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 to the refuah shleima of our dear friend, Phyllis Hecht, גיטל פעשא בת מאשה רחל by all her many friends who love and admire her. Phyllis’ emuna, strength, and positivity are an inspiration.
Want to dedicate learning? Get started here:
Today’s daily daf tools:
This month’s learning is dedicated to the refuah shleima of our dear friend, Phyllis Hecht, גיטל פעשא בת מאשה רחל by all her many friends who love and admire her. Phyllis’ emuna, strength, and positivity are an inspiration.
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’ve been wanting to do Daf Yomi for years, but always wanted to start at the beginning and not in the middle of things. When the opportunity came in 2020, I decided: “this is now the time!” I’ve been posting my journey daily on social media, tracking my progress (#DafYomi); now it’s fully integrated into my daily routines. I’ve also inspired my partner to join, too!
Teaneck, United States
I started learning when my brother sent me the news clip of the celebration of the last Daf Yomi cycle. I was so floored to see so many women celebrating that I wanted to be a part of it. It has been an enriching experience studying a text in a language I don’t speak, using background knowledge that I don’t have. It is stretching my learning in unexpected ways, bringing me joy and satisfaction.
Warwick, Rhode Island, United States
In July, 2012 I wrote for Tablet about the first all women’s siyum at Matan in Jerusalem, with 100 women. At the time, I thought, I would like to start with the next cycle – listening to a podcast at different times of day makes it possible. It is incredible that after 10 years, so many women are so engaged!
Pittsburgh, United States
Oceanside NY, 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 decided to learn one masechet, Brachot, but quickly fell in love and never stopped! It has been great, everyone is always asking how it’s going and chering me on, and my students are always making sure I did the day’s daf.
Memphis, Tennessee, United States
A Gemara shiur previous to the Hadran Siyum, was the impetus to attend it.It was highly inspirational and I was smitten. The message for me was התלמוד בידינו. I had decided along with my Chahsmonaim group to to do the daf and take it one daf at time- without any expectations at all. There has been a wealth of information, insights and halachik ideas. It is truly exercise of the mind, heart & Soul
Hashmonaim, Israel
I have joined the community of daf yomi learners at the start of this cycle. I have studied in different ways – by reading the page, translating the page, attending a local shiur and listening to Rabbanit Farber’s podcasts, depending on circumstances and where I was at the time. The reactions have been positive throughout – with no exception!
Guildford, United Kingdom
תמיד רציתי. למדתי גמרא בבית ספר בטורונטו קנדה. עליתי ארצה ולמדתי שזה לא מקובל. הופתעתי.
יצאתי לגימלאות לפני שנתיים וזה מאפשר את המחוייבות לדף יומי.
עבורי ההתמדה בלימוד מעגן אותי בקשר שלי ליהדות. אני תמיד מחפשת ותמיד. מוצאת מקור לקשר. ללימוד חדש ומחדש. קשר עם נשים לומדות מעמיק את החוויה ומשמעותית מאוד.
מיתר, ישראל
Shortly after the death of my father, David Malik z”l, I made the commitment to Daf Yomi. While riding to Ben Gurion airport in January, Siyum HaShas was playing on the radio; that was the nudge I needed to get started. The “everyday-ness” of the Daf has been a meaningful spiritual practice, especial after COVID began & I was temporarily unable to say Kaddish at daily in-person minyanim.
Wynnewood, United States
I decided to learn one masechet, Brachot, but quickly fell in love and never stopped! It has been great, everyone is always asking how it’s going and chering me on, and my students are always making sure I did the day’s daf.
Memphis, Tennessee, 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
Blacksburg, United States
New York, United States
Ontario, Canada
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
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
A beautiful world of Talmudic sages now fill my daily life with discussion and debate.
bringing alive our traditions and texts that has brought new meaning to my life.
I am a מגילת אסתר reader for women . the words in the Mishna of מסכת megillah 17a
הקורא את המגילה למפרע לא יצא were powerful to me.
I hope to have the zchut to complete the cycle for my 70th birthday.
Jerusalem, Israel
I began daf yomi in January 2020 with Brachot. I had made aliya 6 months before, and one of my post-aliya goals was to complete a full cycle. As a life-long Tanach teacher, I wanted to swim from one side of the Yam shel Torah to the other. Daf yomi was also my sanity through COVID. It was the way to marking the progression of time, and feel that I could grow and accomplish while time stopped.
Givat Zev, Israel
Bronx, 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:
