כָּל כִּנּוּיֵי נְדָרִים כִּנְדָרִים, וַחֲרָמִים כַּחֲרָמִים, וּשְׁבוּעוֹת כִּשְׁבוּעוֹת, וּנְזִירוּת כִּנְזִירוּת. הָאוֹמֵר לַחֲבֵרוֹ, מֻדָּרְנִי מִמְּךָ, מֻפְרָשְׁנִי מִמְּךָ, מְרֻחָקְנִי מִמְּךָ, שֶׁאֵינִי אוֹכֵל לָךְ, שֶׁאֵינִי טוֹעֵם לָךְ, אָסוּר. מְנֻדֶּה אֲנִי לָךְ, רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא הָיָה חוֹכֵךְ בָּזֶה לְהַחֲמִיר. כְּנִדְרֵי רְשָׁעִים, נָדַר בְּנָזִיר, וּבְקָרְבָּן, וּבִשְׁבוּעָה. כְּנִדְרֵי כְשֵׁרִים, לֹא אָמַר כְּלוּם. כְּנִדְבוֹתָם, נָדַר בְּנָזִיר וּבְקָרְבָּן: When an individual takes a vow, he renders an object forbidden to himself or to others as though it were a sacrificial offering; this parallels the act of consecrating an offering, which also renders an item forbidden for personal use by means of a verbal declaration. The most direct expression of a vow is when an individual says: This object is forbidden to me, or to others, like an offering. Additionally, the mishna states that all substitutes for the language of vows are like vows. Consequently, if one states that an object is forbidden to him like a konam instead of like an offering [korban], the vow takes effect, as konam is a substitute term for the word korban (see 10a). Similarly, substitutes for the language of dedications are like dedications, substitutes for the language of oaths are like oaths, and substitutes for the language of nazirite vows are like nazirite vows. Therefore, if one declared a ḥerekh instead of a dedication [ḥerem], a shevuta instead of an oath [shevua], or proclaimed that he was becoming a nazik instead of a nazirite [nazir], his statement takes effect. With regard to one who says to another: I am avowed from you, or: I am separated from you, or: I am distanced from you, and he then says: That which I eat of yours, or: That which I taste of yours, even though he did not explicitly state that he is taking a vow or specify the nature of the vow, the object of his vow is nevertheless forbidden. His intention is understood based on his incomplete statement, known as an intimation of a vow, and his vow therefore takes effect. However, if he says: I am ostracized from you, which does not clearly declare any matter to be prohibited, Rabbi Akiva was uncertain about this halakha but was inclined to rule stringently about this and consider it a vow prohibiting the speaker from deriving benefit from his fellow. The mishna continues to explain the rules of intimations of vows. If an individual states that he accepts an obligation upon himself like the vows of the wicked, he has vowed with regard to becoming a nazirite, or bringing an offering, or taking an oath. This is considered a real formulation of a vow, just as the wicked customarily take vows. If he says: Like the vows of the virtuous, he has not said anything, because virtuous people do not generally take vows. If he says: Like their gift offerings, he has vowed with regard to becoming a nazirite or bringing an offering.
הָאוֹמֵר לַחֲבֵרוֹ, קוֹנָם קוֹנָח, קוֹנָס, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כִנּוּיִין לְקָרְבָּן. חֵרֶק חֵרֶךְ, חֵרֵף, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כִנּוּיִין לְחֵרֶם. נָזִיק נָזִיחַ, פָּזִיחַ, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כִנּוּיִין לִנְזִירוּת. שְׁבוּתָה, שְׁקוּקָה, נָדַר בְּמוֹתָא, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כִנּוּיִין לִשְׁבוּעָה: In the case of one who says to another that a certain object is konam, konaḥ, or konas, these expressions are substitutes for the term offering [korban], and the vow takes effect. Ḥerek, ḥerekh and ḥeref; these are substitutes for the term indicating a dedication [ḥerem] to the Temple treasury. Nazik, naziaḥ, and paziaḥ; these are substitutes for the term naziriteship [nazir]. Shevuta, shekuka, or one who vows with the term mota, these are substitutes for the term oath [shevua].
הָאוֹמֵר לֹא חֻלִּין לֹא אֹכַל לָךְ, לֹא כָשֵׁר, וְלֹא דְכֵי, טָהוֹר, וְטָמֵא, נוֹתָר, וּפִגּוּל, אָסוּר. כְּאִמְּרָא, כַּדִּירִין, כָּעֵצִים, כָּאִשִּׁים, כַּמִּזְבֵּחַ, כַּהֵיכָל, כִּירוּשָׁלָיִם, נָדַר בְּאֶחָד מִכָּל מְשַׁמְּשֵׁי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא הִזְכִּיר קָרְבָּן, הֲרֵי זֶה נָדַר בְּקָרְבָּן. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, הָאוֹמֵר יְרוּשָׁלַיִם, לֹא אָמַר כְּלוּם: If one says to another: That which I eat of yours shall be considered laḥullin, it is interpreted as though he said: La ḥullin, not non-sacred, and the food is thereby forbidden to him. Similarly, if he said that food shall be considered not valid or not dekhi, i.e., not ritually pure, or if he said the food shall be considered an offering that has become ritually impure, left over [notar], or piggul, i.e., an offering that was sacrificed with the intent to consume it after its appointed time, it is forbidden. If one says that food shall be considered like the lamb of the daily offering, like the animals designated as offerings and kept in special enclosures, like the wood of the altar, like the fires on the altar, like the altar, like the Sanctuary, or like Jerusalem, or if he took a vow with any of the accessories of the altar, although he did not explicitly mention that the food should be like an offering, it is considered a vow that associates a different item with an offering. Rabbi Yehuda says: One who says that an item shall be considered Jerusalem, instead of saying that it shall be considered like Jerusalem, has not said anything.
הָאוֹמֵר, קָרְבָּן, עוֹלָה, מִנְחָה, חַטָּאת, תּוֹדָה, שְׁלָמִים שֶׁאֵינִי אוֹכֵל לָךְ, אָסוּר. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה מַתִּיר. הַקָּרְבָּן, כְּקָרְבָּן, קָרְבָּן שֶׁאֹכַל לָךְ, אָסוּר. לְקָרְבָּן לֹא אֹכַל לָךְ, רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹסֵר. הָאוֹמֵר לַחֲבֵרוֹ, קוֹנָם פִּי הַמְדַבֵּר עִמָּךְ, יָדִי עוֹשָׂה עִמָּךְ, רַגְלִי מְהַלֶּכֶת עִמָּךְ, אָסוּר: With regard to one who says: An offering, a burnt-offering, a meal-offering, a sin-offering, a thanks-offering, or a peace-offering, and adds: That which I eat of yours, the vow takes effect and the food is forbidden. Rabbi Yehuda renders the food permitted in all these cases. If one says: The offering, like an offering, or an offering, and adds: That which I will eat of yours, the food is forbidden. If he says: That which I will not eat of your shall be for an offering, Rabbi Meir renders the food forbidden. One who says to another: It is konam for me for my mouth to speak with you, or: It is konam for me for my hand to work with you, or: It is konam for me for my foot to walk with you, it is prohibited for him to speak with, work with, or walk with the other individual.