The Mishnayos in Sotah list all of the Halachos which require Lashon
ha'Kodesh and for which no other language may be used. Nedarim and Shevu'os
are not included in that list, because there is no verse in the Torah that
says that they take effect only in Lashon ha'Kodesh. Accordingly, it is
obvious that any language may be used for making a Neder, and if so, why
does the Mishnah mention that these three specific Kinuyim ("Konam, Konach,
Konas") may be used? According to Rebbi Yochanan, the Mishnah should have
said simply that a Neder may be made in any foreign language!
Also, since Reish Lakish must also agree that a Neder can be made in a
foreign language, there does not seem to be any Machlokes between Rebbi
Yochanan and Reish Lakish with regard to the Halachah; they only argue about
the source for these words mentioned in the Mishnah. But both agree that the
word "Konam," or any word that means "Neder" in any language, may be used to
make a valid Neder. Why, then, does the RAN (beginning of 10b) find it
necessary to say that the Halachah follows the view of Rebbi Yochanan, who
says that Kinuyim are foreign languages, if there is no difference
whatsoever in practice between Rebbi Yochanan and Reish Lakish?
(According to those Rishonim who say that Reish Lakish considers a Neder
made with a Kinuy to be a Neder mid'Rabanan and not mid'Oraisa (see Rabeinu
Yechiel cited by Tosfos 3a), there is an obvious practical difference
between Rebbi Yochanan and Reish Lakish: whether the Neder takes effect
mid'Oraisa or only mid'Rabanan. However, the Ran himself (2a) learns that
even according to Reish Lakish, a Neder made with a Kinuy is a Neder
*mid'Oraisa*, because "a language invented by the Chachamim is no less than
any foreign language." Why, then, does the Ran have to rule like Rebbi
Yochanan?)
(a) The RAN (2a, in the name of Rebbi Yehudah bar'Rebbi Chasda'i) explains
that even according to Rebbi Yochanan, the words "Konam" and "Konach" are
not formal words in a foreign language. Rather, they are colloquialized
versions of words taken from Hebrew, which came about when various nations
adopted Hebrew words to express the concept of Neder but they mispronounce
those words and instead of saying "Korban," they say "Konam" or "Konach."
Since those words are not actually part of a foreign language, perhaps they
should not work to create a Neder, because on one hand they are not
authentic words in a foreign language, while on the other hand they are not
the original Hebrew words either. Rebbi Yochanan teaches that once the
foreigners adopted these words, even though they mispronounce them, they are
acceptable expressions for making a Neder in a foreign language. That is why
the Mishnah mentions only these words (which sound similar to the original
Hebrew version) according to Rebbi Yochanan. It is possible that Reish
Lakish argues with Rebbi Yochanan and does not consider such words to be
valid, but rather he says that these words were created by the Chachamim.
This is why the Ran must rule like Rebbi Yochanan -- only according to Rebbi
Yochanan will a word that was taken from Hebrew and corrupted by the foreign
nation be valid for a Neder, but not according to Reish Lakish.
(b) The RAMBAM (Hilchos Nedarim 1:16), who rules like Rebbi Yochanan,
explains that Kinuyim are words used by unsophisticated people who
mispronounce the words of their own language. He rules that even though the
Neder they make is meaningless to someone who speaks the language properly,
nevertheless if -- in their particular region and time period -- the
mispronunciation is understood, it creates a valid Neder. (According to the
Rambam, when Rebbi Yochanan says that Kinuyim are "Lashon Umos," he means
that they are the "language of unsophisticated people" and not that they are
"foreign languages." The Kinuyim mentioned in the Mishnah are actually
Hebrew words spoken by Hebrew speakers who do not speak the language well.)
According to the Rambam, it is possible that Reish Lakish argues and holds
that a mispronounced term is not considered speech, even in a place where
such a mispronounced word is understood. The Rambam rules like Rebbi
Yochanan that such a word does serve to create a Neder.
(c) TOSFOS (2a) explains that according to Rebbi Yochanan, the Mishnah
singles out these particular Kinuyim because, normally, words in a foreign
language may be used to make a Neder only when the person making the Neder
understands that language. The words listed in the Mishnah, however, can be
used to create a Neder even when the person uttering them does not
understand what they mean (as long as he knows that he is making a Neder by
pronouncing these words; Tosfos Yeshanim 10b). Why, though, should these
words be different than words of any other language? (RASHBA and SHITAH
MEKUBETZES)
Some explain that Tosfos rules that Lashon ha'Kodesh differs from other
languages in that Lashon ha'Kodesh is a language *inherently* -- the words
themselves have intrinsic meaning beyond the objects that they represent; it
is not simply a language by consensus like every other language. Hence, when
a person utters words in Lashon ha'Kodesh, they have a meaning even if he
does not understand them, while words of foreign languages have meaning only
if the speaker understands them. The Kinuyim listed in the Mishnah are so
similar to Lashon ha'Kodesh that they clearly were adopted by other nations
from Lashon ha'Kodesh, like the Ran says, and therefore they retain the
inherent power of words of Lashon ha'Kodesh.
However, it is not clear that a term which has been altered from its
original form in Lashon ha'Kodesh still retains the unique status of Lashon
ha'Kodesh. Also, Tosfos does not mention anything about Lashon ha'Kodesh
being different than other languages in this regard.
Rather, it appears that Tosfos means to say like the TOSFOS YESHANIM (10b)
that any language that is spoken locally can create a Neder even if the
person who speaks it does not understand what the word means (as long as he
understands that he is making a Neder). The words that the Mishnah lists
were spoken in Eretz Yisrael where those languages were spoken, and
therefore they can be used to make a Neder even if the person using them
does not understand them. Other languages, though, must be understood in
order to make a Neder in a place where they are not spoken locally.
This is also the opinion of the RITVA (2a).? (See also TOSFOS in Bava Basra
164b, DH Hina.)
According to these Rishonim, Reish Lakish might be ruling that even in a
place where the language is spoken, the Neder takes effect only if the
person speaking it understands the language. Rebbi Yochanan, on the other
hand, says that the Neder takes effect even when the person does not
understand the language, as long as it is commonly spoken in that place.
Both Reish Lakish and Rebbi Yochanan agree, though, that a language that is
not spoken locally is still a valid language for making a Neder as long as
the speaker understands what he is saying. The SHITAH MEKUBETZES in the name
of the RE'EM also emphasizes this.
The RITVA also differentiates between a language spoken locally and one not
spoken locally. However, he writes that a language not spoken locally cannot
be used as a Neder at all and he does not mention that it could be used if
the speaker understands it. According to the Ritva, the practical difference
between Reish Lakish and Rebbi Yochanan is that according to Reish Lakish,
the Kinuyim mentioned in the Mishnah may be used even where they are not
spoken locally, since the Chachamim established that they may be used.
Based on this, the BI'UR HALACHAH (OC 62) rules that words in a foreign
language other than Lashon ha'Kodesh are *not* effective except in the place
where it is spoken locally, and only if the person using that language
understands what he is saying (i.e. both conditions are necessary). From the
other Rishonim, though, it seems that either one of these conditions
suffices -- either that the speaker understands what he is saying, or he is
speaking in a place where that language is spoken locally.
It is possible that the Ritva is not arguing with the other Rishonim and he
also agrees that a language not spoken locally is effective if the speaker
understands what he is saying. However, the Ritva is discussing a situation
where the speaker does not understand what he is saying, and that is why he
says that Rebbi Yochanan holds that Kinuyim work only in a place where they
are spoken locally. The reason he is discussing such a situation, where the
speaker does not understand the words, is because if the person does
understand the words, then Rebbi Yochanan and Reish Lakish would not argue
and they would both agree that Kinuyim could be used even in places where
that language is not spoken. The argument between Rebbi Yochanan and Reish
Lakish is only where someone uses this words in a place where the language
is not commonly spoken and nor does the speaker understand what they mean.