Musar for Bava Metzia 132:8
אמר ליה רב אחא מדפתי לרבינא דלמא סבר כי היכי דלא תיתזיל ארעיה אלא אמר רב פפא אי קפיד בארעא ודאי קני
R. papa said: An <i>asmakta</i> is sometimes legally binding and sometimes not. If he [the creditor] found him [the debtor] drinking beer [at the expiration of the period], it is binding; if he was endeavouring to procure money, it is not binding.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If repayment was due, and the debtor told him to take the field, at the same time engaging in frivolous pursuits, it is evident that he does not care about it and is in earnest. But if he was attempting to find the money, he was obviously anxious to retain his estate, and therefore his offer was not really meant and is not binding. ');"><sup>8</sup></span>
Shenei Luchot HaBerit
Jacob prefaced his vow with the words: אם יהיה אלוקים עמדי, If the Lord will be with me, etc." He concluded it by saying that if his request would be granted: והיה ה' לי לאלוקים, "then the Lord will be my G–d." How could Jacob have dared to use the word אם, "if," which suggests that he made his loyalty to G–d dependent on G–d fulfilling his requests? We have a halachic ruling in Baba Metzia 66 that if someone purchases something by prefacing his remarks with the conditional word אם, such a purchase is invalid, seeing he had not truly committed himself. Even though the Maharam rules that in matters of vows and oaths conditional vows are legally binding, why did Jacob use an expression involving him in possibly legally binding vows? ...
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy