Nedarim 38

זאת דהמצוה ידרך דהדרך חמש דפאת נגב אם דכי גאל הלין כתבן ולא קריין

The same is true for “this” that is in the verse “and this is the mitzva” (Deuteronomy 6:1); and for “bend” that is in the verse “let the archer bend his bow” (Jeremiah 51:3); and for “five” that is in the verse “and the south side four thousand and five hundred” (Ezekiel 48:16); and for “if” that is in the verse “that if I am a near kinsman” (Ruth 3:12). All these are written but not read.

אמר רב אחא בר אדא במערבא פסקין להדין פסוקא לתלתא פסוקין ויאמר ה׳ אל משה הנה אנכי בא אליך בעב הענן

Rav Aḥa bar Adda said: In the West, Eretz Yisrael, they divide this verse into three verses: “And the Lord said to Moses, behold I come to you in a thick cloud, that the people may hear as I speak with you, and may also believe in you forever; and Moses told the words of the people unto the Lord” (Exodus 19:9).

אמר רבי חמא ברבי חנינא לא העשיר משה אלא מפסולתן של לוחות שנאמר פסל לך שני לחת אבנים כראשנים פסולתן שלך יהא

§ Rabbi Ḥama, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: Moses became wealthy only from the waste remaining from hewing the Tablets of the Covenant, as it is stated: “Hew for you two tablets of stone like the first” (Exodus 34:1). “Hew for you” means that their waste shall be yours. As the tablets were crafted from valuable gems, their remnants were similarly valuable.

אמר רבי יוסי ברבי חנינא לא ניתנה תורה אלא למשה ולזרעו שנאמר כתב לך פסל לך מה פסולתן שלך אף כתבן שלך משה נהג בה טובת עין ונתנה לישראל ועליו הכתוב אומר טוב עין הוא יברך וגו׳

Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: The Torah was given initially only to Moses and his descendants, as it is stated: “Write for you” (Exodus 34:27), and it is also stated: “Hew for you” (Exodus 34:1), meaning: Just as their waste is yours, so too their writing is yours. However, Moses treated the Torah with generosity and gave it to the Jewish people. And about him, the verse says: “He that has a bountiful eye shall be blessed, as he gives of his bread to the poor” (Proverbs 22:9).

מתיב רב חסדא ואתי צוה ה׳ בעת ההיא ללמד אתכם ואותי צוה ואני לכם ראה למדתי אתכם חקים ומשפטים כאשר צוני ה׳ אלהי אותי צוה ואני לכם

Rav Ḥisda raised an objection from the verse that states: “And the Lord commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and laws” (Deuteronomy 4:14). This indicates that Moses was commanded to teach Torah to the Jewish people from the outset. The Gemara answers: The verse means: And the Lord commanded the Torah to me, Moses, and I, on my own initiative, decided to teach you its statutes and laws. The Gemara cites an additional verse proving that God commanded to teach the Jewish people from the outset: “Behold, I have taught you statutes and laws, as the Lord my God commanded me” (Deuteronomy 4:5). The Gemara answers: The Lord commanded the Torah to me, Moses, and I decided to teach you statutes and laws.

ועתה כתבו לכם את השירה הזאת השירה לחודה למען תהיה לי השירה הזאת לעד בבני ישראל אלא פילפולא בעלמא

The Gemara cites an additional verse: “Now therefore write this song for you, and teach it the children of Israel” (Deuteronomy 31:19). Apparently, Moses was commanded to teach the Torah to the Jewish people. The Gemara answers: The verse is referring to the song of Ha’azinu (Deuteronomy 31) alone and not to the rest of the Torah. The Gemara asks: But the continuation of that cited verse: “That this song may be a witness for Me among the children of Israel” (Deuteronomy 31:19), indicates that the reference is to the entire Torah, in which the mitzvot are written. Rather, the Torah was given from the outset to all of the Jewish people, and when Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said that the Torah was given exclusively to Moses, he was referring merely to the profound analysis of the Torah. Moses opted to teach it to the people on his own initiative.

אמר רבי יוחנן אין הקדוש ברוך הוא משרה שכינתו אלא על גבור ועשיר וחכם ועניו וכולן ממשה גבור דכתיב ויפרש את האהל על המשכן ואמר מר משה רבינו פרסו וכתיב עשר אמות ארך הקרש וגו׳ אימא דאריך וקטין

Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The Holy One, Blessed be He, rests His Divine Presence only upon one who is mighty, and wealthy, and wise, and humble. And all of these qualities are derived from Moses. He was mighty, as it is written: “And he spread the tent over the Tabernacle” (Exodus 40:19), and the Master said: Moses, our teacher, spread it himself. And it is written: “Ten cubits shall be the length of a board, and a cubit and a half the breadth of each board” (Exodus 26:16). Moses was tall and strong enough to spread the tent over the boards alone. The Gemara asks: Say that he was tall and thin, and the fact that he was mighty cannot be derived.

אלא מן הדין קרא דכתיב ואתפש בשני הלחת ואשלכם מעל שתי ידי ואשברם ותניא הלוחות ארכן ששה ורחבן ששה ועביין שלשה

Rather, the fact that Moses was mighty is derived from this verse, as it is written: “And I took hold of the two tablets, and cast them out of my two hands, and broke them before your eyes” (Deuteronomy 9:17), and it is taught in a baraita: The tablets, their length was six handbreadths, and their width was six handbreadths, and their thickness was three handbreadths. If Moses was capable of lifting and casting a burden that heavy, apparently he was mighty.

עשיר פסל לך פסולתן שלך יהא חכם רב ושמואל דאמרי תרוייהו חמשים שערי בינה נבראו בעולם וכולם נתנו למשה חסר אחת שנאמר ותחסרהו מעט מאלהים עניו דכתיב והאיש משה ענו מאד

Moses was wealthy, as it is written: “Hew for you” (Exodus 34:1), from which it was derived: The waste of the Tablets of the Covenant shall be yours, and that waste consisted of precious stones. That Moses was wise is derived from the statement of Rav and Shmuel, who both say: Fifty measures of understanding were created in the world, and all were given to Moses except one, as it is stated: “Yet you have deprived him of little, of God” (Psalms 8:6). He lacked only complete knowledge of God. Moses was humble, as it is written: “Now the man Moses was very humble” (Numbers 12:3).

אמר רבי יוחנן כל הנביאים עשירים היו מנלן ממשה ומשמואל מעמוס ומיונה

§ Rabbi Yoḥanan said: All the prophets were wealthy. From where do we derive this? It is derived from Moses, and from Samuel, and from Amos, and from Jonah, who were all wealthy.

משה דכתיב לא חמור אחד מהם נשאתי אי בלא אגרא לאפוקי מאן דשקל בלא אגרא אלא דאפילו באגרא דילמא משום דעני הוה אלא מן פסל לך פסולתן יהא שלך

Moses was wealthy, as it is written: “I have not taken one donkey from them” (Numbers 16:15). The Gemara analyzes the statement of Moses. If he said that he did not take a donkey without payment, was his intent to exclude himself from the category of one who takes items that belong to others without paying? That is obvious, as one who does so is a thief. Rather, he said that even with payment he did not take a donkey. Apparently, he was wealthy and did not need to purchase anything. The Gemara rejects this proof. Perhaps, on the contrary, he did not purchase a donkey because he was poor and could not afford it. Rather, it is derived from the verse written with regard to the Tablets of the Covenant: “Hew for you” (Exodus 34:1), which indicates that their waste shall be yours.

שמואל דכתיב הנני ענו בי נגד ה׳ ונגד משיחו את שור מי לקחתי וחמור מי לקחתי אי בחנם לאפוקי מאן דשקל בחנם אלא דאפילו בשכר דלמא דעני הוה אלא מהכא ותשבתו הרמתה כי שם ביתו ואמר רבא כל מקום שהלך ביתו עמו

Samuel was wealthy, as it is written: “Here I am; witness against me before the Lord, and before His anointed: Whose ox have I taken, or whose donkey have I taken?” (I Samuel 12:3). If he is saying that he did not take an ox or a donkey for free, was his intent to exclude himself from the category of one who takes items that belong to others for free? Rather, he is saying that even with payment he did not take a donkey or an ox. Apparently, he was wealthy. The Gemara rejects this proof. Perhaps, on the contrary, the reason he did not purchase the donkeys is due to the fact that he was poor. Rather, the fact that Samuel was wealthy is derived from here, as it is written: “And his return was to Ramah, for there was his house” (I Samuel 7:17). And Rava said: Everywhere he went, his home was with him. He was so wealthy that he could afford to hire servants and pack animals to take all his belongings from place to place.

אמר רבא גדול מה שנאמר בשמואל יותר משנאמר במשה דאילו במשה רבינו כתיב לא חמור אחד מהם נשאתי דאפילו בשכר ואילו גבי שמואל אפילו ברצון לא שכרו דכתיב ויאמרו לא עשקתנו ולא רצותנו וגו׳

Rava said: That which is stated with regard to Samuel is greater than that which is stated with regard to Moses, as with regard to Moses our teacher it is written: “I have not taken one donkey from them” (Numbers 16:15), meaning that he did not take an item from another against his will even with payment. Whereas with regard to Samuel, even with the consent of the owner, he would not rent an item from him, as it is written: “And they said: You have not defrauded us, nor oppressed us [ratzotanu], neither have you taken anything from any man’s hand” (I Samuel 12:4), even with his consent [ratzon].

עמוס דכתיב ויען עמוס ויאמר אל אמציה לא נביא אנכי ולא בן נביא אנכי כי בוקר אנכי ובולס שקמים כדמתרגם רב יוסף ארי מרי גיתי אנא ושקמין לי בשפלתא וגו׳

Amos was wealthy, as it is written: “Then answered Amos, and said to Amaziah: I was no prophet, neither was I a prophet’s son; but I was a herdsman, and a dresser of sycamore-trees” (Amos 7:14). Amos is saying, as Rav Yosef translates: Because I am the owner of flocks and I have sycamores in the lowland, and I do not come to prophesy for financial gain. Apparently, Amos was wealthy.

יונה דכתיב ויתן שכרה וירד בה ואמר רבי יוחנן שנתן שכרה של ספינה כולה אמר רבי רומנוס שכרה של ספינה הויא ארבע אלפים דינרי דהבא

Jonah was wealthy, as it is written: “And he went down to Jaffa, and found a ship going to Tarshish, so he paid its cost and went down into it” (Jonah 1:3), and Rabbi Yoḥanan said: He paid the cost of the entire ship. Rabbi Romanus said: The cost for the entire ship was four thousand gold dinars.

ואמר רבי יוחנן בתחלה היה משה למד תורה ומשכחה עד שניתנה לו במתנה שנאמר ויתן אל משה ככלתו לדבר אתו

And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Initially, Moses would study Torah and forget it, until it was given to him as a gift, as it is stated: “And He gave it to Moses when he concluded speaking with him” (Exodus 31:18). Once the Torah was given him as a gift, it became his and he was able to remember it.

מתני׳ וזן את אשתו ואת בניו אף על פי שהוא חייב במזונותן ולא יזון את בהמתו בין טמאה בין טהורה רבי אליעזר אומר זן את הטמאה ואינו זן את הטהורה אמרו לו מה בין טמאה לטהורה אמר להו שהטהורה נפשה לשמים וגופה שלו וטמאה

MISHNA: And with regard to one for whom benefit from another is forbidden by vow, that other person may feed his wife and children, although the one who is bound by the vow is obligated in their support and benefits when another supports them. And he may not feed his animal, whether it is a kosher animal or whether it is a non-kosher animal. Rabbi Eliezer says: He may feed the non-kosher animal, and he may not feed the kosher animal. The Rabbis said to him: What is the difference between kosher and non-kosher animals in this respect? Rabbi Eliezer said to them: The kosher animal’s being belongs to Heaven, and the animal’s body is the property of its owner, as he can eat it. Therefore, the owner benefits directly when another feeds his animal. And a non-kosher animal,

נפשה וגופה לשמים אמרו לו אף הטמאה נפשה לשמים וגופה שלו שאם ירצה הרי הוא מוכרה לגוים או מאכילה לכלבים

both its being and its body belong to Heaven, as it is prohibited for its owner to eat its meat. The Rabbis said to him: The non-kosher animal too, its being belongs to Heaven, and its body is the property of its owner, because if the owner chooses, he sells it to gentiles or feeds it to dogs.

גמ׳ אמר רב יצחק בר חנניה אמר רב הונא המודר הנאה מחבירו מותר להשיא לו בתו הוי בה רבי זירא במאי עסקינן אילימא בשנכסי אבי כלה אסורין על החתן הרי מוסר לו שפחה לשמשו

GEMARA: Rav Yitzḥak bar Ḥananya said that Rav Huna said: In the case of one for whom benefit from another is forbidden by vow, he is permitted to marry his daughter to him. Rabbi Zeira discussed it: With what case are we dealing? If we say that it is a case where the property of the father of the bride is forbidden to the groom, this cannot be, as when one marries his daughter to the groom, he provides him a maidservant to serve him and thereby benefits him.

אלא בנכסי חתן אסורין על אבי כלה גדולה מזו אמרו זן את אשתו ואת בניו ואף על פי שהוא חייב במזונותן ואת אמרת מותר להשיא לו בתו

Rather, it is a case where the property of the groom is forbidden to the father of the bride, and although the groom supports the bride, her father is not considered to have benefited from the property of the groom. However, it cannot be this case either, as the Sages stated a halakha with a greater novel element than that in the mishna itself: And with regard to one for whom benefit from another is forbidden by vow, that other person may feed his wife and children, although the one who is bound by the vow is obligated in their support. And you say that it is permitted to marry his daughter to him? Isn’t that obvious?

לעולם בשנכסי אבי כלה אסורין על החתן ובבתו בוגרת ומדעתה

The Gemara answers: Actually, it is a case where the property of the father of the bride is forbidden to the groom, and where his daughter is a grown woman, and where her father may marry her to another only with her consent. Therefore, it is not from her father that the groom is deriving benefit.

תניא נמי הכי המודר הנאה מחבירו אסור להשיא לו בתו אבל משיאו בתו בוגרת ומדעתה

The Gemara comments: That is also taught in a baraita. In the case of one for whom benefit from another is forbidden by vow, it is prohibited for that other person to marry his daughter to him. However, he may marry off his daughter, who is a grown woman, to that other person with her consent.

אמר רבי יעקב המדיר בנו לתלמוד תורה מותר למלאות לו חבית של מים ולהדליק לו את הנר רבי יצחק אמר לצלות לו דג קטן אמר רבי ירמיה אמר רבי יוחנן המודר הנאה מחבירו מותר להשקותו כוס של שלום מאי ניהו הכא תרגימו כוס של בית האבל במערבא אמרי כוס של בית המרחץ

Similarly, Rabbi Ya’akov said: If one vows that benefit from him is forbidden to his son, in order to induce him to engage in Torah study, the one who took the vow may nevertheless perform actions that provide his son with minor benefit. It is permitted for him to fill a barrel of water for his son and to kindle a lamp for him. Rabbi Yitzḥak said: It is permitted for him to roast a small fish for him. Rabbi Yirmeya said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: In the case of one for whom benefit from another is forbidden by vow it is permitted for the other to give him a cup of peace to drink. The Gemara asks: What is this cup of peace? Here, in Babylonia, the Sages interpreted this term as referring to a cup of wine given to mourners to drink at the meal of comfort in the house of mourning. In the West, Eretz Yisrael, the Sages said that it is the cup of wine that one drinks upon leaving the bathhouse.

ולא יזון את בהמתו בין כו׳ תניא יהושע איש עוזא אומר זן עבדיו ושפחותיו הכנענים ולא יזון את בהמתו בין טמאה בין טהורה מאי טעמא עבדיו ושפחותיו הכנענים למנחרותא עבידן בהמה לפטומא עבידא

§ We learned in the mishna: And he may not feed the animal of one for whom benefit from him is forbidden, whether it is a kosher animal or whether it is a non-kosher animal. It is taught in a baraita that Yehoshua of Uzza says: One who vows that benefit from him is forbidden to another may feed the other person’s Canaanite slaves and maidservants; however, he may not feed his animal, whether it is a non-kosher animal or whether it is a kosher animal. The Gemara asks: What is the reason for the distinction? The Gemara explains: His Canaanite slaves and maidservants are designated for labor, whereas an animal is designated for fattening. The one bound by the vow derives benefit from the other person feeding the kosher animal when he eats it and derives benefit from the other person feeding the non-kosher animal when he sells it to a gentile.

מתני׳ המודר הנאה מחבירו ונכנס לבקרו עומד אבל לא יושב ומרפאו רפואת נפש אבל לא רפואת ממון

MISHNA: In the case of one for whom benefit from another is forbidden by vow and he enters his house to visit him, he stands there but does not sit. And that other person heals him with a cure of the nefesh but not a cure of mamon.