Mesorat%20hashas for Nedarim 169:9

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> אמר שמואל הלכה כרבי יוחנן בן נורי למימרא דקסבר שמואל אדם מקדיש דבר שלא בא לעולם ורמינהי המקדיש מעשה ידי אשתו

R. AKIBA SAID: HE MUST ANNUL IT, LEST SHE EXCEED HER OBLIGATIONS.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The amount of work she is obliged to do for him is prescribed in Keth. 64b. Her vow is valid in respect of everything above that, and therefore the husband must annul the vow. ');">⁹</span> R. JOHANAN B. NURI SAID: HE MUST ANNUL IT, LEST HE DIVORCE HER AND SHE THEREBY BE FORBIDDEN TO HIM. <b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. Samuel said: The <i>halachah</i> is as R. Johanan b. Nuri. Shall we say that in Samuel's opinion a man can consecrate that which is non-existent?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'a thing that has not come into the world'. For the prohibition of a vow is a manner of consecration, v. p. 105, n. 8. Now, according to R. Johanan b. Nuri that prohibition is effective in respect of anything she may do after he divorces her, though as yet she is neither divorced nor has she produced anything: hence, just as a vow is valid in respect of the non-existent, so is consecration too, and since Samuel accepts this ruling as the halachah, it must be his view too. ');">¹⁰</span> But the following contradicts it: If a man consecrates his wife's handiwork [which she will produce],

Explore mesorat%20hashas for Nedarim 169:9. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.