נדרים פט

נדרים פט

נָדְרָה וְהִיא בִּרְשׁוּת הַבַּעַל — מֵפֵר לָהּ. כֵּיצַד? אָמְרָה ״הֲרֵינִי נְזִירָה לְאַחַר שְׁלֹשִׁים״, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנִּתְאַלְמְנָה אוֹ נִתְגָּרְשָׁה בְּתוֹךְ שְׁלֹשִׁים — הֲרֵי זֶה מוּפָר. נָדְרָה בּוֹ בַּיּוֹם וְנִתְגָּרְשָׁה בּוֹ בַּיּוֹם, הֶחְזִירָה בּוֹ בְּיוֹם — אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְהָפֵר. זֶה הַכְּלָל: כׇּל שֶׁיָּצְאָה לִרְשׁוּת עַצְמָהּ שָׁעָה אַחַת — אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְהָפֵר.

If she took a vow while she was under the jurisdiction of her husband, he can nullify the vow for her. How so? If she said when she was still married: I am hereby a nazirite for after thirty days, and her husband nullified the vow, then even if she was widowed or divorced within the thirty-day period, the vow is nullified. If she took a vow on that, i.e., one, day and was divorced on that same day, then even if her husband took her back as his wife on that same day, he cannot nullify her previous vows. This is the principle: Once she has left and gone into her own jurisdiction for even a single hour, then after they are remarried her husband can no longer nullify any vow she uttered during their first marriage.

גְּמָ׳ תַּנְיָא: אַלְמָנָה וּגְרוּשָׁה שֶׁאָמְרָה ״הֲרֵינִי נְזִירָה לִכְשֶׁאִנָּשֵׂא״ וְנִשֵּׂאת, רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אוֹמֵר: יָפֵר, וְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר: לֹא יָפֵר. וְסִימָנָא: יְלֵלִי. אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ שֶׁאָמְרָה ״הֲרֵינִי נְזִירָה לִכְשֶׁאֶתְגָּרֵשׁ״ וְנִתְגָּרְשָׁה, רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אוֹמֵר: לֹא יָפֵר, וְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר: יָפֵר.

GEMARA: It is taught in a baraita: With regard to a widow or a divorcée who said: I am hereby a nazirite for when I will get married, and she was married, Rabbi Yishmael says her husband can nullify her vow, whereas Rabbi Akiva says he cannot nullify it. And the mnemonic device for the opinions of Rabbi Yishmael and Rabbi Akiva with regard to this halakha and the following one is the Hebrew acronym yod, lamed, lamed, yod: Yafer, lo yafer; lo yafer, yafer, i.e., he can nullify, he cannot nullify; he cannot nullify, he can nullify. As for a married woman who said while she was married: I am hereby a nazirite for when I will get divorced, and she was divorced, Rabbi Yishmael says her husband cannot nullify her vow, whereas Rabbi Akiva says he can nullify it.

אָמַר רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל: הֲרֵי הוּא אוֹמֵר ״וְנֵדֶר אַלְמָנָה וּגְרוּשָׁה וְגוֹ׳״, עַד שֶׁיְּהֵא נֶדֶר בִּשְׁעַת אַלְמָנוּת וְגֵרוּשִׁין. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא סָבַר: הֲרֵי הוּא אוֹמֵר ״כֹּל אֲשֶׁר אָסְרָה עַל נַפְשָׁהּ״, עַד שֶׁיְּהֵא אִיסּוּרֵי נֶדֶר בִּשְׁעַת אַלְמָנוּת וְגֵרוּשִׁין.

Rabbi Yishmael said: It says: “But every vow of a widow, and of her that is divorced…shall be upheld against her” (Numbers 30:10), which means that the practical application of the vow must be in the time of the woman’s widowhood or divorce. Only when the vow is to take effect when she is a widow or a divorcée shall it be upheld against her, since then it is impossible to nullify. Rabbi Akiva, by contrast, maintains: It says: “But every vow…with which she has bound her soul, shall be upheld against her,” which means that the binding of the vow, i.e., the taking of the vow creating the prohibition, must be at the time of the woman’s widowhood or divorce.

אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: מַתְנִיתִין — רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא הִיא. אַבָּיֵי אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ תֵּימָא רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל, מַתְנִיתִין תָּלְיָא נַפְשַׁהּ בְּיוֹמֵי, בָּרַיְיתָא תָּלְיָא נַפְשַׁהּ בְּנִישּׂוּאִין.

Rav Ḥisda said: The mishna that links the possibility of nullification to the time of the taking of the vow is the opinion of Rabbi Akiva. Abaye said: Even if you say that the mishna follows the opinion of Rabbi Yishmael, there is no difficulty, for the mishna is referring to a woman who made her vow dependent on days, i.e., she specified that the vow should take effect after a fixed period of time. By contrast, the baraita is referring to a woman who made her vow dependent on marriage.

שָׁלְמוּ יוֹמֵי וְלָא נִתְגָּרְשָׁה, שָׁלְמוּ יוֹמֵי וְלָא מִיתְנַסְבָא.

In the case of the baraita, since the woman explicitly connected the application of her vow to her marital status, the possibility of nullifying the vow depends on the time that the vow takes effect. But in the case of the mishna, where the application of the vow is tied to a particular date, it is possible that the days will be completed and she was not divorced, or that the days will be completed and she was not married. Since there is no inherent connection between her marriage and the vow, Rabbi Yishmael agrees that the possibility of nullification depends on the time when the vow was pronounced.

״זֶה הַכְּלָל״ דְּקָתָנֵי גַּבֵּי ״נַעֲרָה הַמְאוֹרָסָה״ — לְאֵיתוֹיֵי הָלַךְ הָאָב עִם שְׁלוּחֵי הַבַּעַל אוֹ שֶׁהָלְכוּ שְׁלוּחֵי הָאָב עִם שְׁלוּחֵי הַבַּעַל, בְּנַעֲרָה הַמְאוֹרָסָה, דְּאָבִיהָ וּבַעְלָהּ מְפִירִין נְדָרֶיהָ.

§ The mishna in the previous chapter (71a) teaches that as long as a betrothed young woman has not gone out into her own jurisdiction for a single moment, her father and her husband can nullify her vows. The mishna in this chapter teaches the principle in the reverse: If she has gone out for even a single hour, her husband cannot nullify her vows. The Gemara addresses this repetition. The mishna of: This is the principle, which is taught in the chapter called: A betrothed young woman, serves to include a case where the father went with the messengers of the husband after handing over his daughter in marriage and a case where the messengers of the father went with the messengers of the husband. In the case of a betrothed young woman, since the father or his messengers were still with her, she has not yet left her father’s jurisdiction, and nevertheless the mishna teaches that her father and her husband can nullify her vows.

״זֶה הַכְּלָל״ דְּקָתָנֵי גַּבֵּי ״וְאֵלּוּ נְדָרִים״, לְאֵיתוֹיֵי מָסַר הָאָב לִשְׁלוּחֵי הַבַּעַל אוֹ שֶׁמָּסְרוּ שְׁלוּחֵי הָאָב לִשְׁלוּחֵי הַבַּעַל, שֶׁאֵין הַבַּעַל מֵיפֵר בַּקּוֹדְמִין.

The mishna of: This is the principle, which is taught in this chapter, called: And these are the vows, serves to include a case where the father handed over his daughter to the messengers of the husband, or a case where the messengers of the father handed her over to the messengers of the husband. Although neither the father nor his messengers accompanied her, and therefore she has been fully handed over to her husband, nevertheless, the mishna teaches that the husband cannot nullify previous vows, i.e., vows that preceded their marriage.

מַתְנִי׳ תֵּשַׁע נְעָרוֹת נִדְרֵיהֶן קַיָּימִין: בּוֹגֶרֶת וְהִיא יְתוֹמָה. נַעֲרָה וּבָגְרָה וְהִיא יְתוֹמָה.

MISHNA: There are nine young women whose vows are upheld and cannot be nullified: If she took a vow when she was a grown woman and she is an orphan; if she took a vow when she was a young woman, and has reached her majority, and she is an orphan;

נַעֲרָה שֶׁלֹּא בָּגְרָה וְהִיא יְתוֹמָה. בּוֹגֶרֶת וּמֵת אָבִיהָ. נַעֲרָה בּוֹגֶרֶת וּמֵת אָבִיהָ. נַעֲרָה שֶׁלֹּא בָּגְרָה וּמֵת אָבִיהָ. נַעֲרָה שֶׁמֵּת אָבִיהָ וּמִשֶּׁמֵּת אָבִיהָ בָּגְרָה. בּוֹגֶרֶת וְאָבִיהָ קַיָּים. נַעֲרָה בּוֹגֶרֶת וְאָבִיהָ קַיָּים. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אַף הַמַּשִּׂיא בִּתּוֹ הַקְּטַנָּה וְנִתְאַלְמְנָה אוֹ נִתְגָּרְשָׁה וְחָזְרָה אֶצְלוֹ — עֲדַיִין הִיא נַעֲרָה.

if she took a vow when she was a young woman who had not yet reached her majority, and she is an orphan; if she took a vow when she was a grown woman and her father died; if she took a vow when she was a young woman, and she became a grown woman, and her father died; if she took a vow when she was a young woman who had not reached her majority, and her father died; if she took a vow when she was a young woman, and her father died, and after her father died she reached her majority; if she took a vow when she was a grown woman and her father is still alive; and if she took a vow when she was a young woman, and she became a grown woman, and her father is still alive. Rabbi Yehuda says: With regard to even one who married off his minor daughter, and she was widowed or divorced and she returned to him, and according to her age she still is in the category of a young woman, her vows cannot be nullified.

גְּמָ׳ אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: זוֹ דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה. אֲבָל חֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, שָׁלֹשׁ נְעָרוֹת נִדְרֵיהֶן קַיָּימִין: בּוֹגֶרֶת, וִיתוֹמָה, וִיתוֹמָה בְּחַיֵּי הָאָב.

GEMARA: Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: This mishna is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda, who spelled out all the cases and listed nine young women whose vows are upheld. But the Rabbis say that it is unnecessary to go into such detail. Instead, they simply said: There are three young women whose vows are upheld and cannot be nullified: A grown woman, and an orphan, and an orphan in her father’s lifetime, i.e., a young woman who was divorced or widowed while her father was still alive and is considered an orphan in that her father no longer has jurisdiction over her.

מַתְנִי׳ ״קֻוֽנָּם שֶׁאֵינִי נֶהֱנֶה לְאַבָּא וּלְאָבִיךָ אִם עוֹשָׂה אֲנִי עַל פִּיךָ״, ״שֶׁאֵינִי נֶהֱנֵית לְךָ אִם עוֹשָׂה אֲנִי עַל פִּי אַבָּא וְעַל פִּי אָבִיךָ״ — הֲרֵי זֶה יָפֵר.

MISHNA: If a woman said to her husband: Deriving benefit from my father or from your father is konam for me if I will prepare anything for you; or if she said: Deriving benefit from you is konam for me if I will prepare anything for my father or for your father, the husband can nullify this vow.

גְּמָ׳ תַּנְיָא: ״שֶׁאֵינִי נֶהֱנֵית לְאַבָּא וּלְאָבִיךְ אִם אֲנִי עוֹשָׂה לְפִיךָ״, רַבִּי נָתָן אוֹמֵר: לֹא יָפֵר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: יָפֵר.

GEMARA: It is taught in a baraita: If a woman said to her husband: Deriving benefit from my father or from your father is konam for me if I will prepare anything for you, Rabbi Natan says her husband cannot nullify the vow. She must prepare food for him, as she is obligated to do so by virtue of their being married, and it is prohibited for her to benefit from their respective fathers. The husband cannot nullify a vow that has not yet taken effect and that depends on the fulfillment of a certain condition. And the Rabbis say that even in such a case he can nullify her vow.

״נְטוּלָה אֲנִי מִן הַיְּהוּדִים אִם מְשַׁמַּשְׁתֶּךָ״, רַבִּי נָתָן אוֹמֵר: לֹא יָפֵר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: יָפֵר.

The baraita continues: If the woman said to her husband: I am removed from the Jews, i.e., the benefit of my engaging in sexual intercourse will be forbidden to all Jews, if I engage in sexual intercourse with you, Rabbi Natan says he cannot nullify the vow. Rather, she must engage in sexual intercourse with her husband, as she is obligated to do so by virtue of their marriage, and she will be forbidden to all other Jews. And the Rabbis say he can nullify her vow.

הָהוּא גַּבְרָא דְּאִיתְּסַר הֲנָיָיתָא דְּעָלְמָא עֲלֵיהּ אִי נָסֵיב אִיתְּתָא כִּי לָא תָּנֵינָא הִילְכְתָא. רָהֵיט בְּגַפָּא וְתוּבַלְיָא וְלָא אִמְּצִי לְמִיתְנֵא. אֲתָא רַב אַחָא בַּר רַב הוּנָא וְשַׁבְּשֵׁיהּ וְאִינְּסִיב אִיתְּתָא,

§ It is related that there was a certain man who took a vow that all benefit from the world should be forbidden to him if he marries a woman when he has not yet learned halakha. He would run up a ladder and rope but was not able to learn the material, i.e., despite all his efforts he failed in his studies. Rav Aḥa bar Rav Huna came and misled him, allowing him to understand that even if he took a vow, the vow would not take effect, and so he married a woman.