Previous Folio / Nedarim Directory / Tractate List / Navigate Site

Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Nedarim

Folio 20a

MISHNAH. IF ONE VIEWS BY HEREM,1  AND THEN SAYS, 'I VOWED ONLY BY A FISHING NET',2  BY KORBAN, AND THEN SAYS, I VOWED ONLY BY ROYAL GIFTS',3  [IF HE SAYS] BEHOLD! [I MYSELF] 'AZMI BE A KORBAN',4  AND THEN STATES. 'I VOWED ONLY BY THE EZEM [BONE] WHICH I KEEP FOR THE PURPOSE OF VOWING';5  [IF ONE SAYS,] 'KONAM BE ANY BENEFIT MY WIFE HAS OF ME, AND THEN DECLARES, I SPOKE ONLY OF MY FIRST WIFE, WHOM I HAVE DIVORCED (IF NONE OF THESE [VOWS] DO THEY REQUIRE TO SEEK ABSOLUTION.6  BUT IF A REQUEST FOR ABSOLUTION IS PREFERRED, THEY ARE PUNISHED AND TREATED STRICTLY: THIS IS THE VIEW OF R. MEIR, BUT THE SAGES SAY: THEY ARE GIVEN AN OPENING [FOR REGRET] (IN OTHER GROUNDS.7  AND THEY ARE ADMONISHED SO THAT THEY DO NOT TREAT VOWS WITH LEVITY.

GEMARA. This is self-contradictory: You say, OF NONE OF THESE VOWS DO THEY REQUIRE TO SEEK ABSOLUTION; and then you continue: IF A REQUEST FOR ABSOLUTION IS PREFERRED, THEY ARE PUNISHED AND TREATED STRICTLY?8  — Said Rab Judah, This is its meaning; OF NONE OF THESE VOWS DO THEY REQUIRE TO SEEK ABSOLUTION. This applies however only to a scholar;9  and when 'am ha-arez10  applies for absolution, he is punished and treated strictly. Now 'TREATED STRICTLY' is well: it means that we do not suggest an opening for regret.11  But how are they punished? — As it was taught: If one vowed neziroth and then violated his vow: his case is not examined unless he observes his vow for the full period that he had violated it: this is the view of R. Judah. R. Jose said: This applies only to short neziroth [i.e., thirty days]; but in the case of a long period of neziroth, thirty days are sufficient.12  R. Joseph said: Since the Rabbis have decreed, his case is not to be examined, if a Beth din13  does attend to it [before time], it does not act right [and must be reprimanded]. R. Aha b. Jacob said: It is banned.14

BUT THE SAGES SAY: THEY ARE GIVEN AN OPENING [FOR] REGRET etc. It was taught: Never make a practice of vowing, for ultimately you will trespass in the matter of oaths,15  and do not frequent an 'am ha-arez, for eventually he will give you tebalim;16  and do not associate with a priest, an 'am ha-arez, for ultimately he will give you terumah to eat;17  and do not converse much with women, as this will ultimately lead you to unchastity.18  R. Aha of the school of19  R. Josiah said: He who gazes at a woman eventually comes to sin, and he who looks even at a woman's heel will beget degenerate children. R. Joseph said: This applies even to one's own wife when she is a niddah.20  R. Simeon b. Lakish said: 'Heel' that is stated means the unclean part, which is directly opposite the heel.

It was taught: [And Moses said unto the people, fear not: for God is come to prove you,] that his fear may be before your faces:21  By this is meant shamefacedness; that ye sin not22  — this teaches that shamefacedness leads to fear of sin: hence it was said23  that it is a good sign if a man is shamefaced.24  Others say: No man who experiences shame25  will easily sin; and he who is not shamefaced — it is certain that his ancestors were not present at Mount Sinai.

R. Johanan b. Dahabai said: The Ministering Angels told me four things: People are born lame because they [sc. their parents] overturned their table [i.e., practised unnatural cohabitation]; dumb, because they kiss 'that place'; deaf, because they converse during cohabitation; blind, because they look at 'that place'. But this contradicts the following: Imma Shalom26  was asked: Why are

Original footnotes renumbered. See Structure of the Talmud Files
  1. Viz., 'This be herem unto me'.
  2. Herem meaning net too; i.e., 'I did not vow at all'.
  3. Korban meaning an offering, and hence applicable to gifts or tribute to the king.
  4. Implying that he had consecrated himself to the Lord and needed redemption; v. Lev. XXVII, 1-8. (Rashi). [Or: May I myself be forbidden to you as korban (Ran).]
  5. [In order to give the impression to the hearer that I am making a vow.]
  6. Being invalid, according to the meaning assigned to them.
  7. Lit., 'from another place'. I.e., they cannot obtain absolution on the plea that thy had attached an unusual significance to their words, for the phrase cf. supra 13b.
  8. The first implies that they are altogether invalid, whereas the second implies that they are valid vows.
  9. Who is careful about making vows.
  10. V. Glos.
  11. When one desired absolution, the Rabbi usually suggested grounds for granting it; here, however, such aid was to be withheld.
  12. E.g., if he had vowed to be a nazir a hundred days, violated his vow for fifty days, and then desired absolution, it is enough to observe thirty days only, and then he is absolved. Here too he is punished in this way.
  13. Lit., 'house of law': Jewish court of law. Any three persons could constitute themselves a Beth din, by request, and it is to such a constituted body of laymen that this dictum probably refers. [Absolution could he granted either by one Rabbi or by three laymen; infra.]
  14. On the term used shamta, v. supra p. 17, n. 2.
  15. Which are more stringent.
  16. Tebel, pl. tebalim, produce from which no tithes have been set aside.
  17. According to this reading the exhortation is to a zar. The Ran however reads: 'unclean terumah', which was forbidden even to a priest, in which case the exhortation is to a priest.
  18. The present statement is not meant to be derogatory to women, who were held in high esteem, but conditioned by the prevailing laxity in sexual matters which characterised many of the ancient peoples. V. Herford Talmud and Apocrypha, pp. 163ff.
  19. Berabbi or Beribbi is a contraction of Be Rab, belonging to the school of an eminent teacher (Jast.).
  20. A woman during her period of menstruation and seven days following.
  21. Ex. XX, 17.
  22. Ibid.
  23. This indicates a very ancient tradition; v. Frankel, Z.: Darke ha-Mishnah, p. 305; Bacher, Tradition und Tradenten, pp. 160, 171 seqq.
  24. Cf. Yeb. 79a, where a sense of shame is said to be one of the characteristics of the Jew; also Ab. V, 20, where 'shamefacedness' is contrasted with 'bold-facedness', i.e., impudence or insolence.
  25. I.e., who is not hardened or callous, but feels humiliated when he does wrong.
  26. The wife of R. Eliezer b. Hyrkanos, a sister of Gamaliel II.

Nedarim 20b

 thy children so exceedingly beautiful? She replied: [Because] he [my husband] 'converses' with me neither at the beginning nor at the end of the night, but [only] at midnight; and when he 'converses', he uncovers a handbreadth and covers a hand breadth, and is as though he were compelled by a demon. And when I asked him, What is the reason for this [for choosing midnight], he replied, So that I may not think of another woman,1  lest my children be as bastards.2  — There is no difficulty: this refers to conjugal matters;3  the other refers to other matters.

     

Dilling discussion of highlighted text
    R. Johanan said: The above is the view of R. Johanan b. Dahabai; but our Sages said: The halachah is not as R. Johanan b. Dahabai, but a man may do whatever he pleases with his wife [at intercourse]: A parable; Meat which comes from the abattoir, may be eaten salted, roasted, cooked or seethed; so with fish from the fishmonger.4  Amemar said: Who are the 'Ministering Angels'? The Rabbis. For should you maintain it literally, why did R. Johanan say that the halachah is not as R. Johanan b. Dahabai, seeing that the angels know more about the formation of the fetus than we? And why are they designated 'Ministering Angels'? — Because they are as distinguished as they.5

A woman once came before Rabbi and said, 'Rabbi! I set a table before my husband, but he overturned it.' Rabbi replied: 'My daughter! the Torah hath permitted thee to him — what then can I do for thee?' A woman once came before Rab and complained. 'Rabbi! I set a table before my husband, but he overturned it.' Rab replied; Wherein does it differ from a fish?6

And that ye seek not after your own heart.7  [Deducing] from this Rabbi taught: One may not drink out of one goblet and think of another.8  Rabina said: This is necessary only when both are his wives.

And I will purge out from among you the rebels, and them that transgress against me.9  R. Levi said: This refers to children belonging to the following nine categories: children of fear,10  of outrage, of a hated wife, one under a ban,11  of a woman mistaken for another,12  of strife,13  of intoxication [during intercourse], of a mentally divorced wife,14  of promiscuity, and of a brazen woman.15  But that is not so: for did not R. Samuel b. Nahmani say in the name of R. Jonathan: One who is summoned to his marital duty by his wife will beget children such as were not to be found even in the generation of Moses? For it is said, Take you wise men, and understanding [and known among your tribes, and I will make them rulers over you];16  and it is written, So I took the chiefs of your tribes, wise men and known17  but 'understanding' is not mentioned.18  But it is also written, Issachar is a large-boned ass;19  whilst elsewhere it is written, And of the children of Issachar, which were men that had understanding of the titles?20  — [It is virtuous] only when the wife ingratiates herself [with her husband].21

CHAPTER III

MISHNAH. FOUR TYPES OF VOWS HAVE THE SAGES INVALIDATED;22  VIZ., VOWS INCENTIVE, VOWS OF EXAGGERATION, VOWS IN ERROR, AND VOWS [BROKEN] UNDER PRESSURE.23  VOWS INCENTIVE: E.G., IF ONE WAS SELLING AN ARTICLE AND SAID, KONAM THAT I DO NOT LET YOU HAVE IT FOR LESS THAN A SELA''; AND THE OTHER REPLIED, KONAM THAT I DO NOT GIVE YOU MORE THAN A SHEKEL —

Original footnotes renumbered. See Structure of the Talmud Files
  1. At the beginning of the night women are still going about in the streets; at the end, before morning, they are abroad again.
  2. Figuratively, of course. This shews that they did converse.
  3. That are permitted.
  4. [This parable serves to express the absence of reserve that may characterise the mutual and intimate relationship of husband and wife without offending the laws of chastity.]
  5. Rashi (in Kid. 71a): they are distinguished in dress, being robed in white and turbaned; cf. passage a.l.: Shah. 25b.
  6. V. supra.
  7. Num. XV, 39.
  8. Whilst cohabiting with one woman to think of another.
  9. Ezek. XX, 38.
  10. When a husband imposes himself upon his wife by force; Asheri reads: children of a maidservant ([H] instead of [H]); v. MGWJ 1934 p 136. n. 1.
  11. A person under a ban was forbidden to cohabit.
  12. Having intended to cohabit with one of his wives, he cohabited with another.
  13. Not a hated wife, but one with whom he had just then quarrelled.
  14. I.e., when her husband has decided to divorce her.
  15. One who openly demands her conjugal rights.
  16. Deut. I. 13.
  17. Ibid. I, 15.
  18. The Heb. [H] is here taken to denote the highest degree of wisdom — but such could not be found.
  19. Gen. XLIX, 14; cf. Gen. XXX. 16-18. The allusion is to the legend that Leah heard the braying of Jacob's ass, and so came out of the tent and said to Jacob, thou must come in unto me. She had thus demanded her conjugal rights.
  20. I Chron. XII. 33; though such men were not to be found in the days of Moses. This was Leah's reward, thus proving that it is meritorious for a woman to demand her rights.
  21. She may shew her desires, as did Leah, who merely invited Jacob into her tent, but not explicitly demand their gratification.
  22. Lit., 'permitted'.
  23. This is explained infra 27a.