadran and Rabbanit Michelle. Such joy!
HUNTINGTON, United States
I had dreamed of doing daf yomi since I had my first serious Talmud class 18 years ago at Pardes with Rahel Berkovitz, and then a couple of summers with Leah Rosenthal. There is no way I would be able to do it without another wonderful teacher, Michelle, and the Hadran organization. I wake up and am excited to start each day with the next daf.
Irvine, United States
Phoenix, Arizona, United States
I started Daf during the pandemic. I listened to a number of podcasts by various Rebbeim until one day, I discovered Rabbanit Farbers podcast. Subsequently I joined the Hadran family in Eruvin. Not the easiest place to begin, Rabbanit Farber made it all understandable and fun. The online live group has bonded together and have really become a supportive, encouraging family.
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
I started learning at the beginning of this cycle more than 2 years ago, and I have not missed a day or a daf. It’s been challenging and enlightening and even mind-numbing at times, but the learning and the shared experience have all been worth it. If you are open to it, there’s no telling what might come into your life.
Phoenix, Arizona, United States
Geri Goldstein got me started learning daf yomi when I was in Israel 2 years ago. It’s been a challenge and I’ve learned a lot though I’m sure I miss a lot. I quilt as I listen and I want to share what I’ve been working on.
Ottawa, Canada
When I started studying Hebrew at Brown University’s Hillel, I had no idea that almost 38 years later, I’m doing Daf Yomi. My Shabbat haburah is led by Rabbanit Leah Sarna. The women are a hoot. I’m tracking the completion of each tractate by reading Ilana Kurshan’s memoir, If All the Seas Were Ink.
Pennsylvania, United States
I had tried to start after being inspired by the hadran siyum, but did not manage to stick to it. However, just before masechet taanit, our rav wrote a message to the shul WhatsApp encouraging people to start with masechet taanit, so I did! And this time, I’m hooked! I listen to the shiur every day , and am also trying to improve my skills.
Yad Binyamin, Israel
Nedarim 22
אִילּוּ לָא חֲמָאת בָּהּ אִימַּהּ מִילִּין דַּעֲזִיבָה — בִּכְדִי לָא אַדַּרְתַּהּ! מִי אַדַּרְתַּהּ? אֲמַרָה לֵיהּ: לָא, וְשַׁרְיַיהּ.
Had her mother not seen inappropriate [aziva] matters or behavior in her that should be stopped, she would not have taken a vow with regard to her for nothing; had you known that the neighbors would say that, would you have taken a vow with regard to her? She said to him: No, and he dissolved the vow for her.
בַּר בְּרַתֵּיה דְּרַבִּי יַנַּאי סָבָא אֲתָא לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי יַנַּאי סָבָא, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אִילּוּ הֲוָה יָדְעַתְּ דְּפָתְחִין פִּינְקְסָךְ וּמְמַשְׁמְשִׁין בְּעוֹבָדָךְ, מִי נְדַרְתְּ? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: לָא, וְשַׁרְיֵיהּ.
The Gemara relates: The son of the daughter of Rabbi Yannai the Elder came before Rabbi Yannai the Elder to dissolve a vow. He said to him: Had you known that when you make a vow they open your record book [pinekas] in heaven and examine your actions, would you have vowed? He said to him: No, and he dissolved the vow for him.
אָמַר רַבִּי אַבָּא: מַאי קְרָאָה — ״וְאַחַר נְדָרִים לְבַקֵּר״. וְאַף עַל גַּב דִּפְתַח רַבִּי יַנַּאי לֵיהּ — אֲנַן לָא פָּתְחִינַן לֵיהּ בְּהָא.
Rabbi Abba said: What is the verse from which it is derived that taking a vow leads to one’s deeds being examined? It is “And after vows to make inquiry” (Proverbs 20:25). This is interpreted to mean that after one takes a vow, his actions are reviewed in heaven. The Gemara comments: And although Rabbi Yannai broached dissolution with him in this way, we do not broach dissolution in this manner for one who vows, by asking if he regrets it because his actions will be examined in heaven. This is because one might be embarrassed, upon hearing such a question, to say that he does not have regret, and he will claim untruthfully that he is regretful.
וְלָא פָּתְחִינַן בְּהָדָא אַחְרָנִייתָא, דְּאָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: מַאי פְּתַח לֵיהּ רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל לְהָהוּא סָבָא: ״יֵשׁ בּוֹטֶה כְּמַדְקְרוֹת חָרֶב וּלְשׁוֹן חֲכָמִים מַרְפֵּא״. כׇּל הַבּוֹטֶה — רָאוּי לְדוֹקְרוֹ בְּחֶרֶב, אֶלָּא — לְשׁוֹן חֲכָמִים מַרְפֵּא.
And we also do not broach dissolution in this other way, as Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: What type of dissolution did Rabban Gamliel broach for a certain elderly man who had taken a vow and came before him for dissolution? He informed him that it is written: “There is one who speaks like the piercing of a sword, but the tongue of the wise is health” (Proverbs 12:18), which is interpreted to mean: Anyone who verbally expresses the language of a vow, it is appropriate to pierce him with a sword, but he has another option: “The tongue of the wise is health,” since the Sages can release him from his vow. Quoting this verse with its interpretation is also not an acceptable method of broaching dissolution.
וְלָא פָּתְחִינַן בַּהֲדָא אַחְרָנִייתָא, דְּתַנְיָא, רַבִּי נָתָן אוֹמֵר: הַנּוֹדֵר — כְּאִילּוּ בָּנָה בָּמָה, וְהַמְקַיְּימוֹ — כְּאִילּוּ מַקְרִיב עָלָיו קׇרְבָּן. בְּרֵישָׁא פָּתְחִינַן. בְּסֵיפָא, אַבָּיֵי אָמַר: פָּתְחִינַן, רָבָא אָמַר: לָא פָּתְחִינַן.
We also do not broach dissolution using this other method, as it is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Natan says: One who vows is considered as if he built a personal altar outside the Temple, which is prohibited, and one who fulfills this vow is considered as if he sacrifices an offering on it. With the first clause, we may broach dissolution by informing the one who vowed that vowing is akin to building an altar outside the Temple, but with regard to the latter clause there is a dispute among the Sages. Abaye said: We do broach dissolution by telling someone that fulfilling a vow is like sacrificing an offering on a forbidden altar, while Rava said: We do not broach dissolution with it.
רַב כָּהֲנָא מַתְנֵי לַהּ לְהָא שְׁמַעְתָּא בְּהָדֵין לִישָּׁנָא. רַב טַבְיוֹמֵי מַתְנֵי הָכִי: בְּסֵיפָא לָא פָּתְחִינַן. בְּרֵישָׁא, אַבָּיֵי אָמַר: פָּתְחִינַן, רָבָא אָמַר: לָא פָּתְחִינַן. וְהִלְכְתָא: לָא פָּתְחִינַן לָא בְּרֵישָׁא וְלָא בְּסֵיפָא.
Rav Kahana taught this halakha in this wording, i.e., the wording that was just cited. However, Rav Tavyumei taught this halakha in this way: With regard to what is written in the last clause, all agree that we do not broach dissolution in this way. With regard to what is written in the first clause, there is a dispute among the Sages. Abaye said: We do broach dissolution in this manner, while Rava said: We do not broach dissolution in this manner either. The Gemara concludes: And the halakha is that we do not broach dissolution using either the language in the first clause or the language in the latter clause.
וְלָא פָּתְחִינַן בְּהָא נָמֵי דִּשְׁמוּאֵל. דְּאָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמְּקַיְּימוֹ — נִקְרָא רָשָׁע. אָמַר רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ, מַאי קְרָא: ״וְכִי תֶחְדַּל לִנְדֹּר לֹא יִהְיֶה בְךָ חֵטְא״, וְיָלֵיף ״חֲדָלָה״ ״חֲדָלָה״. כְּתִיב הָכָא: ״וְכִי תֶחְדַּל לִנְדֹּר״, וּכְתִיב הָתָם: ״שָׁם רְשָׁעִים חָדְלוּ רֹגֶז״.
And furthermore, we also do not broach dissolution with this statement of Shmuel, as Shmuel said: With regard to one who vows, although he fulfills it, he is called wicked. Rabbi Abbahu said: What is the verse from which this is derived? It is “But if you refrain [teḥdal] from vowing there will be no sin in you” (Deuteronomy 23:23), and he derives the word ḥadala here from the word ḥadala elsewhere. It is written here: “But if you refrain [teḥdal] from vowing,” and it is written there: “There the wicked cease [ḥadlu] from troubling” (Job 3:17). The parallel language demonstrates that vowing is an act of the wicked.
אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף, אַף אֲנַן נָמֵי תְּנֵינָא: ״כְּנִדְרֵי כְשֵׁרִים״ — לֹא אָמַר כְּלוּם, ״כְּנִדְרֵי רְשָׁעִים״ — נָדַר בְּנָזִיר וּבְקׇרְבָּן וּבִשְׁבוּעָה.
Rav Yosef said: We, too, learn in the mishna (9a): If one says he vows like the vows of the virtuous, he has not said anything. If he says: Like the vows of the wicked, he has vowed with regard to becoming a nazirite, or with regard to obligating himself in an offering, or with regard to taking an oath. From here it is also apparent that vowing is an act of the wicked.
אָמַר רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָנִי אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹנָתָן: כׇּל הַכּוֹעֵס כׇּל מִינֵי גֵיהִנָּם שׁוֹלְטִין בּוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְהָסֵר כַּעַס מִלִּבֶּךָ וְהַעֲבֵר רָעָה מִבְּשָׂרֶךָ״, וְאֵין ״רָעָה״ אֶלָּא גֵּיהִנָּם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״כֹּל פָּעַל ה׳ לַמַּעֲנֵהוּ וְגַם רָשָׁע לְיוֹם רָעָה״.
§ Apropos the verse “There the wicked cease from troubling,” the Gemara cites a related statement: Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said that Rabbi Yonatan said: Anyone who gets angry, all kinds of Gehenna rule over him, because anger causes him to transgress all kinds of severe sins, as it is stated: “Therefore remove vexation from your heart and put away evil from your flesh” (Ecclesiastes 11:10), and the evil mentioned is nothing other than Gehenna, as it is stated: “The Lord has made everything for His own purpose and even the wicked for the day of evil” (Proverbs 16:4), which is interpreted to mean that ultimately the day of the evildoer in Gehenna will arrive.
וְלֹא עוֹד אֶלָּא שֶׁהַתַּחְתּוֹנִיּוֹת שׁוֹלְטוֹת בּוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְנָתַן ה׳ לְךָ שָׁם לֵב רַגָּז וְכִלְיוֹן עֵינַיִם וְדַאֲבוֹן נָפֶשׁ״, אֵיזֶהוּ דָּבָר שֶׁמְּכַלֶּה אֶת הָעֵינַיִם וּמַדְאִיב אֶת הַנֶּפֶשׁ — הֱוֵי אוֹמֵר: אֵלּוּ הַתַּחְתּוֹנִיּוֹת.
And not only that, but also hemorrhoids will control him, as it is stated: “But the Lord shall give you there a trembling heart, and failing of eyes, and languishing of soul” (Deuteronomy 28:65). Which is the matter of sickness that causes failing of the eyes in pain and causes languishing of the soul? You must say this is referring to hemorrhoids.
עוּלָּא בְּמִיסְּקֵיהּ לְאַרְעָא דְּיִשְׂרָאֵל אִיתְלְווֹ לֵיהּ תְּרֵין בְּנֵי חוֹזָאֵי בַּהֲדֵיהּ. קָם חַד שַׁחְטֵיהּ לְחַבְרֵיהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ לְעוּלָּא: יָאוּת עֲבַדִי? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אִין, וּפְרַע לֵיהּ בֵּית הַשְּׁחִיטָה. כִּי אֲתָא לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: דִּלְמָא חַס וְשָׁלוֹם אַחְזִיקִי יְדֵי עוֹבְרֵי עֲבֵירָה? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: נַפְשְׁךָ הִצַּלְתָּ.
The Gemara relates: Ulla, on his ascent to Eretz Yisrael, had two residents of Ḥozai join him. Because of a brawl between them, one arose and slaughtered the other. The assailant said to Ulla: Did I act properly? He said to him: Yes, and open the place of the slaughter, i.e., cut it more so that he will die faster. When Ulla came before Rabbi Yoḥanan, Ulla said to him: Perhaps, Heaven forbid, I strengthened the hands of sinners by commending him, although I did so merely because I was afraid that he would kill me. He said to him: You saved yourself by doing so, as it is permitted for one to say words like this in order to save his own life.
קָא תָמַהּ רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, מִכְּדִי כְּתִיב: ״וְנָתַן ה׳ לְךָ שָׁם לֵב רַגָּז״ בְּבָבֶל כְּתִיב? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הָהוּא שַׁעְתָּא
With regard to the narrative itself, Rabbi Yoḥanan wondered: Now, it is written in the passage of curses: “But the Lord shall give you there a trembling heart” (Deuteronomy 28:65) and this is written with regard to Babylonia, because in the exile an individual possesses a trembling and angry heart. How is it possible that in Eretz Yisrael a person can get so angry as to murder another? Ulla said to him: At that moment when the incident occurred
לָא עָבְרִינַן יַרְדְּנָא.
we had not yet crossed the Jordan River, and we were still outside of Eretz Yisrael. Therefore, the curse of a heart of anger was relevant.
אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר רַב הוּנָא: כׇּל הַכּוֹעֵס, אֲפִילּוּ שְׁכִינָה אֵינָהּ חֲשׁוּבָה כְּנֶגְדּוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״רָשָׁע כְּגֹבַהּ אַפּוֹ בַּל יִדְרֹשׁ אֵין אֱלֹהִים כׇּל מְזִמּוֹתָיו״. רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה מִדִּיפְתִּי אָמַר: מְשַׁכֵּחַ תַּלְמוּדוֹ וּמוֹסִיף טִיפְּשׁוּת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״כִּי כַעַס בְּחֵיק כְּסִילִים יָנוּחַ״, וּכְתִיב: ״וּכְסִיל יִפְרֹשׂ אִוֶּלֶת״. רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק אָמַר: בְּיָדוּעַ שֶׁעֲוֹנוֹתָיו מְרוּבִּין מִזְּכִיּוֹתָיו, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וּבַעַל חֵמָה רַב פָּשַׁע״.
Rabba bar Rav Huna said: Anyone who gets angry, at that moment even the Divine Presence is not important to him, as it is stated: “The wicked, in the height of his anger says: He will not require; all his thoughts are: There is no God” (Psalms 10:4). Rabbi Yirmeya of Difti said: Anyone who gets angry forgets his learning and increases foolishness, as it is stated: “For anger rests in the bosom of fools” (Ecclesiastes 7:9), and it is written: “But a fool unfolds folly” (Proverbs 13:16). Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: With regard to one who gets angry, it is acknowledged that his sins are more numerous than his merits, as it is stated: “And a wrathful man abounds in transgression” (Proverbs 29:22).
אָמַר רַב אַדָּא בְּרַבִּי חֲנִינָא: אִלְמָלֵא (לֹא) חָטְאוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל לֹא נִיתַּן לָהֶם אֶלָּא חֲמִשָּׁה חוּמְשֵׁי תוֹרָה וְסֵפֶר יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בִּלְבַד, שֶׁעֶרְכָּהּ שֶׁל אֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל הוּא. מַאי טַעְמָא: ״כִּי בְּרֹב חׇכְמָה רׇב כָּעַס״.
Rav Adda, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: Had Israel not sinned in earlier times they would have been given the five books of the Torah and the book of Joshua alone. They needed the book of Joshua because it includes the arrangement of Eretz Yisrael. Since it contains the division of Eretz Yisrael among the tribes, it was required for all generations, but the other books of the prophets primarily detail the history of how Israel angered God and He sent prophets to admonish them. What is the reason, i.e., what is the allusion to this idea? It is stated: “For in much wisdom is much vexation” (Ecclesiastes 1:18). All the wisdom that the Jews possess from the books of the Bible is the result of their angering God.
אָמַר רַבִּי אַסִּי: אֵין נִזְקָקִין לֶ״אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל״, חוּץ מִ״קּוּנָּם אִשְׁתִּי נֶהֱנֵית לִי שֶׁגָּנְבָה אֶת כִּיסִי וְשֶׁהִכְּתָה אֶת בְּנִי״, וְנוֹדַע שֶׁלֹּא גָּנְבָה וְשֶׁלֹּא הִכַּתּוּ.
§ Rabbi Asi said: One does not attend to a request to dissolve a vow in which the name of the God of Israel is invoked because such a declaration is especially stringent, except for a case where one swears by the God of Israel and adds: Benefiting from me is konam for my wife because she stole my purse or she hit my son, and then it became known that she did not steal or did not hit his son. In such a case, the vow can be dissolved because the vow was made in error, but in other cases such a vow is not dissolved.
הָהִיא דַּאֲתַאי לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב אַסִּי, אָמַר לַהּ: בְּמַאי נְדַרְתְּ? בֵּ״אלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל״. אֲמַר לַהּ: אִי נְדַרְתְּ בְּ״מוֹהִי״ שֶׁהִיא כִּינּוּי בְּעָלְמָא — מִזְדְּקִיקְנָא לִךְ, הַשְׁתָּא דְּלָא נְדַרְתְּ בְּ״מוֹהִי אֶלָּא בֵּ״אלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל״, לָא מִזְדְּקִיקְנָא לִךְ.
The Gemara relates: There was a certain woman who came before Rav Asi. He said to her: With what language did you vow? She said to him: By the God of Israel. He said to her: If you would have vowed and said: By mohi, which is merely a substitute name, I would have attended to your request and dissolved the vow, but now that you did not vow by mohi but rather, by the God of Israel, I will not attend to your request and dissolve the vow.
רַב כָּהֲנָא אִיקְּלַע לְבֵי רַב יוֹסֵף, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: לִטְעוֹם מָר מִידֵּי. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: לָא מָרֵי כּוֹלָּא, לָא טָעֵימְנָא לֵיהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: לָא מָרֵי כּוֹלָּא, לָא טָעֲימַתְּ לֵיהּ. הָנִיחָא לְרַב כָּהֲנָא, דְּאָמַר: ״לָא מָרֵי כּוֹלָּא״. אֶלָּא לְרַב יוֹסֵף, אַמַּאי אֲמַר ״לָא מָרֵי כּוֹלָּא״? הָכִי הוּא דְּקָאָמַר לֵיהּ: ״לָא מָרֵי כּוֹלָּא״ הוּא דְּקָאָמְרַתְּ, הִלְכָּךְ לָא טָעֲימַתְּ לֵיהּ.
The Gemara relates another incident: Rav Kahana happened to come to the home of Rav Yosef. Rav Yosef said to him: Let the Master eat something. He said to him: No, by the Master of all I will not eat it. Rav Yosef said to him: No, by the Master of all you will not eat it. The Gemara comments: Rav Kahana’s statement: No, by the Master of all I will not eat it, is well understood. But for Rav Yosef, why did he say: No, by the Master of all you will not eat it? What was the purpose of his vow? The Gemara answers: This is what he said to him: No, by the Master of all you will not eat it is what you said; therefore, you may not eat it, since a vow taken in such solemn fashion may not be dissolved.
אָמַר רָבָא אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: הִלְכְתָא, פּוֹתְחִין בַּחֲרָטָה, וְנִזְקָקִין לֵ״אלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל״.
Rava said that Rav Naḥman said: The halakha is that it is permitted for a halakhic authority to broach dissolution based on regret, and that one also attends to a request to dissolve a vow in which the name of the God of Israel is invoked.
מִשְׁתַּבַּח לֵיהּ רָבָא לְרַב נַחְמָן בְּרַב סְחוֹרָה דְּאָדָם גָּדוֹל הוּא. אָמַר לוֹ: כְּשֶׁיָּבֹא לְיָדְךָ, הֲבִיאֵהוּ לְיָדִי. הֲוָה לֵיהּ נִדְרָא לְמִישְׁרֵא. אֲתָא לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב נַחְמָן.
§ Rava praised his student Rav Seḥora to Rav Naḥman by saying that he is a great man. Rav Naḥman said to him: When Rav Seḥora comes to you, bring him to me. Rav Seḥora had a vow that he wanted to dissolve, so Rava sent Rav Seḥora to Rav Naḥman. He came before Rav Naḥman.
אֲמַר לֵיהּ: נְדַרְתְּ אַדַּעְתָּא דְּהָכִי? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אִין. אַדַּעְתָּא דְּהָכִי? אִין. כַּמָּה זִימְנִין. אִיקְּפַד רַב נַחְמָן. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: זִיל לְקִילְעָךְ.
Rav Naḥman, who wanted to dissolve the vow, said to him: Did you vow with such a matter in mind? He said to him: Yes, so Rav Naḥman did not dissolve the vow. He then asked again: Did you vow with such a matter in mind, and suggested another possibility. He said to him: Yes. This happened several times, and every time Rav Naḥman attempted to broach an opening, Rav Seḥora replied that he had that in mind when he made the vow. Rav Naḥman became upset with him because it appeared that Rav Seḥora was making it unnecessarily difficult for him to dissolve the vow. Rav Naḥman said to him: Go to your tent [kilakh] because I do not want to talk to you.
נְפַק רַב סְחוֹרָה וּפְתַח פִּיתְחָא לְנַפְשֵׁיהּ. רַבִּי אוֹמֵר: אֵיזֶה הִיא דֶּרֶךְ יְשָׁרָה שֶׁיָּבוֹר לוֹ הָאָדָם. כֹּל שֶׁהִיא תִּפְאֶרֶת לְעוֹשֶׂיהָ וְתִפְאֶרֶת לוֹ מִן הָאָדָם. וְהַשְׁתָּא דְּאִיקְּפַד רַב נַחְמָן — אַדַּעְתָּא דְּהָכִי לָא נְדַרִי. וּשְׁרָא לְנַפְשֵׁיהּ.
Rav Seḥora went out and made the following opening for himself that would enable the dissolution of his vow, based on a mishna in tractate Avot (2:1): Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: What is the proper path that a person should choose? He should choose any path that is considered a glory to the one who does it and a glory from his fellow men. Rav Seḥora then reasoned that now that Rav Naḥman became upset at him, he would not have made the vow with knowledge of this fact, since he would not receive glory from his fellow men, and based on this he dissolved the vow for himself.
רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בְּרַבִּי הֲוָה לֵיהּ נִדְרָא לְמִישְׁרֵא. אֲתָא לְקַמַּיְיהוּ דְּרַבָּנַן, אָמְרִי לֵיהּ: נְדַרְתְּ אַדַּעְתָּא דְּהָכִי? אָמַר: אִין. אַדַּעְתָּא דְּהָכִי? אִין. כַּמָּה זִימְנִין,
The Gemara relates a similar incident: Rabbi Shimon, son of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, had a vow to dissolve. He came before the Sages for dissolution. They said to him: Did you vow with the knowledge of this particular fact? He said: Yes. They proposed another possibility: Did you vow with the knowledge of this other particular fact? He said to them: Yes. This happened several times,
