Nedarim 171

אמר ר' אילא ומה אילו אומר לחבירו שדה זו שאני מוכר לך לכשאקחנה ממך תקדיש מי לא קדשה

— Said R. Elai: What if a man declares to his neighbour, 'Let this field which I am selling you be consecrated when I buy it back from you', — is it not consecrated?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Surely it is! So here too the vow is valid in respect of a future state through it is not valid when made. ');">¹</span>

מתקיף לה ר' ירמיה מי דמי שדה זו שאני מוכר לך השתא בידיה היא אשה בידה להקדיש מעשה ידיה הא לא דמי אלא לאומר לחבירו שדה זו שמכרתי לך לכשאקחנה ממך תקדיש מי קדשה

R. Jeremiah demurred to this: How compare! [In the case of] 'Let this field which I sell you [etc.],' it is now in his possession; but is it in a woman's power to consecrate the work of her hands?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Obviously not. ');">²</span>

מתקיף לה רב פפא מי דמי גבי זבינא פסיקא מילתייהו גבי אשה מי פסיקא מילתא הא לא דמי אלא לאומר לחבירו שדה זו שמשכנתי לך לכשאפדנה ממך תקדיש מי לא קדשה

This is [rather] to be compared only to a man who says to his neighbour, 'Let this field, which I have sold to you, be consecrated when I repurchase it from you,' — is it consecrated?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Surely not. Thus, he argued, this analogy proves on the contrary that the woman's vow is invalid. ');">³</span>

מתקיף לה רב שישא בריה דרב אידי מי דמי שדה בידו לפדותו אשה בידה להתגרש הא לא דמיא אלא לאומר לחבירו שדה זו שמשכנתי לך לעשר שנים לכשאפדנה ממך תקדיש מי לא קדשה

R. Papa demurred to this: How compare! In the case of purchase the matter is definitely closed;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Neither the field nor its produce belongs, for the time being, to the vower. ');">⁴</span>

מתקיף לה רב אשי מי דמי התם קיץ אשה מי אית לה קיצותא

but as for a woman, is the matter definitely closed?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For her body at least still belongs to herself. ');">⁵</span> This can only be compared to a man who declares to his neighbour. 'Let this field, which I have mortgaged to you, be consecrated when I redeem it from you', — is it not consecrated? R. Shisha the son of R. Idi demurred to this: How compare! As for the field, it is in his power to redeem it; but does it lie with a woman to be divorced? This is [rather] to be compared to one who says to his neighbour. 'Let this field, which I have mortgaged to you for ten years, be consecrated on its redemption,' — is it not consecrated?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Surely it is, though it cannot be redeemed before a certain date; so in the case of a woman too, though she cannot procure her divorce. As far as actual law is concerned this Rabbi agrees with the preceding: he merely varies the analogy for the sake of greater accuracy, though the result is the same. ');">⁶</span> R. Ashi demurred to this: How compare! There is a definite term [for redemption]; has then a woman a definite term [when she can encompass her divorce]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Obviously not; hence it should follow that her vow is invalid. ');">⁷</span>