Mishnah.org Logo

המשנה היומית של היום

נדרים ח׳:ז׳ - ט׳:א׳

The Mishnah Yomi for Monday, September 30, 2019 is נדרים ח׳:ז׳ - ט׳:א׳

＜ היום הקודםהיוםלמחרת ＞

משנה א

Mishnayos Nedarim Perek 8 Mishnah 7

נדרים פרק ח׳ משנה ז׳

7
In the case of one who says to another: Benefiting from you is konam for me, i.e., I am prohibited from deriving benefit from you, if you do not come and take for your son one kor of wheat and two barrels of wine as a gift, this other individual can dissolve his vow without the consent of a halakhic authority. This is because he can say to him: Did you say your vow for any reason other than due to my honor, in order to convince me to accept a gift for my son? This is my honor, that I refrain from accepting the gift, and consequently the vow is annulled. And, so too, in the case of one who says to another: Benefiting from me is konam for you, i.e., you are prohibited from deriving benefit from me, if you do not come and give my son one kor of wheat and two barrels of wine, Rabbi Meir says: It is prohibited for the other individual to benefit from the speaker until he gives the gifts to his son. However, the Rabbis say: Even this individual who took the vow can dissolve his own vow without the consent of a halakhic authority. This is because he can say to him: I hereby consider it as though I have received the gift. If an individual was urging another to marry the daughter of his sister, and in order to deflect the pressure, the other man said: Benefiting from me is konam for her forever, i.e., she is prohibited from deriving any benefit from me forever, and, so too, if there is one who divorces his wife and says: Benefiting from me is konam for my wife forever, these women are permitted to derive benefit from him, as this man intended to take this vow only for the purpose of prohibiting marriage between them, but not to prohibit all forms of benefit. Similarly, if one was urging another to eat with him, and the latter said: Entering your house is konam for me, as is tasting even a drop of cold liquid of yours, the individual who took the vow is nevertheless permitted to enter his house and to drink a cold beverage of his. This is because this individual intended to take this vow only for the purpose of eating and drinking a meal, but not to prohibit himself from entering the house entirely or from drinking in small quantities (Commentary on Nedarim).
הָאוֹמֵר לַחֲבֵרוֹ קוֹנָם שֶׁאֲנִי נֶהֱנֶה לְךָ אִם אֵין אַתָּה בָא וְנוֹטֵל לְבָנֶיךָ כּוֹר אֶחָד שֶׁל חִטִּין וּשְׁתֵּי חָבִיּוֹת שֶׁל יַיִן, הֲרֵי זֶה יָכוֹל לְהָפֵר אֶת נִדְרוֹ שֶׁלֹּא עַל פִּי חָכָם, וְיֹאמַר לוֹ, כְּלוּם אָמַרְתָּ אֶלָּא מִפְּנֵי כְבוֹדִי, זֶהוּ כְבוֹדִי. וְכֵן הָאוֹמֵר לַחֲבֵרוֹ קוֹנָם שֶׁאַתָּה נֶהֱנֶה לִי אִם אֵין אַתָּה בָא וְנוֹתֵן לִבְנִי כּוֹר אֶחָד שֶׁל חִטִּין וּשְׁתֵּי חָבִיּוֹת שֶׁל יַיִן, רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר, אָסוּר עַד שֶׁיִּתֵּן. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, אַף זֶה יָכוֹל לְהָפֵר אֶת נִדְרוֹ שֶׁלֹּא עַל פִּי חָכָם, וְיֹאמַר לוֹ, הֲרֵי אֲנִי כְאִלּוּ הִתְקַבָּלְתִּי. הָיוּ מְסָרְבִין בּוֹ לָשֵׂאת בַּת אֲחוֹתוֹ וְאָמַר קוֹנָם שֶׁהִיא נֶהֱנֵית לִי לְעוֹלָם, וְכֵן הַמְגָרֵשׁ אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ וְאָמַר קוֹנָם אִשְׁתִּי נֶהֱנֵית לִי לְעוֹלָם, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ מֻתָּרוֹת לֵהָנוֹת לוֹ, שֶׁלֹּא נִתְכַּוֵּן זֶה אֶלָּא לְשׁוּם אִישׁוּת. הָיָה מְסָרֵב בַּחֲבֵרוֹ שֶׁיֹּאכַל אֶצְלוֹ, אָמַר קוֹנָם לְבֵיתְךָ שֶׁאֵינִי נִכְנָס, טִפַּת צוֹנֵן שֶׁאֵינִי טוֹעֵם לָךְ, מֻתָּר לִכָּנֵס לְבֵיתוֹ וְלִשְׁתּוֹת מִמֶּנּוּ צוֹנֵן, שֶׁלֹּא נִתְכַּוֵּן זֶה אֶלָּא לְשׁוּם אֲכִילָה וּשְׁתִיָּה:
ז׳
ברטנורא

זהו כבודי – that I will support my child from my own [possessions].

מסרבין בו לשאת את בת אחותו – they were urging hin that he should marry the daughter of his sister because she is his age and we state [Tractate Yevamot 62b] that a person who marries the daughter of his sister, upon him Scripture states (Isaiah 58:7.9): “And not to ignore your own kin…Then when you call, the LORD will answer.”

שלא נתכוין זה אלא לשם אכילה ושתיה – But however,also eating and drinking are permitted, for since he did not state from his mouth “eating and drinking” and wih vows, we require that he issue it from his lips, as it is written (Numbers 30:3): “he must carry out all that has crossed his lips (i.e., literally, come out of his mouth),” and it is not similar to the first clause [of the Mishnah], for marriage is included within the benefits that he has.

זהו כבודי. שאפרנס בני משלי:

היו מסרבין בו לשאת את בת אחותו. מפצירין בו שישא את בת אחותו מפני שהיא בת גילו ואמרינן [יבמות ס״ב.] הנושא את בת אחותו עליו הכתוב אומר (ישעיהו נ״ח:ט׳) ומבשרך לא תתעלם אז תקרא וה׳ יענה:

שלא נתכוין זה אלא לשם אכילה ושתיה. ומיהו גם באכילה ושתיה מותר, הואיל ולא הוציא מפיו אכילה ושתיה, דבנדרים בעינן שיוציא בשפתיו, כדכתיב (במדבר ל׳:ג׳) ככל היוצא מפיו יעשה. ולא דמי לרישא, דאישות בכלל הנאות איתיה:

משנה ב

Mishnayos Nedarim Perek 9 Mishnah 1

נדרים פרק ט׳ משנה א׳

1
Rabbi Eliezer says: When halakhic authorities are approached with regard to the dissolution of a vow, they may broach dissolution with a person who took a vow by raising the issue of how taking the vow ultimately degraded the honor of his father and mother, asking him the following: Had you known that your parents would experience public shame due to your lax attitude toward your vow, would you still have taken the vow? But the Rabbis disagree with Rabbi Eliezer and prohibit broaching dissolution of a vow with this particular question. To support the opinion of the Rabbis, Rabbi Tzadok said: Instead of broaching dissolution with him by raising the issue of the honor of his father and mother, let them broach dissolution with him by raising the issue of the honor of the Omnipresent. They should point out that a vow taken in the name of God lessens the honor of God, so they could ask him: If you had known that your vow would diminish the honor of God, would you have taken your vow? And if so, if this is a valid method of broaching dissolution, there are no vows. Nevertheless, the Rabbis concede to Rabbi Eliezer with regard to a vow concerning a matter that is between him and his father and mother, that they may broach dissolution with him by raising the issue of the honor of his father and mother, as in this case the extenuation is connected to this particular vow.
רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, פּוֹתְחִין לָאָדָם בִּכְבוֹד אָבִיו וְאִמּוֹ. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹסְרִין. אָמַר רַבִּי צָדוֹק, עַד שֶׁפּוֹתְחִין לוֹ בִכְבוֹד אָבִיו וְאִמּוֹ, יִפְתְּחוּ לוֹ בִכְבוֹד הַמָּקוֹם, אִם כֵּן אֵין נְדָרִים. וּמוֹדִים חֲכָמִים לְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בְּדָבָר שֶׁבֵּינוֹ לְבֵין אָבִיו וְאִמּוֹ, שֶׁפּוֹתְחִין לוֹ בִּכְבוֹד אָבִיו וְאִמּוֹ:
א׳
ברטנורא

רבי אליעזר אומר פותחין לאדם בכבוד אביו ואמו – as, for example, that they would say to him: “if you would know that the world would say to your father and your mother, ‘see the rearing of your children that you raised, how much your children are lax in the taking of vows’ and it would be found that they despise their honor (i.e., that of their parents), you would not ever take a vow.”

וחכמים אוסרין – for we suspect that perhaps he would lie, for he is embarrassed to state that he would not allow him from taking a vow because of their honor, and it is found that the Sage pardons this vow without regret and there is no need to find for him an opening [to release him from his vow] at the time that he feels sorry on his own from the beginning.

יפחתו לו בכבוד המקום – he (Rabbi Tzadok) is raising an objection on the matter of Rabbi Eliezer, for just as that you open [to elicit regret] with the honor of his father and mother, and we don’t suspect that perhaps he will lie, let him open [to elicit regret] with the honor of “the Place” (i.e., God) and they will inform him, that if you had known that you would be called wicket before “the Place” (i.e., God), you would never take a vow? But the Sages said to him according Rabbi Eliezer, that from here, you will not find you will not support them, for even Rabbi Eliezer admits to this, specifically that he may lie, for a person a person is not so impudent that he would not set aside something for the honor of “the Place” (i.e., God), and it is not similar to that of Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel (see Talmud Nedarim 22a) who opened [to elicit regret] for that person (Proverbs 12:18): “There is blunt talk like sword thrusts [But the speech of the wise is healing].” That there he says to him from the Biblical verses like that which is taught in our Mishnah (see Tractate Nedarim, Chapter 9, Mishnah 4) that he is transgressing on (Leviticus 19:17): “You shall not hate your kinfolk in your heart,” (Leviticus 19:18): “You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against your countrymen.” But when we mention to him the honor of God (i.e., המקום ), then he certainly is lying. And the Halakha is according to the Sages.

שבינו לבין אביו ואמו – as, for example when he made his father take a vow from his possessions,

רבי אליעזר אומר פותחין לאדם בכבוד אביו ואמו. כגון שיאמרו לו אילו היית יודע שיאמרו העולם לאביך ולאמך ראו גידולים שגדלתם, כמה בנכם קל בנדרים, ונמצאת מזלזל בכבודם, כלום היית נודר:

וחכמים אוסרין. דחיישינן שמא משקר, כי הוא בוש לומר שלא היה מניח מלידור בשביל כבודם, ונמצא שחכם מתיר נדר זה בלא חרטה. ומיירי שהוא אינו מתחרט מעיקרא מעצמו, דקיי״ל פותחין בחרטה ואין צריך למצוא לו פתח בשעה שהוא מתחרט מעצמו מעיקרא:

יפתחו לו בכבוד המקום. על מלתיה דר״א קא פריך, כי היכי דפותחין בכבוד אביו ואמו ולא חיישינן שמא ישקר, יפתחו לו נמי בכבוד המקום ויאמרו לו אילו היית יודע שתקרא רע לפני המקום כלום היית נודר. ואמרו לו חכמים דר״א, מהא לא תסייען, דאף ר״א מודה בהא, דודאי ישקר, דלא חציף אינש כולי האי דיאמר שלא היה מניח בשביל כבוד המקום, ולא דמי לרשב״ג דפתח לההוא גברא יש בוטה כמדקרות חרב כו׳. דהתם אומר לו מן הפסוקים כהך דתנן במתניתין שעובר על לא תשנא ולא תקום ולא תטור. אבל כשמזכירין לו כבוד המקום אז ודאי משקר. והלכה כחכמים:

שבינו לבין אביו ואמו. כגון שהדיר את אביו מנכסיו:

שאלות נפוצות על משנה יומית

עדיין יש לכם שאלה? צרו קשר