Commentary for Nedarim 172:5

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> למימרא דיניא אותה דוקא הוא

— Learn: moreover, LEST HE DIVORCE HER.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., actually the vow is valid even now, since konam has the force of intrinsic consecration. But should you dispute this, for the Rabbis strengthened the husband's rights, so that not even konam may cancel them, the husband must still annul the vow, lest he divorce her. The objections raised above to the assumption that the vow has after-divorce validity are now inapplicable. Since in fact the vow should be valid immediately, but that the Rabbis, by a special decree, strengthened the husband's rights and rendered it valid, it follows that on divorce the law is restored to its proper basis. — In Keth. 59b the text reads: 'the Rabbis strengthened the husband's rights, so that the consecration should not be valid from now'; and the reading of Rashi, Tosaf. and Asheri is the same here too. Cur. edd., however, and also Ran, have the reading as given. ');">⁵</span> <b><i>MISHNAH</i></b>. IF HIS WIFE VOWED, AND HE TOUGHT THAT HIS DAUGHTER HAD VOWED, OR IF HIS DAUGHTER VOWED AND HE THOUGHT THAT HIS WIFE HAD VOWED; IF SHE TOOK THE VOW OF A NAZIRITE, AND HE THOUGHT THAT SHE HAD VOWED [TO OFFER] A SACRIFICE, OR IF SHE VOWED (TO OFFER] A SACRIFICE, AND HE THOUGHT THAT SHE VOWED A NAZIRITE VOW; IF SHE VOWED [TO ABSTAIN] FROM FIGS, AND HE THOUGHT THAT SHE VOWED FROM GRAPES, OR IF SHE VOWED [TO ABSTAIN] FROM GRAPES AND HE THOUGHT THAT SHE VOWED FROM FIGS,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And on these assumptions he annulled the vow. ');">⁶</span> HE MUST ANNUL [THE VOW] AGAIN. <b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. Shall we say that ['if her husband] disallow her'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. XXX, 9. ');">⁷</span> is precisely meant?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., he must intend to disallow her, not a different person. ');">⁸</span>

Explore commentary for Nedarim 172:5. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.