Nedarim 41

שניהם רוצין בשלושה דינרין

BOTH ARE AGREED UPON THREE <i>DENARII</i>.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A sela' _ two shekels _ four denarii. ');">¹</span>

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> ארבעה נדרים התירו חכמים כו' אמר ליה רבי אבא בר ממל לרבי אמי אמרת לן משמיה דרבי יהודה נשיאה מאן תנא ארבעה נדרים רבי יהודה היא דאמר משום רבי טרפון לעולם אין אחד מהן נזיר לפי שלא ניתנה נזירות אלא להפלאה

<b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. FOUR VOWS HAVE THE RABBIS INVALIDATED etc. R. Abba b. Memel said to R. Ammi: You have told us in the name of R. Judah Nesi'ah:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Judah, the Prince II. ');">²</span>

רבא אמר אפילו תימא רבנן מי קתני שניהן רצו שניהן רוצין קתני

Which Tanna holds this view? — R. Judah, who said on the authority of R. Tarfon: Neither is a <i>nazir</i>, because neziroth must be expressed with certainty.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 19b. Thus here too, in the case of the incentive vow, since the two parties are dependent upon another, the vow is invalid. ');">³</span>

אמר ליה רבינא לרב אשי אמר לו טפי מסלע והלה אמר בציר משקל נדרא הוי או זירוזין הוי

Raba said: You may even say, The Rabbis. Does the Mishnah teach, both [subsequently] agreed — it teaches, BOTH ARE AGREED.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Thus, neither meant the vow seriously at all; but the conditional vow of neziroth was really meant. ');">⁴</span>

אמר ליה תנינא היה מסרב בחבירו שיאכל אצלו ואמר לו קונם ביתך שאני נכנס טיפת צונן שאני טועם מותר ליכנס לביתו ולשתות הימנו צונן שלא נתכוון זה אלא לשום אכילה ושתיה

Rabina asked R. Ashi: If he demanded more than a <i>se'ah</i>, and the other offered less than a <i>shekel</i><span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [I.e., the vendor demanded a sela' and a perutah (v. Glos.) and the buyer offered a shekel minus a perutah (Ran).] ');">⁵</span>

ואמאי והא טיפת צונן קאמר אלא משתעי איניש הכי הכא נמי משתעי איניש הכי

is it a [valid] vow, or still a matter of incitement?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since each was so exact, it may be that the sum was literally meant by both, and the vow likewise. ');">⁶</span>

אמר ליה

— He replied. We have learnt this. If one was urging his neighbour to eat in his house, and he answered: 'Konam if I enter your house,' or 'if I drink a drop of cold water', he may enter his house and drink cold water, because he only meant eating and drinking in general.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But did not intend his words literally. ');">⁷</span> But why? Did he not state, a drop of cold water? Hence this is the usual manner of speech.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For emphasis stating 'a drop of water', when in reality something substantial was meant. ');">⁸</span> Thus here too: this is the usual manner of speech!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For emphasis: but neither meant his words literally, hence the vow is invalid. ');">⁹</span> — He said to him: