Nedarim 107

מתני׳ <big><strong>הנודר</strong></big> מן הירק מותר בדלועין ורבי עקיבא אוסר אמרו לו לרבי עקיבא והלא אומר אדם לשלוחו קח לי ירק והוא אומר לא מצאתי אלא דלועין

<b><i>MISHNAH</i></b>. HE WHO VOWS [TO ABSTAIN] FROM VEGETABLES IS PERMITTED GOURDS. R. AKIBA FORBIDS THEM. THE [SAGES] SAID TO HIM, BUT WHEN A MAN SAYS TO HIS AGENT 'FETCH ME VEGETABLES, HE REPLIES, I COULD OBTAIN ONLY GOURDS. HE ANSWERED, EXACTLY: BUT WOULD HE SAY, 'I COULD OBTAIN ONLY PULSE?'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If only pulse were obtainable, he would simply report that vegetables were unobtainable. ');">¹</span> BUT THAT GOURDS ARE INCLUDED IN VEGETABLES, WHILST PULSE IS [DEFINITELY] NOT. HE IS [ALSO] FORBIDDEN FRESH EGYPTIAN BEANS. BUT PERMITTED THE DRY SPECIES].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' These are two different species, the fresh regarded as a vegetable, the dry a cereal, because it is ground into flour. ');">²</span>

אמר להם כן הדבר או שמא אומר הוא לא מצאתי אלא קיטנית אלא שהדלועין בכלל ירק וקיטנית אינו בכלל ירק ואסור בפול המצרי לח ומותר ביבש:

<b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. HE WHO VOWS [TO ABSTAIN] FROM VEGETABLES etc. But he vowed [to abstain] from vegetables!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which gourds are certainly not. ');">³</span> — Said 'Ulla: This refers to one who vows. 'The vegetables of the pot [be forbidden] to me.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And since gourds are boiled in pots, R. Akiba maintains that they are included. ');">⁴</span>

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> הנודר מן הירק כו': והא מן ירק נדר אמר עולא באומר ירקי קדירה עלי ודילמא ירק הנאכל בקדרה קאמר באומר ירק המתבשל בקדרה עלי

But perhaps he meant vegetables which are eaten [with food cooked] in a pot?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.g., onions, which are put in a pot for seasoning. ');">⁵</span> — He said: 'Vegetables that are cooked in a pot [he forbidden] to me.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This most refer to something prepared for itself, and not mere seasoning. ');">⁶</span>

במאי קא מיפלגי רבנן סברי כל מילתא דצריך שליחא לאמלוכי עלה לאו מיניה הוא ורבי עקיבא סבר כל מילתא דמימליך שליחא עלה מיניה הוא אמר אביי מודה רבי עקיבא לענין מלקות שאינו לוקה

Wherein do they differ? — The Rabbis maintain: Whatever an agent must inquire about does not belong to the same species;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A servant, being told to buy vegetables and finding only gourds, would ask his master whether these would do. ');">⁷</span> but R. Akiba maintains, Whatever the agent needs inquire about is of the same species.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For if not, he would reject them immediately. ');">⁸</span>

תנן התם השליח שעשה שליחותו בעל הבית מעל לא עשה שליחותו שליח מעל

Abaye said: R. Akiba admits in respect to punishment that he is not flagellated.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For eating them. Though he forbids them, it is not certain that they are vegetables. ');">⁹</span> We learnt elsewhere: If the agent carried out his commission, the principal<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'householder'. ');">¹⁰</span>

מאן תנא אמר רב חסדא מתניתין דלא כרבי עקיבא דתנן כיצד אמר לו תן בשר לאורחים ונתן להם כבד תן כבד ונתן להם בשר השליח מעל ואי רבי עקיבא הא א"ר עקיבא כל מילתא דמימליך עלה שליח מיניה הוא למעול בעל הבית ולא למעול שליח

is guilty of a trespass; if he did not carry out his commission, he himself is guilty of a trespass.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Me'il, 20a. The reference is to hekdesh (q.v. Glos.), which must not be appropriated for secular use; if it is (unwittingly), a trespass-offering must be brought, v. Lev. V, 14. Now, if one instructs his agent to do this, and his instructions are exactly carried out, he is responsible; if not, the agent is held to have acted of his own accord and is himself responsible. ');">¹¹</span> With which Tanna does this agree? R. Hisda said: Our Mishnah does not agree with R. Akiba. For we learnt:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Continuing the Mishnah quoted. ');">¹²</span>

אמר אביי אפילו תימא רבי עקיבא

Thus, if he said to him, 'Give the guests meat, and he gave them liver; '[give them] liver,' and he gave them meat, the agent is guilty of a trespass.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It should be observed that by offering this hekdesh to the guests the agent has already misappropriated it by withdrawing it from sacred to secular ownership. The sacrifice is due for that withdrawal; hence when the guests eat it. It is no longer sacred, and no obligation rests upon them. ');">¹³</span> But if this agrees with R. Akiba: did he not say. Whatever an agent must inquire about, belongs to that species? In that case, the principal, and not the agent, should be liable to a trespass-[offering]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For if one is sent to buy meat and finds only liver, he should certainly consult his master about it. Therefore, if the servant gave liver when ordered to give meat, on R. Akiba's view he carried out his master's instructions. ');">¹⁴</span> Abaye said, This may agree even with R. Akiba: