Nedarim 20aנדרים כ׳ א
The William Davidson Talmudתלמוד מהדורת ויליאם דוידסון
Toggle Reader Menu Display Settings
20aכ׳ א

מתני׳ נדר בחרם ואמר לא נדרתי אלא בחרמו של ים בקרבן ואמר לא נדרתי אלא בקרבנות של מלכים

MISHNA: One who took a vow by associating an item with a dedication [ḥerem], saying: This item is hereby forbidden to me like an item dedicated to the Temple, and then said: I took a vow only with the intention that it would be like a sea net [ḥermo shel yam] that is used to catch fish; or one who took a vow by associating an item with an offering, and then said: I took a vow only with reference to offerings to kings, i.e., a gift for a king, not an offering to God.

הרי עצמי קרבן ואמר לא נדרתי אלא בעצם שהנחתי לי להיות נודר בו: קונם אשתי נהנית לי ואמר לא נדרתי אלא באשתי הראשונה שגירשתי

Or one who said: I am hereby an offering myself [atzmi], and then said: I took a vow only with reference to a bone [etzem] that I set aside for myself to vow with, as atzmi means both myself and my bone, i.e., he set aside a bone so as to pretend to take a vow upon himself; or one who said: Deriving benefit from me is konam for my wife, and then said: I took a vow only with regard to my first wife whom I divorced, not with regard to my current wife.

על כולן אין נשאלין להם ואם נשאלו עונשין אותן ומחמירין עליהן דברי רבי מאיר

For all of the above vows, those who took them do not need to request of a halakhic authority to dissolve them, as the speaker interpreted the vows in a manner that caused them not to take effect at all. However, if they requested dissolution, apparently due to their being uncertain of their explanations, the court punishes them and treats them stringently and the vows are not dissolved. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir.

וחכמים אומרים פותחין להן פתח ממקום אחר ומלמדין אותן כדי שלא ינהגו קלות ראש בנדרים:

And the Rabbis say: These vows are not treated stringently. Rather, dissolution is broached with them by suggesting a different extenuation, i.e., the halakhic authority suggests extenuating circumstances that undermine the vow but do not pertain to its wording. And we teach them that they should not take this kind of vow in the future, in order that they will not take vows lightly.

גמ׳ הא גופא קשיא אמרת אין נשאלין להן והדר תני אם נשאלו עונשין אותן ומחמירין עליהן

GEMARA: This matter is itself difficult. On the one hand, you said they do not need to request to dissolve them, and then it is taught that if they requested dissolution, the court punishes them and treats them stringently, i.e., the vows took effect and the vows are not dissolved.

אמר רב יהודה הכי קתני וכולן אין צריכין שאלה במה דברים אמורים בתלמיד חכם אבל בעם הארץ שבא לישאל עונשין אותו ומחמירין עליו

Rav Yehuda said that this is what the mishna is teaching: All of these vows do not need a request. However, in what case is this statement said? In the case of a Torah scholar, who knows that these vows do not take effect, and he obviously did not intend for them to take effect in the first place. How-ever, in the case of an ignoramus who comes to request dissolution of the vow, the court punishes him and treats him stringently.

בשלמא מחמירין דלא פתחינן ליה בחרטה אלא עונשין היכי דמי

The Gemara asks: Granted, the court treats him stringently in that the halakhic authorities do not broach dissolution with him merely by means of regret; rather, extenuating circumstances must be found. However, what are the circumstances in which the court punishes him?

כדתניא מי שנזר ועבר על נזירותו אין נזקקין לו עד שינהוג בו איסור כימים שנהג בהן היתר דברי רבי יהודה אמר רבי יוסי במה דברים אמורים בנזירות מועטת אבל בנזירות מרובה דיו שלושים יום

The Gemara answers that the circumstances are as it is taught in a baraita: With regard to one who vowed to be a nazirite and violated his naziriteship, the halakhic authority does not attend to him to dissolve his vow until he observes the prohibitions of naziriteship for the same number of days in which he behaved with permissiveness concerning the restrictions of a nazirite. This is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Yosei said: In what case is this statement, that he must observe naziriteship for a period of time corresponding to his vow, said? It is said in the case of a short term of naziriteship, which is not longer than the minimum thirty days. However, in the case of a long term of naziriteship it is enough for him to observe it for thirty days, even if he violated it for a greater number of days. This explains the punishment mentioned in the mishna: An ignoramus who requests the dissolution of his vow must first observe the vow for a certain period of time.

אמר רב יוסף הואיל ואמרי רבנן אין נזקקים לו בי דינא דמזדקקי לא עביד שפיר רב אחא בר יעקב אומר משמתינן ליה:

Rav Yosef said: Since the Sages say that the halakhic authority does not attend to him, a court that does attend to him and dissolves his vow immediately is not acting properly. Rav Aḥa bar Yaakov says: A halakhic authority who dissolves the vow prematurely is excommunicated.

וחכמים אומרים פותחין לו פתח כו': תנא לעולם אל תהי רגיל בנדרים שסופך למעול בשבועות ואל תהי רגיל אצל עם הארץ שסופך להאכילך טבלים אל תהי רגיל אצל כהן עם הארץ שסופך להאכילך תרומה ואל תרבה שיחה עם האשה שסופך לבוא לידי ניאוף

§ It is stated in the mishna that the Rabbis say: Dissolution is broached with him by suggesting a different extenuation, and he is taught not to take this kind of vow so that he will not take vows lightly. It is taught in a baraita: Never be accustomed to taking vows, because ultimately you will disregard them, and you will even abuse oaths, which are more grave. And do not regularly be around an ignoramus, because ultimately he will feed you untithed produce, as he is not careful to tithe. Do not regularly be by an ignorant priest, because ultimately he will feed you teruma due to his close relationship with you, and teruma is forbidden to a non-priest. And do not talk extensively with a woman, because ultimately you will come to adultery.

רבי אחא ברבי יאשיה אומר כל הצופה בנשים סופו בא לידי עבירה וכל המסתכל בעקבה של אשה הויין לו בנים שאינן מהוגנין אמר רב יוסף ובאשתו נדה אמר רבי שמעון בן לקיש עקבה דקתני במקום הטינופת שהוא מכוון כנגד העקב

Rabbi Aḥa, son of Rabbi Yoshiya, says: Anyone who watches women will ultimately come to sin, and anyone who looks at the heel of a woman will have indecent children as a punishment. Rav Yosef said: And this relates to all women, including his wife when she has the status of a menstruating woman. Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: The heel of a woman that is mentioned is not the heel of the foot, but the place of uncleanliness, i.e., the genitalia, and it is called a heel as a euphemism, as it is situated opposite the heel.

תניא בעבור תהיה יראתו על פניכם זו בושה לבלתי תחטאו מלמד שהבושה מביאה לידי יראת חטא מיכן אמרו סימן יפה באדם שהוא ביישן אחרים אומרים כל אדם המתבייש לא במהרה הוא חוטא ומי שאין לו בושת פנים בידוע שלא עמדו אבותיו על הר סיני

§ It is taught in a baraita: “That His fear may be upon your faces” (Exodus 20:17); this is referring to shame, as shame causes one to blush. “That you not sin” (Exodus 20:17) teaches that shame leads to fear of sin. From here the Sages said: It is a good sign in a person that he is one who experiences shame. Others say: Any person who experiences shame will not quickly sin, and conversely, one who does not have the capacity to be shamefaced, it is known that his forefathers did not stand at Mount Sinai.

אמר רבי יוחנן בן דהבאי ארבעה דברים סחו לי מלאכי השרת חיגרין מפני מה הויין מפני שהופכים את שולחנם אילמים מפני מה הויין מפני שמנשקים על אותו מקום חרשים מפני מה הויין מפני שמספרים בשעת תשמיש סומין מפני מה הויין מפני שמסתכלים באותו מקום

§ Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Dehavai said: The ministering angels told me four matters: For what reason do lame people come into existence? It is because their fathers overturn their tables, i.e., they engage in sexual intercourse in an atypical way. For what reason do mute people come into existence? It is because their fathers kiss that place of nakedness. For what reason do deaf people come into existence? It is because their parents converse while engaging in sexual intercourse. For what reason do blind people come into existence? It is because their fathers stare at that place.

ורמינהו שאלו את אימא שלום מפני מה

And the Gemara raises a contradiction: Imma Shalom, the wife of Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus, was asked: For what reason