Mishnayos Nedarim Perek 1 Mishnah 1
Change text layout:
נדרים פרק א׳ משנה א׳
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.
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:
Bartenura
כל כנויי נדרים כנדרים. בגמרא מוקמינן דרישא דמתניתין חסורי מחסרא והכי קתני, כל ידות נדרים כנדרים, כל כנויי נדרים כנדרים. אלו הן ידות נדרים האומר לחבירו מודר אני ממך מופרש אני ממך וכו׳. אלו הן כנויי נדרים קונם קונח קונס וכו׳. ידות נדרים, כמו בית יד של כלי שאוחזין אותו בו, כך ידות נדרים שבהם הנדרים נאחזים. כנויי נדרים, כמו המכנה שם לחבירו [בבא מציעא נ״ח:], שאינו עיקרו של שם:
מודר אני ממך. אם אמר אחד מלשונות הללו, מודר אני ממך שאיני אוכל לך ושאיני טועם לך, או מופרש אני ממך שאיני אוכל לך ושאיני טועם לך, או מרוחק אני ממך שאיני אוכל לך ואיני טועם לך, הוא ידות נדרים ואסור לאכול ולטעום עמו. אבל אם אמר לו מודר אני ממך בלבד, אין במשמעות דבריו אלא שלא ידבר עמו. ומופרש אני ממך בלבד, משמע שלא ישא ויתן עמו. ומרוחק אני ממך בלבד, משמע שלא ישב בארבע אמותיו. ואינו אסור לאכול עמו אא״כ פירש ואמר עם כל אחד מלשונות הללו, שאיני אוכל לך ושאיני טועם לך:
רבי עקיבא היה חוכך וכו׳ כלומר מחכך שפתיו זו בזו ולא רצה לאסור בפירוש, אבל היה נראה מדעתו שהיה אוסר:
כנדרי רשעים נדר בנזיר ובקרבן ובשבועה. אם אמר הרי עלי כנדרי רשעים שנדריהם נזיר וקרבן שבועה אם אוכל ככר זו, ועבר ואכלה, חייב להיות נזיר שלשים יום ולהביא קרבן עולה וחייב מלקות כעובר על שבועת ביטוי, שהרי הזכיר בנדרו נזיר וקרבן ושבועה. ומה שאמר כנדרי רשעים, לפי שהרשעים הם שנודרים ונשבעים, לא הכשרים, שהכשרים יראים שלא לעבור על בל תאחר ונזהרים שלא להוציא שבועה מפיהם, ולפיכך כנדרי כשרים לא אמר כלום:
כנדבותם נדר בנזיר ובקרבן. אם אמר כנדבות כשרים הריני נזיר והרי זה קרבן אם אוכל ככר זו, ואכלה, חייב בנזיר ובקרבן, שהכשרים פעמים נודרים בנזיר לאפרושי מאיסור. ומתנדבים בקרבן שמביאים קרבנם לפתח העזרה ומקדישין אותה שם כדי שלא יבואו בה לידי מכשול. ונדבה היא כשיאמר הרי זו. ונדר הרי עלי. לפיכך הכשרים מתנדבים אבל אינם נודרים, כי היכי דלא ליתו לידי תקלה:
In the Gemara (Tractate Nedarim 2b), we maintain that our Mishnah is deficient and should be read as follows: all intimations/ידות (i.e., a term for words uttered by a person conveying a certain intention that can be understood from the context or from the general subject of the statement, although it is not clearly and explicitly expressed – are intimations regarded as explicit statements) of vows are like vows; all substitutes/כנויי for the language of vows (i.e., and it is obvious that he intended his statement to be a vow, his words assume that status) are like vows. Which are intimations of vows? A person who says to his fellow: “I am forbidden by vow from you,” “I am separated from you,” etc. Which are substitutions of vows? “A person who states (see Mishnah 2 of this chapter): קונם/Konam, קונח/Konakh, קונס/Konas, etc., (i.e., a specific type of vow whereby one prohibits himself from eating something or deriving benefit from something or someone by saying: “That person or object is to a KONAM;” the word KONAM is a substitute for the Hebrew word for offering/קרבן – and is used in order to avoid uttering that word). The intimations of vows/ידות נדרים are like the handle of a utensil that one holds it by, so are intimations of vows by which vows are held. Substitutes for vows, like [Tractate Bava Metzia 58b] when one calls his neighbor by a nickname which is not the essence of the name [of that person].
מודר אני ממך – if he said one of these linguistic formulations: “I am forbidden by vow from you that I don’t eat your [food], or/and I taste your [food],” or “I am separated from you that I don’t eat your [food], or/and if I taste your [food],” or “I am distanced from you that I don’t eat your [food] or/and I don’t taste your [food],” this is an intimation of vows and it is forbidden to eat or to taste with him. But if he said to him: “I am forbidden by vow” alone, there is no implication in his words other than he doesn’t speak with him. And “I am separated from you” alone, implies that he will not engage in business with him, and “I am distanced from you” alone, implies that he will not sit within his four cubits, and does not prohibit eating with him unless he specified and stated with one of these linguistic formulations, “that I don’t eat [food] with you,” or “I don’t taste anything with you.”
רבי עקיבא היה חוכך וכו' (had some hesitation about deciding in favor of greater stringency) – meaning to say, rubbed/scratched his lips on against the other, but did not want to forbid explicitly, but it had appeared from his temperament/mind that it was forbidden.
כנדרי רשעים נדר בנזיר ובקרבן ובשבועה – if he said: “May this be upon me like the vows of wicked people whose vows in the case of a Nazir or in bringing a sacrifice or in taking of an oath if I eat this loaf, and he transgressed and ate it, he is liable to become a Nazir for thity days and to bring a sacrifice of a burnt offering and would liable for flogging/stripes like one who transgresses an oath on a statement (i.e., an oath taken by a person to reinforce a promise or an obligation or o confirm he veracity of a story –he brings a sacrifice based upon his financial situation/קרבן עולה ויורד ) because he mentioned in his oath the Nazir, and/or a sacrifice and/or an oath. But when he stated, “like the vows of the wicked,” since he wicked are those who make vows and take oaths, not the suitable people, for he suitable ones fear not to transgress (Deuteronomy 23:22): “[When you make a vow to the LORD your God,] do not put off fulfilling it, [for the LORD your God will require it of you, and you will have incurred guilt],” and they (i.e., the suitable/appropriate people) are warned not to bring forth an oath from their lips, and therefore “like the vows of the suitable/appropriate [people],” he has said nothing whatsoever.
וכנדבותם נדר נזיר ובקרבן (as their free-will offerings – he has made a binding vow in the case of a Nazir or in the case of bringing an offering) – if he said, “like the free-will offerings of the suitable/appropriate [people], I will be a Nazir or this is an offering if I eat this loaf,” and he consumed it, he is liable regarding becoming a Nazir, or in bringing a sacrifice, for the suitable/appropriate people sometimes make vows of becoming a Nazir in order to separate from prohibition. But when they make a free-will donation of a sacrifice that they bring their offering to the entrance of the Temple courtyard and sanctify it there in order that they will now come through it as a hindrance/stumbling-block. And the free-will offering is when he says, “May this be,” or “A vow be upon me.” Therefore, the worthy people make a free-will offering but do not make a vow, in order that one may not be led to commit an offernse through it.