Commentary for Nedarim 32:6

אמר רבא וכי מצות ליהנות ניתנו אלא אמר רבא הא דאמר ישיבת סוכה עלי והא דאמר שבועה שלא אשב בסוכה

Raba objected: Were the precepts then given for enjoyment?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Technically speaking, one cannot be said to drive physical enjoyment from the fulfilment of a precept, and therefore a vow in these terms would not be binding. One's highest enjoyment should be in obedience to God's word. [Apart from its halachic implications, the object of this saying was to keep the ethical principle free from any admixture of the idea of utility V. Lazarus, M. Ethics of Judaism, I, p. 284.] ');">¹¹</span> But Raba answered: There [in the case of vows] one says, 'The sitting in the <i>sukkah</i> be forbidden me';<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Thus the vow falls upon the sukkah, which is rendered forbidden, and upon the person; therefore it is valid. ');">¹²</span>

Explore commentary for Nedarim 32:6. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.