Bava Batra 240

(במדבר ל, ב) זה הדבר דראשי המטות הכי נמי דלא יהא נוהג אלא בדור זה א"ל ההוא יליף זה זה מהתם

Does This is the thing.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Nuns. XXX, 2. ');">¹</span> [said in connection] with the heads of the tribes<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. ');">²</span> also [imply] that [that Jaw]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The law of the disallowance of vows. (ibid. 3-17). ');">³</span> was to apply to that generation only? — He said unto him: [In] that [case], this<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Mentioned at the law of the disallowance of vows. ');">⁴</span>

האי נמי ליליף זה זה מהתם האי מאי בשלמא התם איצטרי' לגזרה שוה הכא למאי איצטריך לשתוק קרא מיניה ואנא ידענא דלדורות הוא

is inferred from this [that is mentioned] there.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Used in connection with the law of animals slaughtered outside the Temple. As in the other Case the law is applicable to all generations (v. supra note 2), so also is the law in the former case. ');">⁵</span> Let this, [in] the present [case].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The prohibition of the marriage of an heiress to a member of another tribe. ');">⁶</span> also, be inferred from this [mentioned] there!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. n. 7. ');">⁷</span> — What a comparison!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'this, what'? ');">⁸</span>

מאי ג"ש דתניא נאמר כאן זה הדבר ונאמר להלן (ויקרא יז, ב) זה הדבר מה להלן אהרן ובניו וכל ישראל אף כאן אהרן ובניו וכל ישראל ומה כאן ראשי המטות אף להלן ראשי המטות

There<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The law of animals slaughtered outside the Temple and that of the disallowance of vows. ');">⁹</span> [one may] rightly [compare one this to the other this because these expressions are in any case] required for [another] comparison;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A gezerah shawah, an inference by similarity of expressions (v. Glos). V. infra. ');">¹⁰</span> here,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The marriage of an heiress to one of another tribe. ');">¹¹</span> [however], for what [other purpose] is it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The expression, this. ');">¹²</span>

אמר מר מה להלן אהרן ובניו וכל ישראל אף כאן אהרן ובניו וכל ישראל למאי הלכתא אמר רב אחא בר יעקב לומר שהפרת נדרים בשלשה הדיוטות

needed? The text could [simply] have omitted it altogether<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'let the verse keep silence about (from) it'. ');">¹³</span> and one would have known that [the law applied]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As do most other laws. ');">¹⁴</span> to [all] generations!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since, therefore, the expression was used, it must have been meant to limit the law to that generation only. ');">¹⁵</span> What is the [other] comparison<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. note. 12. ');">¹⁶</span>

והא ראשי המטות כתיב ביה כדאמר רב חסדא אמר רבי יוחנן ביחיד מומחה ה"נ ביחיד מומחה

[just referred to]? — It was taught: This is the thing, has been said here,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' At the laws of vows (Num. XXX, 2). ');">¹⁷</span> and This is the thing, has [also] been said elsewhere:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XVII, 2, at the law of animals slaughtered outside the Temple. ');">¹⁸</span> just as there [it was spoken to] Aaron and his sons and all Israel,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As stated specifically in Lev. XVII, 2. ');">¹⁹</span> so here<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In connection with the laws relating to vows. ');">²⁰</span>

ומה כאן ראשי המטות אף להלן ראשי המטות למאי הלכתא אמר רב ששת לומר שיש שאלה בהקדש

[it was spoken to] Aaron and his sons and all Israel; and just as here<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In connection with the laws relating to vows. ');">²⁰</span> [it was spoken to] the heads of the tribes.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As stated in Num. XXX, 2. ');">²¹</span> so there<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 494, n. 20. ');">²²</span> [it was spoken to] the heads of the tribes.

ולב"ש דאמרי אין שאלה בהקדש דתנן ב"ש אומרים הקדש טעות הקדש וב"ה אומרים אינו הקדש האי זה וזה מאי עבדי ליה

The Master has said: 'Just as there, [it was spoken to] Aaron and his sons and all Israel, so here, [it was spoken to] Aaron and his sons and all Israel'. In [respect of] what law [has this comparison been made]? — R. Aba b. Jacob said: To infer that the annulment of vows [may be effected] by three laymen.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' From the Biblical association of Aaron and his sons and all Israel with the laws of vows it is to be inferred that a properly constituted Court is not required for the annulment of vows. Any member of the congregation of Israel is as good as Aaron and his sons for the purpose of acting as a member of such a lay court of three. ');">²³</span> But surely, 'the heads of the tribes' is written [in connection] with it?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' With the laws of vows (Num. XXX, 2). Would not 'Heads of tribes' imply, 'qualified men', 'members of a proper court'? ');">²⁴</span> — As R. Hisda said in the name of R. Johanan, 'By a qualified individual',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. infra. ');">²⁵</span> [so] here also [it may be said], 'By a qualified individual'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., vows may be annulled not only by a lay Court of three but also by one individual if he is qualified by his attainments (a Mumhe, v. Glos.) The expression, heads of tribes', is equivalent to 'qualified individuals', though acting singly. ');">²⁶</span>

זה הדבר דשחוטי חוץ מיבעי ליה על השוחט הוא חייב ואינו חייב על המולק זה הדבר דראשי המטות מיבעי ליה לחכם מתיר ואין בעל מתיר בעל מפר ואין חכם מפר

[It has been said: 'Just as here [it was spoken to] the heads of the tribes, so there [it was spoken to] the heads of the tribes'. In [respect of] what law [has this comparison been made]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' What connection could there be between the law of animals slaughtered outside the Temple and the heads of tribes. ');">²⁷</span> — R. Shesheth said: To infer [that] the law of absolution<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Heb. [H] lit., 'question'. ');">²⁸</span> [is applicable] to consecrated objects.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As a qualified scholar may annul a vow, so he may render absolution from the consecration of an object, if the person who consecrated it can produce sufficient grounds to justify the absolution. ');">²⁹</span> According to Beth Shammai, however, who maintains [that] the law of absolution<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Heb. [H] lit., 'question'. ');">²⁸</span>

ולבית שמאי דלית להו גזרה שוה הפרת נדרים בשלשה הדיוטות מנא להו נפקא להו מדתניא (ויקרא טז, א) וידבר משה את מועדי ה' אל בני ישראל ר' יוסי הגלילי אומר

is not [applicable] to consecrated objects; as we learnt,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Naz. 30b. ');">³⁰</span> 'Beth Shammai maintains [that] mistaken consecration is [regarded as proper] consecration, and Beth Hillel maintains [that] it is not [regarded as proper] consecration,' — to what [other] purpose do they apply,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'what do they do to it'. ');">³¹</span> this and this?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This, mentioned with the law of animals slaughtered outside the Temple and this of the laws of vows. Maintaining that 'mistaken consecration is regarded as proper consecration', Beth Shammai is obviously of the opinion that the low of absolution is never applicable to consecrated objects. Hence, the comparison made above between the similar expressions of 'this' (from which the law of absolution has been derived) is not required. What, then, is the purpose of the employment of this expression in the Biblical text. ');">³²</span> [The expression], This is the thing, [used in connection] with [animals] slaughtered outside the Temple is required [for the inference that] one is guilty [only] for slaughtering<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Outside the Temple. ');">³³</span> but not for 'pinching'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Heb. Melikah, [H] 'pinching off the head of a bird with the finger nails' (cf. Lev. I, 15). The expression, this, implies that only what was mentioned in the text, viz., slaughtering, is prohibited. ');">³⁴</span> [The express sion] This is the thing, [mentioned in connection] with the 'heads of the tribes', is required [for the inference that only] a Sage can dissolve [a vow], but a husband cannot dissolve<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By using the formula, [H], the Sage has the right of disallowing, or dissolving a vow ([H] 'unbinding', 'dissolving'), if a good reason for his action can be found. If, e.g., the man who vowed can show that his vow was made under a misapprehension. ');">³⁵</span> [a vow], [only] a husband can declare [a vow] void, but a Sage cannot declare [it] void.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By using the formula, [H] a husband is entitled to declare as void, ([H] 'breaking' destroying'), any vow made by his wife, without the necessity for her finding any reason for its annulment. Unlike the sage who must first inquire whether grounds exist for dissolving it (v. previous note), the husband may, as soon as he hears of the vow, 'destroy' it at once retrospectively. This, implies that only the expressions of the Biblical text as interpreted in Ned. 77b may be used and that only the procedure they imply must be followed. ');">³⁶</span> Whence does Beth Shammai, who does not use the inference from the similarity of expression,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Requiring the two expressions of this for other purposes, as just explained. ');">³⁷</span> derive the law [that] the annulment of vows [may be performed] by three laymen?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Or by a Sage, who is regarded as of equal status to that if a lay court of three. ');">³⁸</span> They derive it from what was taught [in the following Baraitha]: And Moses declared unto the children of Israel the appointed seasons of the Lord.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXIII, 44 ');">³⁹</span> R. Jose the Galilean said: