What language of a vow will mean that not only the item is forbidden but if one trades it in, the other item will be forbidden and if one plants it, what grows from there will also be forbidden? What language will not be applied to the traded item or the growth? To what type of seeds is this referring? If a man forbade items his wife made until a certain period of time, if the time was associated with the use of the item, it will be permitted after that time. But if the time frame was about the creation of the item, then if it was created in that time frame, it will be forbidden forever. What happens when one made a vow upon condition – you will be forbidden to benefit from me for x amount of time if you do something for y period of time. The Mishna brings a case where x is shorter than y and one where y is shorter than x and explains the differences between the law in each case. A question was asked regarding the nullification of the sanctity of the sabbatical year when an onion picked in the seventh year was replanted in the eighth year. Is the sanctity that is in the small piece of onion that was planted nullified in the growth from the eighth year which does not have sanctity? Various opinions are brought regarding similar situations relating to laws of teruma, orla and mixed breeds. But some show nullification works and others show it does not work.
This month’s learning is dedicated in memory of Rabbi Dr. Raymond Harari z”l, on his 1st yahrzeit. As an educator, principal of Yeshiva of Flatbush, and community rabbi, he inspired thousands with his wisdom, warmth, and unwavering commitment to Torah.
Want to dedicate learning? Get started here:
Today’s daily daf tools:
This month’s learning is dedicated in memory of Rabbi Dr. Raymond Harari z”l, on his 1st yahrzeit. As an educator, principal of Yeshiva of Flatbush, and community rabbi, he inspired thousands with his wisdom, warmth, and unwavering commitment to Torah.
Nedarim 57
מַתְנִי׳ ״קֻוֽנָּם פֵּירוֹת הָאֵלּוּ עָלַי״, ״קֻוֽנָּם הֵן עַל פִּי״, ״קֻוֽנָּם הֵן לְפִי״ — אָסוּר בְּחִילּוּפֵיהֶן וּבְגִידּוּלֵיהֶן. ״שֶׁאֲנִי אוֹכֵל״, וְ״שֶׁאֲנִי טוֹעֵם — מוּתָּר בְּחִילּוּפֵיהֶן וּבְגִידּוּלֵיהֶן, בְּדָבָר שֶׁזַּרְעוֹ כָּלֶה. אֲבָל בְּדָבָר שֶׁאֵין זַרְעוֹ כָּלֶה — אֲפִילּוּ גִּידּוּלֵי גִידּוּלִין אֲסוּרִין.
MISHNA: For one who says: This produce is konam upon me, or it is konam upon my mouth, or it is konam to my mouth, it is prohibited to partake of the produce, or of its replacements, or of anything that grows from it. If he says: This produce is konam for me, and for that reason I will not eat it, or for that reason I will not taste it, it is permitted for him to partake of its replacements or of anything that grows from it. This applies only with regard to an item whose seeds cease after it is sown. However, with regard to an item whose seeds do not cease after it is sown, e.g., bulbs, which flower and enter into a foliage period and repeat the process, it is prohibited for him to partake even of the growths of its growths, as the original, prohibited item remains intact.
הָאוֹמֵר לְאִשְׁתּוֹ ״קֻוֽנָּם מַעֲשֵׂה יָדַיִךְ עָלַי״, ״קֻוֽנָּם הֵן עַל פִּי״, ״קֻוֽנָּם הֵן לְפִי״ — אָסוּר בְּחִילּוּפֵיהֶן וּבְגִידּוּלֵיהֶן. ״שֶׁאֲנִי אוֹכֵל״, ״שֶׁאֲנִי טוֹעֵם״ — מוּתָּר בְּחִילּוּפֵיהֶן וּבְגִידּוּלֵיהֶן, בְּדָבָר שֶׁזַּרְעוֹ כָּלֶה. אֲבָל דָּבָר שֶׁאֵין זַרְעוֹ כָּלֶה — אֲפִילּוּ גִּידּוּלֵי גִידּוּלִין אֲסוּרִין.
For one who says to his wife: Your handicraft is konam upon me, or it is konam upon my mouth, or it is konam to my mouth, it is prohibited to benefit from her handicraft, and from their replacements and anything that grows from them. However, if he said to his wife: Your handicraft is konam for me only in the sense that I will not eat from your handicraft, or that I will not taste from your handicraft, it is permitted for him to benefit from their replacements and anything that grows from them. This applies only with regard to an item whose seeds cease after it is sown. However, with regard to an item whose seeds do not cease after it is sown, it is prohibited for him to benefit even from the growths of their growths.
״שֶׁאַתְּ עוֹשָׂה אֵינִי אוֹכֵל עַד הַפֶּסַח״, ״שֶׁאַתְּ עוֹשָׂה אֵינִי מִתְכַּסֶּה עַד הַפֶּסַח״, עָשְׂתָה לִפְנֵי הַפֶּסַח — מוּתָּר לֶאֱכוֹל וּלְהִתְכַּסּוֹת אַחַר הַפֶּסַח. ״שֶׁאַתְּ עוֹשָׂה עַד הַפֶּסַח אֵינִי אוֹכֵל״, וְ״שֶׁאַתְּ עוֹשָׂה עַד הַפֶּסַח אֵינִי מִתְכַּסֶּה״, עָשְׂתָה לִפְנֵי הַפֶּסַח — אָסוּר לֶאֱכוֹל וּלְהִתְכַּסּוֹת אַחַר הַפֶּסַח. ״שֶׁאַתְּ נֶהֱנֵית לִי עַד הַפֶּסַח אִם הוֹלֶכֶת אַתְּ לְבֵית אָבִיךְ עַד הֶחָג״, הָלְכָה לִפְנֵי הַפֶּסַח — אֲסוּרָה בַּהֲנָאָתוֹ עַד הַפֶּסַח.
If the husband said: From that which you prepare, I will not eat until Passover, or, with that which you prepare, I will not cover myself until Passover, then, if she prepared it before Passover, it is permitted for him to eat or to cover himself with them after Passover. If, however, he said: From that which you prepare until Passover, I will not eat, or from that which you prepare until Passover, I will not cover myself, then, if she prepared it before Passover, it is prohibited for him to eat or cover himself with it after Passover. If he said to her: Benefit from me until Passover if you go to your father’s house from now until the festival of Sukkot is forbidden for you, and she went to his house before Passover, it is prohibited for her to derive benefit from him until Passover.
לְאַחַר הַפֶּסַח — בְּ״בַל יַחֵל״. ״שֶׁאַתְּ נֶהֱנֵית לִי עַד הֶחָג אִם הוֹלֶכֶת אַתְּ לְבֵית אָבִיךָ עַד הַפֶּסַח״, הָלְכָה לִפְנֵי הַפֶּסַח — אֲסוּרָה בַּהֲנָאָתוֹ עַד הֶחָג, וּמוּתֶּרֶת לֵילֵךְ אַחַר הַפֶּסַח.
If she derived benefit from him before Passover and went to visit her father after Passover, she is liable for violating the prohibition of: He shall not profane his word (Numbers 30:3), as the condition was fulfilled and she violated the vow retroactively. If the husband vowed: Benefit from me is konam for you until the Festival if you go to your father’s house from now until Passover, then if she went to his house before Passover, it is prohibited for her to derive benefit from him until the Festival, and it is permitted for her to go to her father’s house after Passover, as that time period is not included in his stipulation.
גְּמָ׳ הָאוֹמֵר לְאִשְׁתּוֹ ״קֻוֽנָּם מַעֲשֵׂה יָדַיִךְ עָלַי״, ״קֻוֽנָּם הֵן עַל פִּי״, ״קֻוֽנָּם הֵן לְפִי וְכוּ׳״, יִשְׁמָעֵאל אִישׁ כְּפַר יַמָּא, וְאָמְרִי לַהּ אִישׁ כְּפַר דְּיַמָּא, הֶעֱלָה בְּיָדוֹ בָּצָל שֶׁעֲקָרוֹ בַּשְּׁבִיעִית, וּנְטָעוֹ בַּשְּׁמִינִית, וְרַבּוּ גִּידּוּלָיו עַל עִיקָּרוֹ. וְהָכִי קָא מִיבַּעְיָא לֵיהּ: גִּידּוּלָיו הֶיתֵּר וְעִיקָּרוֹ אָסוּר, כֵּיוָן דְּרָבוּ גִּידּוּלָיו מֵעִיקָּרוֹ — אוֹתָן גִּידּוּלֵי הֶיתֵּר מַעֲלִין אֶת הָאִיסּוּר, אוֹ לָא? אֲתָא לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי אַמֵּי לָא הֲוָה בִּידֵיהּ.
GEMARA: We learned in the mishna: For one who says to his wife: Your handicraft is konam upon me, or it is konam upon my mouth, or it is konam to my mouth, it is prohibited to benefit from her handicraft. Yishmael, a man of Kefar Yamma, and some say, a man of Kefar Dima, raised a dilemma with regard to an onion that one uprooted during the Sabbatical Year, which was therefore sanctified with the sanctity of the Sabbatical Year, and he then planted it during the eighth year, and its growths that developed in the eighth year exceeded its principal original Sabbatical-Year onion. And this is the dilemma that he raised: Its eighth-year growth is permitted, and its Sabbatical-Year principal is prohibited. Since its growth exceeded its principal, do those permitted growths neutralize the prohibition of the onion, or do they not? Yishmael came and raised the dilemma before Rabbi Ami, and he did not have an answer readily available.
אֲתָא לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי יִצְחָק נַפָּחָא, פְּשַׁט לֵיהּ מִן הָדָא דְּאָמַר רַבִּי חֲנִינָא תְּרִיתָאָה אָמַר רַבִּי יַנַּאי: בָּצָל שֶׁל תְּרוּמָה שֶׁנְּטָעוֹ, וְרַבּוּ גִּידּוּלָיו עַל עִיקָּרוֹ — מוּתָּר. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה וְאִיתֵּימָא רַבִּי זְרִיקָא: שָׁבֵיק מָר תְּרֵין וְעָבֵיד כְּחַד?!
Yishmael came and raised the dilemma before Rabbi Yitzḥak Nappaḥa, who resolved it for him from that which Rabbi Ḥanina Terita’a said that Rabbi Yannai said: With regard to an onion of teruma that one planted, if its growths exceeded its principal, it is permitted. Here too, the eighth-year growth should neutralize the prohibition of the Sabbatical-Year onion. Rabbi Yirmeya said, and some say it was Rabbi Zerika who said to Rabbi Yitzḥak Nappaḥa: Did the Master abandon the opinion of two Sages and conduct himself in accordance with the opinion of one Sage?
מַאן נִינְהוּ תְּרֵין? דְּאָמַר רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: יַלְדָּה שֶׁסִּיבְּכָהּ בִּזְקֵינָהּ, וּבָהּ פֵּירוֹת, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוֹסִיפָה מָאתַיִם — אָסוּר.
The Gemara asks: Who are they, the two Sages who disagree with his opinion? The Gemara answers: It is as Rabbi Abbahu said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: With regard to a young vine within three years of its planting, whose fruits are orla and forbidden, that one grafted onto an old, permitted vine, and there were fruits on the younger vine, even though the younger vine added two hundred times the number of fruits that were there when it was grafted, and those additional fruits are permitted because they draw their nourishment from the older vine, the fruit that was on the younger vine before it was grafted is forbidden. Although, in principle, when the permitted part of the mixture is two hundred times the forbidden orla, the prohibition is neutralized, in this case, the prohibition is not neutralized, as the forbidden fruit was there from the outset.
וְאָמַר רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר רַבִּי נַחְמָנִי אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹנָתָן: בָּצָל שֶׁנְּטָעוֹ בַּכֶּרֶם, וְנֶעֱקַר הַכֶּרֶם — אָסוּר.
And Rabbi Shmuel bar Rabbi Naḥmani said that Rabbi Yonatan said: With regard to an onion that one planted in a vineyard, creating a forbidden mixture of food crops in a vineyard, and then the vineyard was uprooted, and most of the onion grew in a permitted manner, it is forbidden. Apparently, both Rabbi Yoḥanan and Rabbi Yonatan disagree with the opinion of Rabbi Yannai, and therefore, there is no clear resolution to the dilemma.
הֲדַר אֲתָא לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי אַמֵּי וּפְשַׁיט לֵיהּ מִן הָדָא דְּאָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: לִיטְרָא בְּצָלִים שֶׁתִּיקְּנָה וּזְרָעָהּ, מִתְעַשֶּׂרֶת לְפִי כוּלָּהּ. אַלְמָא אוֹתָן גִידּוּלִין מְבַטְּלִין עִיקָּר.
Yishmael then came and raised the dilemma before Rabbi Ami, who resolved it for him from that which Rabbi Yitzḥak said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: With regard to a litra of onions that one tithed, and then he sowed a field with the entire litra of onions, when the field yields the crop, it is tithed according to the entire crop. Although some of the onions that he sowed were already tithed, he is obligated to tithe them because the volume of the growths exceeds the volume of the original onions and the entire crop has untithed status. Apparently, those growths neutralize the prohibition of the primary, original, tithed onions.
דִּלְמָא לְחוּמְרָא שָׁאנֵי.
The Gemara rejects that resolution: There is no proof from the ruling in the case of the litra of onions, as perhaps it is different when the ruling is a stringency. Perhaps, due to the concern that the growths neutralize the prohibition of the original, the ruling is that he must tithe the entire crop. However, there is no proof that the same would be true in cases where the ruling is a leniency, e.g., to neutralize the prohibition of the Sabbatical Year or teruma.
אֶלָּא, מִן הָדָא דְּתַנְיָא, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר:
Rather, proof may be cited from this source; as it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Shimon says:
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.
Nedarim 57: Do Growing and Replanting Remove Foods from a Vow?
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.
I began my Daf Yomi journey on January 5, 2020. I had never learned Talmud before. Initially it struck me as a bunch of inane and arcane details with mind bending logic. I am now smitten. Rabbanit Farber brings the page to life and I am eager to learn with her every day!
Highland Park, United States
Phoenix, AZ, United States
Minnesota, United States
I started learning after the siyum hashas for women and my daily learning has been a constant over the last two years. It grounded me during the chaos of Corona while providing me with a community of fellow learners. The Daf can be challenging but it’s filled with life’s lessons, struggles and hope for a better world. It’s not about the destination but rather about the journey. Thank you Hadran!
אפרת, Israel
After reading the book, “ If All The Seas Were Ink “ by Ileana Kurshan I started studying Talmud. I searched and studied with several teachers until I found Michelle Farber. I have been studying with her for two years. I look forward every day to learn from her.
Virginia, United States
In early 2020, I began the process of a stem cell transplant. The required extreme isolation forced me to leave work and normal life but gave me time to delve into Jewish text study. I did not feel isolated. I began Daf Yomi at the start of this cycle, with family members joining me online from my hospital room. I’ve used my newly granted time to to engage, grow and connect through this learning.
Worcester, United States
It’s hard to believe it has been over two years. Daf yomi has changed my life in so many ways and has been sustaining during this global sea change. Each day means learning something new, digging a little deeper, adding another lens, seeing worlds with new eyes. Daf has also fostered new friendships and deepened childhood connections, as long time friends have unexpectedly become havruta.
Northwest Washington, United States
I decided to give daf yomi a try when I heard about the siyum hashas in 2020. Once the pandemic hit, the daily commitment gave my days some much-needed structure. There have been times when I’ve felt like quitting- especially when encountering very technical details in the text. But then I tell myself, “Look how much you’ve done. You can’t stop now!” So I keep going & my Koren bookshelf grows…
Huntington, United States
I began Daf Yomi with the last cycle. I was inspired by the Hadran Siyum in Yerushalayim to continue with this cycle. I have learned Daf Yomi with Rabanit Michelle in over 25 countries on 6 continents ( missing Australia)
Silver Spring, MD, United States
I had no formal learning in Talmud until I began my studies in the Joint Program where in 1976 I was one of the few, if not the only, woman talmud major. It was superior training for law school and enabled me to approach my legal studies with a foundation . In 2018, I began daf yomi listening to Rabbanit MIchelle’s pod cast and my daily talmud studies are one of the highlights of my life.
Minneapolis, United States
I began Daf Yomi with the last cycle. I was inspired by the Hadran Siyum in Yerushalayim to continue with this cycle. I have learned Daf Yomi with Rabanit Michelle in over 25 countries on 6 continents ( missing Australia)
Silver Spring, MD, United States
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’ve been learning since January 2020, and in June I started drawing a phrase from each daf. Sometimes it’s easy (e.g. plants), sometimes it’s very hard (e.g. korbanot), and sometimes it’s loads of fun (e.g. bird racing) to find something to draw. I upload my pictures from each masechet to #DafYomiArt. I am enjoying every step of the journey.
Ashdod, Israel
I started learning Gemara at the Yeshivah of Flatbush. And I resumed ‘ברוך ה decades later with Rabbanit Michele at Hadran. I started from Brachot and have had an exciting, rewarding experience throughout seder Moed!
Maale Adumim, Israel
I had never heard of Daf Yomi and after reading the book, The Weight of Ink, I explored more about it. I discovered that it was only 6 months before a whole new cycle started and I was determined to give it a try. I tried to get a friend to join me on the journey but after the first few weeks they all dropped it. I haven’t missed a day of reading and of listening to the podcast.
Elkins Park, United States
I started learning with rabbis. I needed to know more than the stories. My first teacher to show me “the way of the Talmud” as well as the stories was Samara Schwartz.
Michelle Farber started the new cycle 2 yrs ago and I jumped on for the ride.
I do not look back.
Houston, 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
Los Angeles, United States
Minnesota, United States
I started learning Daf in Jan 2020 with Brachot b/c I had never seen the Jewish people united around something so positive, and I wanted to be a part of it. Also, I wanted to broaden my background in Torah Shebal Peh- Maayanot gave me a great gemara education, but I knew that I could hold a conversation in most parts of tanach but almost no TSB. I’m so thankful for Daf and have gained immensely.
NJ, United States
Nedarim 57
מַתְנִי׳ ״קֻוֽנָּם פֵּירוֹת הָאֵלּוּ עָלַי״, ״קֻוֽנָּם הֵן עַל פִּי״, ״קֻוֽנָּם הֵן לְפִי״ — אָסוּר בְּחִילּוּפֵיהֶן וּבְגִידּוּלֵיהֶן. ״שֶׁאֲנִי אוֹכֵל״, וְ״שֶׁאֲנִי טוֹעֵם — מוּתָּר בְּחִילּוּפֵיהֶן וּבְגִידּוּלֵיהֶן, בְּדָבָר שֶׁזַּרְעוֹ כָּלֶה. אֲבָל בְּדָבָר שֶׁאֵין זַרְעוֹ כָּלֶה — אֲפִילּוּ גִּידּוּלֵי גִידּוּלִין אֲסוּרִין.
MISHNA: For one who says: This produce is konam upon me, or it is konam upon my mouth, or it is konam to my mouth, it is prohibited to partake of the produce, or of its replacements, or of anything that grows from it. If he says: This produce is konam for me, and for that reason I will not eat it, or for that reason I will not taste it, it is permitted for him to partake of its replacements or of anything that grows from it. This applies only with regard to an item whose seeds cease after it is sown. However, with regard to an item whose seeds do not cease after it is sown, e.g., bulbs, which flower and enter into a foliage period and repeat the process, it is prohibited for him to partake even of the growths of its growths, as the original, prohibited item remains intact.
הָאוֹמֵר לְאִשְׁתּוֹ ״קֻוֽנָּם מַעֲשֵׂה יָדַיִךְ עָלַי״, ״קֻוֽנָּם הֵן עַל פִּי״, ״קֻוֽנָּם הֵן לְפִי״ — אָסוּר בְּחִילּוּפֵיהֶן וּבְגִידּוּלֵיהֶן. ״שֶׁאֲנִי אוֹכֵל״, ״שֶׁאֲנִי טוֹעֵם״ — מוּתָּר בְּחִילּוּפֵיהֶן וּבְגִידּוּלֵיהֶן, בְּדָבָר שֶׁזַּרְעוֹ כָּלֶה. אֲבָל דָּבָר שֶׁאֵין זַרְעוֹ כָּלֶה — אֲפִילּוּ גִּידּוּלֵי גִידּוּלִין אֲסוּרִין.
For one who says to his wife: Your handicraft is konam upon me, or it is konam upon my mouth, or it is konam to my mouth, it is prohibited to benefit from her handicraft, and from their replacements and anything that grows from them. However, if he said to his wife: Your handicraft is konam for me only in the sense that I will not eat from your handicraft, or that I will not taste from your handicraft, it is permitted for him to benefit from their replacements and anything that grows from them. This applies only with regard to an item whose seeds cease after it is sown. However, with regard to an item whose seeds do not cease after it is sown, it is prohibited for him to benefit even from the growths of their growths.
״שֶׁאַתְּ עוֹשָׂה אֵינִי אוֹכֵל עַד הַפֶּסַח״, ״שֶׁאַתְּ עוֹשָׂה אֵינִי מִתְכַּסֶּה עַד הַפֶּסַח״, עָשְׂתָה לִפְנֵי הַפֶּסַח — מוּתָּר לֶאֱכוֹל וּלְהִתְכַּסּוֹת אַחַר הַפֶּסַח. ״שֶׁאַתְּ עוֹשָׂה עַד הַפֶּסַח אֵינִי אוֹכֵל״, וְ״שֶׁאַתְּ עוֹשָׂה עַד הַפֶּסַח אֵינִי מִתְכַּסֶּה״, עָשְׂתָה לִפְנֵי הַפֶּסַח — אָסוּר לֶאֱכוֹל וּלְהִתְכַּסּוֹת אַחַר הַפֶּסַח. ״שֶׁאַתְּ נֶהֱנֵית לִי עַד הַפֶּסַח אִם הוֹלֶכֶת אַתְּ לְבֵית אָבִיךְ עַד הֶחָג״, הָלְכָה לִפְנֵי הַפֶּסַח — אֲסוּרָה בַּהֲנָאָתוֹ עַד הַפֶּסַח.
If the husband said: From that which you prepare, I will not eat until Passover, or, with that which you prepare, I will not cover myself until Passover, then, if she prepared it before Passover, it is permitted for him to eat or to cover himself with them after Passover. If, however, he said: From that which you prepare until Passover, I will not eat, or from that which you prepare until Passover, I will not cover myself, then, if she prepared it before Passover, it is prohibited for him to eat or cover himself with it after Passover. If he said to her: Benefit from me until Passover if you go to your father’s house from now until the festival of Sukkot is forbidden for you, and she went to his house before Passover, it is prohibited for her to derive benefit from him until Passover.
לְאַחַר הַפֶּסַח — בְּ״בַל יַחֵל״. ״שֶׁאַתְּ נֶהֱנֵית לִי עַד הֶחָג אִם הוֹלֶכֶת אַתְּ לְבֵית אָבִיךָ עַד הַפֶּסַח״, הָלְכָה לִפְנֵי הַפֶּסַח — אֲסוּרָה בַּהֲנָאָתוֹ עַד הֶחָג, וּמוּתֶּרֶת לֵילֵךְ אַחַר הַפֶּסַח.
If she derived benefit from him before Passover and went to visit her father after Passover, she is liable for violating the prohibition of: He shall not profane his word (Numbers 30:3), as the condition was fulfilled and she violated the vow retroactively. If the husband vowed: Benefit from me is konam for you until the Festival if you go to your father’s house from now until Passover, then if she went to his house before Passover, it is prohibited for her to derive benefit from him until the Festival, and it is permitted for her to go to her father’s house after Passover, as that time period is not included in his stipulation.
גְּמָ׳ הָאוֹמֵר לְאִשְׁתּוֹ ״קֻוֽנָּם מַעֲשֵׂה יָדַיִךְ עָלַי״, ״קֻוֽנָּם הֵן עַל פִּי״, ״קֻוֽנָּם הֵן לְפִי וְכוּ׳״, יִשְׁמָעֵאל אִישׁ כְּפַר יַמָּא, וְאָמְרִי לַהּ אִישׁ כְּפַר דְּיַמָּא, הֶעֱלָה בְּיָדוֹ בָּצָל שֶׁעֲקָרוֹ בַּשְּׁבִיעִית, וּנְטָעוֹ בַּשְּׁמִינִית, וְרַבּוּ גִּידּוּלָיו עַל עִיקָּרוֹ. וְהָכִי קָא מִיבַּעְיָא לֵיהּ: גִּידּוּלָיו הֶיתֵּר וְעִיקָּרוֹ אָסוּר, כֵּיוָן דְּרָבוּ גִּידּוּלָיו מֵעִיקָּרוֹ — אוֹתָן גִּידּוּלֵי הֶיתֵּר מַעֲלִין אֶת הָאִיסּוּר, אוֹ לָא? אֲתָא לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי אַמֵּי לָא הֲוָה בִּידֵיהּ.
GEMARA: We learned in the mishna: For one who says to his wife: Your handicraft is konam upon me, or it is konam upon my mouth, or it is konam to my mouth, it is prohibited to benefit from her handicraft. Yishmael, a man of Kefar Yamma, and some say, a man of Kefar Dima, raised a dilemma with regard to an onion that one uprooted during the Sabbatical Year, which was therefore sanctified with the sanctity of the Sabbatical Year, and he then planted it during the eighth year, and its growths that developed in the eighth year exceeded its principal original Sabbatical-Year onion. And this is the dilemma that he raised: Its eighth-year growth is permitted, and its Sabbatical-Year principal is prohibited. Since its growth exceeded its principal, do those permitted growths neutralize the prohibition of the onion, or do they not? Yishmael came and raised the dilemma before Rabbi Ami, and he did not have an answer readily available.
אֲתָא לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי יִצְחָק נַפָּחָא, פְּשַׁט לֵיהּ מִן הָדָא דְּאָמַר רַבִּי חֲנִינָא תְּרִיתָאָה אָמַר רַבִּי יַנַּאי: בָּצָל שֶׁל תְּרוּמָה שֶׁנְּטָעוֹ, וְרַבּוּ גִּידּוּלָיו עַל עִיקָּרוֹ — מוּתָּר. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה וְאִיתֵּימָא רַבִּי זְרִיקָא: שָׁבֵיק מָר תְּרֵין וְעָבֵיד כְּחַד?!
Yishmael came and raised the dilemma before Rabbi Yitzḥak Nappaḥa, who resolved it for him from that which Rabbi Ḥanina Terita’a said that Rabbi Yannai said: With regard to an onion of teruma that one planted, if its growths exceeded its principal, it is permitted. Here too, the eighth-year growth should neutralize the prohibition of the Sabbatical-Year onion. Rabbi Yirmeya said, and some say it was Rabbi Zerika who said to Rabbi Yitzḥak Nappaḥa: Did the Master abandon the opinion of two Sages and conduct himself in accordance with the opinion of one Sage?
מַאן נִינְהוּ תְּרֵין? דְּאָמַר רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: יַלְדָּה שֶׁסִּיבְּכָהּ בִּזְקֵינָהּ, וּבָהּ פֵּירוֹת, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוֹסִיפָה מָאתַיִם — אָסוּר.
The Gemara asks: Who are they, the two Sages who disagree with his opinion? The Gemara answers: It is as Rabbi Abbahu said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: With regard to a young vine within three years of its planting, whose fruits are orla and forbidden, that one grafted onto an old, permitted vine, and there were fruits on the younger vine, even though the younger vine added two hundred times the number of fruits that were there when it was grafted, and those additional fruits are permitted because they draw their nourishment from the older vine, the fruit that was on the younger vine before it was grafted is forbidden. Although, in principle, when the permitted part of the mixture is two hundred times the forbidden orla, the prohibition is neutralized, in this case, the prohibition is not neutralized, as the forbidden fruit was there from the outset.
וְאָמַר רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר רַבִּי נַחְמָנִי אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹנָתָן: בָּצָל שֶׁנְּטָעוֹ בַּכֶּרֶם, וְנֶעֱקַר הַכֶּרֶם — אָסוּר.
And Rabbi Shmuel bar Rabbi Naḥmani said that Rabbi Yonatan said: With regard to an onion that one planted in a vineyard, creating a forbidden mixture of food crops in a vineyard, and then the vineyard was uprooted, and most of the onion grew in a permitted manner, it is forbidden. Apparently, both Rabbi Yoḥanan and Rabbi Yonatan disagree with the opinion of Rabbi Yannai, and therefore, there is no clear resolution to the dilemma.
הֲדַר אֲתָא לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי אַמֵּי וּפְשַׁיט לֵיהּ מִן הָדָא דְּאָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: לִיטְרָא בְּצָלִים שֶׁתִּיקְּנָה וּזְרָעָהּ, מִתְעַשֶּׂרֶת לְפִי כוּלָּהּ. אַלְמָא אוֹתָן גִידּוּלִין מְבַטְּלִין עִיקָּר.
Yishmael then came and raised the dilemma before Rabbi Ami, who resolved it for him from that which Rabbi Yitzḥak said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: With regard to a litra of onions that one tithed, and then he sowed a field with the entire litra of onions, when the field yields the crop, it is tithed according to the entire crop. Although some of the onions that he sowed were already tithed, he is obligated to tithe them because the volume of the growths exceeds the volume of the original onions and the entire crop has untithed status. Apparently, those growths neutralize the prohibition of the primary, original, tithed onions.
דִּלְמָא לְחוּמְרָא שָׁאנֵי.
The Gemara rejects that resolution: There is no proof from the ruling in the case of the litra of onions, as perhaps it is different when the ruling is a stringency. Perhaps, due to the concern that the growths neutralize the prohibition of the original, the ruling is that he must tithe the entire crop. However, there is no proof that the same would be true in cases where the ruling is a leniency, e.g., to neutralize the prohibition of the Sabbatical Year or teruma.
אֶלָּא, מִן הָדָא דְּתַנְיָא, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר:
Rather, proof may be cited from this source; as it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Shimon says:
