Mishnah.org Logo

המשנה היומית של היום

נדרים ט׳:ב׳ - ט׳:ג׳

The Mishnah Yomi for Sunday, September 29, 2019 is נדרים ט׳:ב׳ - ט׳:ג׳

＜ היום הקודםהיוםלמחרת ＞

משנה א

Mishnayos Nedarim Perek 9 Mishnah 2

נדרים פרק ט׳ משנה ב׳

2
And Rabbi Eliezer further said: They may broach dissolution by asking about a new situation, but the Rabbis prohibit it. How might they broach dissolution by asking about a new situation? If one said: It is forbidden to me like an offering [konam] that I will therefore not derive benefit from so-and-so, and that person later became a scribe [sofer], and the one who took the vow now requires his services, or if the one forbidden by the vow was marrying off his son and prepared a feast for all the residents of his town, and the one that had taken the vow said: Had I known that he would become a scribe, or that he would be marrying off his son in the near future, I would not have vowed. The mishna cites another example of a new situation. If one said: Entering this house is konam for me, and that house became a synagogue, and he said: Had I known that it would become a synagogue, I would not have vowed, in this and all such cases Rabbi Eliezer permits the halakhic authority to use this as a basis for the dissolution of the vow, and the Rabbis prohibit it.
וְעוֹד אָמַר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, פּוֹתְחִין בְּנוֹלָד. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹסְרִין. כֵּיצַד. אָמַר, קוֹנָם שֶׁאֵינִי נֶהֱנֶה לְאִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי, וְנַעֲשָׂה סוֹפֵר, אוֹ שֶׁהָיָה מַשִּׂיא אֶת בְּנוֹ בְקָרוֹב, וְאָמַר, אִלּוּ הָיִיתִי יוֹדֵעַ שֶׁהוּא נַעֲשֶׂה סוֹפֵר אוֹ שֶׁהוּא מַשִּׂיא אֶת בְּנוֹ בְקָרוֹב, לֹא הָיִיתִי נוֹדֵר. קוֹנָם לְבַיִת זֶה שֶׁאֵינִי נִכְנָס, וְנַעֲשָׂה בֵית הַכְּנֶסֶת, וְאָמַר, אִלּוּ הָיִיתִי יוֹדֵעַ שֶׁהוּא נַעֲשֶׂה בֵית הַכְּנֶסֶת לֹא הָיִיתִי נוֹדֵר, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר מַתִּיר, וַחֲכָמִים אוֹסְרִין:
ב׳
ברטנורא

ועוד אמר רבי אליעזר – another leniency in making vows/Nedarim.

פותחין – in [the releasing from] vows with a נולד/a new situation (i.e., a vow may not be dissolved on grounds of lack of intent if the person who vowed failed to anticipate an unpredictable situation that would have led him to refrain from making the vow, though they can be dissolved if it is shown that they were not made with full intent and knowledge), as for example a thing which is not found and is a new situation and it became established as a new interpretation after he had vowed but if he had known at the time of the vow this thing would be established as a new interpretation, he would not have made the vow.

וחכמים אוסרים – that the reason of regret is because through regret, the vow is uprooted from its essence, and for a thing that is not found, it doesn’t become a vow that is uprooted/removed from its essence, but for this, he would not have allowed [himself] from making a vow, for he would have thought that it would not ever come to pass.

ונעשה סופר – a Sage and everyone needs him.

או שהיה משיא את בנו ברקוב לא הייתי נודר – and for example, that he took a vow for a period of time and didn’t think that he would marry off his son within that time, and that he would have to go to the wedding of his son. But the Halakha is according to the Sages.

ועוד אמר רבי אליעזר. קולא אחרת בנדרים:

פותחין. בנדרים בנולד, כגון דבר שאינו מצוי ונולד ונתחדש אחר שנדר ואילו ידע בשעת הנדר שיתחדש דבר זה לא היה נודר:

וחכמים אוסרים. דטעמא דחרטה, משום שע״י חרטה נעקר הנדר מעיקרו, ובדבר שאינו מצוי אינו נעשה נדר עקור מעיקרו, כי בשביל זה לא היה מניח מלידור כי היה סבור שלא יבוא לעולם:

ונעשה סופר. ת״ח והכל צריכים לו:

או שהיה משיא את בנו בקרוב לא הייתי נודר. וכגון שנדר לזמן ולא היה סבור שישיא את בנו בתוך אותו זמן ויצטרך לילך לחופת בנו. והלכה כחכמים:

משנה ב

Mishnayos Nedarim Perek 9 Mishnah 3

נדרים פרק ט׳ משנה ג׳

3
As a continuation of the opinion of the Rabbis in the previous mishna that they may not broach dissolution of a vow based on a new situation, Rabbi Meir says: There are matters that are, at first glance, like a new situation but are not in fact like a new situation, and the Rabbis do not concede to him. How so? For example, one said: Marrying so-and-so is konam for me, as her father is evil, and they told him that her father died, or that he repented. Or he said: Entering this house is konam for me, as there is a bad dog inside it, or a snake inside it, and they told him that the dog died, or that the snake was killed. This is at first glance perceived like a new situation, and yet it is not in fact like a new situation, and this claim may be used to broach dissolution. But the Rabbis do not concede to him.
רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר, יֵשׁ דְּבָרִים שֶׁהֵן כְּנוֹלָד וְאֵינָן כְּנוֹלָד, וְאֵין חֲכָמִים מוֹדִים לוֹ. כֵּיצַד. אָמַר, קוֹנָם שֶׁאֵינִי נוֹשֵׂא אֶת פְּלוֹנִית, שֶׁאָבִיהָ רָע. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, מֵת אוֹ שֶׁעָשָׂה תְשׁוּבָה. קוֹנָם לְבַיִת זֶה שֶׁאֵינִי נִכְנָס, שֶׁהַכֶּלֶב רַע בְּתוֹכוֹ אוֹ שֶׁהַנָּחָשׁ בְּתוֹכוֹ. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, מֵת הַכֶּלֶב אוֹ שֶׁנֶּהֱרַג הַנָּחָשׁ, הֲרֵי הֵן כְּנוֹלָד וְאֵינָן כְּנוֹלָד, וְאֵין חֲכָמִים מוֹדִים לוֹ:
ג׳
ברטנורא

יש דברים שהם כנולד – they appear like a new situation/נולד

ואינם כנולד – and he opens with them [as a means of getting a person to regret that he vowed].

אמרו לו מת וכו' – even though that death is like a new situation, since he specified at the time of his vow on account of what he is vowing, it is made as if he is making his vow dependent upon a thing, as if he specified all the time that her father is alive, therefore, it is not a new situation. But a it is not a complete condition, therefore, it requires renunciation. But in the Jerusalem Talmud it is proven that he doesn’t require renunciation [of the vow]. And so explained Maimonides (see The Laws of Vows/הלכות נדרים, Chapter 8, Halakhot 1-2).

יש דברים שהם כנולד. נראין כנולד:

ואינן כנולד. ופותחין בהם:

אמרו לו מת וכו׳ ואע״ג דמיתה נולד הוי, הואיל ופירש בשעת נדרו בעבור מה היה נודר, נעשה כתולה נדרו בדבר, כאילו פירש כל זמן שאביה קיים, הלכך לא הוי נולד. אבל תנאי גמור לא הוי, הילכך צריך התרה. ובירושלמי מוכח שא״צ התרה. וכן פירש רמב״ם:

שאלות נפוצות על משנה יומית

עדיין יש לכם שאלה? צרו קשר