Nedarim 36

<big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> סתם נדרים להחמיר ופירושם להקל כיצד אמר הרי עלי כבשר מליח כיין נסך אם בשל שלמים נדר אסור

<b><i>MISHNAH</i></b>. UNSPECIFIED VOWS ARE INTERPRETED STRICTLY, BUT IF SPECIFIED,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' After the vow is made in general terms (Ran). ');">¹</span> LENIENTLY. E.G., IF ONE VOWS, BEHOLD! THIS BE TO ME AS SALTED MEAT,' OR, 'AS WINE OF LIBATION': NOW, IF HE VOWED BY ALLUSION TO A PEACEOFFERING,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [Var. lec. 'TO HEAVEN', v. next note.] ');">²</span>

אם בשל עבודה זרה נדר מותר ואם סתם אסור

HE IS FORBIDDEN;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To benefit from the object of his vow — i.e., his vow is valid. ');">³</span> IF BY AN IDOLATROUS SACRIFICE, HE IS PERMITTED, BUT IF IT WAS UNSPECIFIED, HE IS FORBIDDEN. [IF ONE DECLARES], 'BEHOLD! THIS BE TO ME AS HEREM': IF AS A HEREM TO THE LORD,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'of Heaven'. For 'Heaven' as a synonym of god cf. I Macc. III, 18 (though some ancient authorities read there 'the God of heaven'); Matt. XXI. 25; v. A. Marmorstein, The Old Rabbinic doctrine of God, I, pp. 14 and 105-106. ');">⁴</span>

הרי עלי כחרם אם כחרם של שמים אסור ואם כחרם של כהנים מותר ואם סתם אסור

HE IS FORBIDDEN; IF AS A HEREM TO THE PRIESTS, HE IS PERMITTED.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That which was devoted (herem) to the Lord, i.e., to be utilized in or sold for Temple purposes, could not be redeemed, and hence was definitely forbidden for secular use (Lev. XXVII, 28); but if devoted to the priests. it might be so used once they had taken possession of it (Num. XVIII, 14); it is therefore regarded as permitted, and a reference to it in a vow has no validity. ');">⁵</span> IF IT IS UNSPECIFIED, HE IS FORBIDDEN. 'BEHOLD! THIS BE TO ME AS TITHE': IF HE VOWED, AS CATTLE TITHES, HE IS FORBIDDEN; IF AS CORN TITHES, HE IS PERMITTED; IF UNSPECIFIED, HE IS FORBIDDEN.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The cattle tithe had to be formally designated, hence it is regarded as humanly forbidden, and a reference to it is valid; but the corn tithe belonged automatically to the Levite, even if not formally designated; therefore it is regarded as Divinely forbidden; v. supra 13b. ');">⁶</span>

הרי עלי כמעשר אם כמעשר בהמה נדר אסור ואם של גורן מותר ואם סתם אסור

'BEHOLD! THIS BE TO ME AS TERUMAH';<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos. ');">⁷</span> IF HE VOWED, AS THE <i>TERUMAH</i> OF THE TEMPLE-CHAMBER,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For congregational sacrifices; v. Shek. III. 2; IV. 1. ');">⁸</span>

הרי עלי כתרומה אם כתרומת הלשכה נדר אסור ואם של גורן מותר ואם סתם אסור דברי רבי מאיר

HE IS FORBIDDEN; IF AS THE <i>TERUMAH</i> OF THE THRESHING-FLOOR [I.E., OF CORN]. HE IS PERMITTED;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 50. n. 8. The terumah of the Temple fund had to be formally designated, but that of corn was regarded as Divinely and automatically forbidden. ');">⁹</span> IF UNSPECIFIED, HE IS FORBIDDEN: THIS IS THE VIEW OF R. MEIR. R. JUDAH SAID; AN UNSPECIFIED REFERENCE TO <i>TERUMAH</i> IN JUDEA<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the southern portion of Palestine. ');">¹⁰</span>

רבי יהודה אומר סתם תרומה ביהודה אסורה בגליל מותרת שאין אנשי גליל מכירין את תרומת הלשכה סתם חרמים ביהודה מותרין בגליל אסורין שאין אנשי גליל מכירין את חרמי הכהנים

IS BINDING, BUT NOT IN GALILEE, BECAUSE THE GALILEANS ARE UNFAMILIAR WITH THE <i>TERUMAH</i> OF THE TEMPLE-CHAMBER.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Galileans, living at some distance from the Temple, did not think much about the Temple fund, consequently, when they spoke of terumah without any further qualification, they meant terumah if corn. ');">¹¹</span> UNQUALIFIED ALLUSIONS TO HARAMIM IN JUDEA ARE NOT BINDING. BUT IN GALILEE THEY ARE, BECAUSE THE GALILEANS ARE UNFAMILIAR WITH PRIESTLY HARAMIM.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As the priests lived mainly in Judea, priestly haramim were unusual in Galilee; hence a Divine Herem must have been meant. ');">¹²</span>

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> והתנן ספק נזירות להקל

<b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. But we learnt: A doubt in neziruth is treated leniently?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Toho. IV, 12. E.g., if one vows, 'Behold! I will be a nazir if the man who is just passing is one', and that person disappeared before it could be ascertained whether he was or not, the vow is not binding. This contradicts the Mishnah that an unspecified vow, the meaning of which is doubtful, is rigorously interpreted. ');">¹³</span> — R. Zera answered; There is no difficulty; This [our Mishnah] agrees with the Rabbis; the other, with R. Eliezer. For it was taught: If one consecrates [all] his beasts and his cattle,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So Rashi and Asheri. Ran: his beasts or his cattle; Tosaf. maintains that it refers to both cases The term 'cattle' (behemah) refers to domesticated animals; 'beasts' (hayyah) to wild or semi-wild animals. ');">¹⁴</span>

אמר רבי זירא לא קשיא הא רבי אליעזר הא רבנן דתניא המקדיש חייתו ובהמתו הקדיש את הכוי רבי אליעזר אומר לא הקדיש את הכוי

the koy<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Probably a kind of bearded deer or antelope. It is doubtful whether this belongs to the genus of cattle or of beasts. This view is that the koy must be included in the one or the other. Or, according to the interpretation of the Ran, we are strict because of our doubt. ');">¹⁵</span> is included. R. Eliezer said: He has not consecrated the koy.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because his vow embraced animals of certain, but not of uncertain genus. ');">¹⁶</span>

מאן דאמר ממונו מעייל לספיקא גופיה נמי מעייל ומאן דאמר ממונו לא מעייל לספיקא גופיה (נמי)

He who maintains that one permits doubt to extend to his chattels,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., in consecrating his cattle or his beasts, he meant it to include the lot, though aware that it is of doubtful genus. ');">¹⁷</span> maintains likewise that he permits it to extend to himself too.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Thus, having subjected himself to an unspecified vow, his intention is that the most rigorous interpretation of his words shall apply. ');">¹⁸</span> But he who holds that one does not permit doubt to extend to his chattels, will maintain this all the more of one's own person.