Previous daf

1)

(a) What the following have in common - is that the Noder is believed, because the Tana here, mentions them all as examples of 'u'Pirushan Lehakel' (in the previous Mishnah): 'Nadar be'Cherem, ve'Amar Lo Nadarti Ela be'Charmo shel Yam'; Nadar be'Korban ve'Amar Lo Nadarti Ela be'Korbanos shel Melachim'; 'Harei Atzmi Korban, ve'Amar Lo Nadarti Ela ba'Etzem she'Hinachti Liheyos Noder Bo'.

(b) 'Cherem shel Yam' - is a fishing-net.

(c) Despite the fact that our Mishnah basically elaborates on the phrase 'u'Pirusham Lehakel' in the Reisha, the Tana deals with the above cases (which are all new ones), and not with the equivalent cases that it dealt with initially - to teach us that, even though, the Noder's explanations are more far-fetched than the initial cases, he is nevertheless believed.

(d) If, after declaring 'Konem Ishti Nehenis Li', a man explains that he was referring to his first wife - he is believed.

(a) When Rebbi Meir says ...

1. ... 'Al Kulan Ein Nish'alin, ve'Im Nish'alu, Onshin Osan' - he means that, in all the above cases, a Talmid-Chacham does not require Hatarah, but that an Am ha'Aretz, who is not believed without Hatarah, is punished for contravening the Neder without it.
2. ... 'u'Machmirin Aleihen' - he means that Beis-Din will not annul his Neder on the basis of Charatah (remorse) alone.

(b) The Chachamim disagree with Rebbi Meir in two points. According to them, we do not punish an Am ha'Aretz who contravened his Neder - nor will the Beis-Din refrain from anulling his Neder on the basis of Charatah alone, which they refer to as 'Makom Acher' - because it is external from the Neder itself (which is not the case by a Pesach, which is a flaw in the actual Neder).

(c) The Hatarah required of an Am ha'Aretz does not pertain to all the Nedarim mentioned in both Mishnahs - only to those mentioned in *this* Mishnah, because they are far-fetched.

(d) They conclude 'u'Melamdim Osan Kedei she'Lo Yinhagu Kalus Rosh bi'Nedarim' - by which they mean that, although, according to the Noder's interpretation, these Nedarim ought not really to be valid, we nevertheless teach the Am ha'Aretz to treat them as if they were.

(a) Rav Yehudah reconciles the statement in the Mishnah 'Ein Nish'alin Aleihem' (meaning that it is not necessary to do so) with the subsequent phrase 've'Im Nish'alu, Onshin Osam ... ' (an obvious contradiction) - by establishing the former by a Talmid-Chacham, and the latter, by an Am ha'Aretz (as we have already explained).

(b) We explain 'Onshin Osam' in our Mishnah like the Beraisa, where Rebbi Yehudah rules that the Noder must keep as many days as he did not keep initially. Rebbi Yehudah himself - is referring to someone who contravened his own Neder.

(c) Rebbi Yossi disagrees with Rebbi Yehudah. He qualifies his colleague's ruling - by restricting it to thirty days, and no more.

(a) Based on the Tana'im in the previous Beraisa, Rav Yosef says that a Beis-Din that nullifies the Neder of someone who already contravened it has done wrong.

(b) We would otherwise have explained - that when the Tana'im said 'Ein Nizkakin Lo' they meant that the Beis-Din do not need to go out of their way to persuade the Noder to annul his Neder (like they did before he contravened it). But, should he come on his own accord to have it annulled, they may indeed do so.

(c) Rav Acha bar Ya'akov is more stringent still with the Beis-Din. According to him - one even declares a Shamta on them.

(a) We rule like the Rabbanan in our Mishnah, with regard to both points in which argue with Rebbi Meir. Regarding ...

1. ... someone who contravened a Neder d'Oraysa - we do not annul his vow until he has practiced the same amount of days as he contravened it.
2. ... a Beis-Din who nullifies the Neder of someone who has already contravened it - we declare a Shamta on them.

(b) We declare a Shamta - on a Rav who permits the Noder on one of the cases in our Mishnah to consider his Neder void before having practiced the same amount of days as contravened.

(c) A certain Rav annulled the Neder of a man who contravened his Neder forbidding all fruit on himself except for wheat. The Ba'alei Tosfos agreed with him on the grounds - that the Neder was impossible to adhere to; and besides, adhering to it would detract from his Avodas Hashem.

(d) Due to the fact that he had contravened the Neder, the Rav nevertheless insisted - that the it had to be annulled though a Pesach, and not merely, through Charatah.

(a) The reason the Tana of a Beraisa gives for keeping away from ...

1. ... Nedarim - is because it will lead to the contravention of Shevu'os (which are even stricter than Nedarim, as we learned above).
2. ... Amei ha'Aretz - is because ultimately, they will feed one Tevel.
3. ... Cohanim Amei ha'Aretz - because they will feed one T'rumah.

(b) According to some texts, the Tana says that the Cohen Am ha'Aretz will feed him 'Terumah Temei'ah'. The difference whether the Terumah is Tehorah or Temei'ah (seeing as Terumah is forbidden to a Zar anyway) is - whether a Cohen Talmid-Chacham is incorporated in the warning.

(c) The same Tana advises one not to talk to much to a woman - because that leads to adultery.

(a) Rebbi Acha bar Yashiyah says that someone ...

1. ... who looks at women - will eventually commit adultery with them.
2. ... who looks at the heel of a woman - which Resh Lakish explains to mean 'Oso Makom' (because it is exactly opposite the heel) will have children who are not decent people.

(b) When Rav Yosef says 'u've'Ishto Nidah' - he means that even one's wife who is a Nidah is included in the previous warning (despite the fact that she will be permitted in a short time, anyway.

(c) The Tana of the Beraisa interprets 'P'neichem' in the Pasuk "Lema'an Tihyeh Yir'aso al P'neichem le'Vilti Techeta'u" as 'Bushah' (reservedness - being ashamed to sin) from which he derives that the root of Yir'as Shamayim is Boshes Panim, and from which Acheirim derives that Boshes Panim is the antidote to sin. Acheirim also says that if someone does not possess Boshes Panim - then it is clear that his ancestors did not stand at Har Sinai (which is also evident from the above Pasuk).

(d) He know that it also extends to subsequent generations, who did not actually stand at Har Sinai - because the Torah specifically includes 'those are who not here today' (i.e. their Neshamos - even those of converts) in the covenant made at the Plains of Mo'av.

(a) The angels told Rebbi Yochanan ben Dahav'ai that someone who, during Tashmish ...

1. ... reverses the normal positioning of a man and a woman - will become lame (on the thigh, because he sinned with the thigh).
2. ... kisses 'Oso Makom' - will become dumb.
3. ... talks with his wife during Tashmish - will become a deaf-mute (seeing as he sinned with his mouth and ears).
4. ... gazes be'Oso Makom - will become blind.

(b) Eima Shalom (the wife of Rebbi Eliezer and sister of Raban Gamliel), have particularly good-looking children - because her husband was so modest during Tashmish.

(c) Rebbi Eliezer would not perform Tashmish at the beginning of the night or at the end - because women were up and about at that time, and he was afraid that he might overhear one of them talking and think about her.

(d) When Eima Shalom described Rebbi Eliezer as 'Megaleh Tefach u'Mechaseh Tefach' - she meant that for Tashmish, he would uncover one of the two Tefachim that Chazal permitted a man to uncover when urinating (see also Rosh DH 'Megaleh').

9)

(a) Rebbi Eliezer was scrupulously modest during Tashmish - so keep him so preoccupied with those matters, that he would not have time to think of any other woman (which would render his children close to being Mamzeirim - see Rosh - DH 've'Nimtze'u').

(b) Rebbi Eliezer used to talk with his wife during Tashmish (it appears that, although 'Mesaper' really refers to Tashmish, it also incorporates conversing with her - see Ya'avetz) - regarding issues of Tashmish (either to appease his wife or to increase his own desire [to enable him to perform Tashmish]); whereas Rebbi Yochanan ben Dahava'i, who forbids conversing with one's wife during Tashmish, is referring to a conversation that is irrelevant to the Tashmish.

(c) Rebbi Yochanan rules like the Chachamim who argue with Rebbi Yochanan ben Dahava'i - and permit a man to take his wife in any way that he wishes (just like a man eats meat that arrives from the butcher; salted, roasted, cooked or well-cooked - and nobody can stop him). This will be explained shortly.

(d) Ameimar proves from Rebbi Yochanan's ruling that the 'Mal'achei ha'Shareis' cited by Rebbi Yochanan ben Dahava'i cannot have been angels - because if it did, seeing as they know Hashem's secrets of how babies are formed and why, better than the Chachamim, Rebbi Yochanan would have ruled like Rebbi Yochanan ben Dahava'i?

11)

(a) Rebbi too, follows the opinion of the Chachamim of Rebbi Yochanan ben Dahava'i. When he told he woman who came to complain to him that he could not help her, seeing as the Torah permitted her to her husband - he was referring to the Pasuk in Ki Seitzei "Ki Yikach Ish Ishah", which places the woman under her husband's jurisdiction regarding marital issues (see also Gilyon ha'Shas DH 'be'ha'Rosh').

(b) When Abaye said that it was no different than a fish - he meant that it was no different than a fish that one could eat as one wished, fried or cooked (similar to the Rabbanan's comparison to meat, cited earlier).

(c) Rebbi learns from the Pasuk "ve'Lo Sasuru Acharei Levav'chem" - that a man may not 'drink from one cup whilst looking into another' (perform Tashmish with one woman whilst thinking about another).

(d) Ravina carries Rebbi's statement still further - by applying it even to performing Tashmish with one of one's wives whilst thinking about another one.

(a) The Pasuk "u'Varusi Mikem ha'Mordim ve'ha'Posh'im" refers to 'B'nei Tesha Midos' (bad children that will result from nine improper relationships). The 'B'nei Eima' refers to - a man who frightens his wife into having Tashmish with him against her will; the 'B'nei Anusah' - to when he actually takes her by force. Seeing as the two are similar, Rebbi Levi (the author of this Sugya) counts them as one.

(b) 'B'nei Senu'ah refers to a wife whom her husband hates, and B'nei Niduy, to a woman on whom a Niduy has been declared.

1. 'B'nei Temurah' - refers to a man who has relations with one of his wives, whilst believing her to be another.
2. 'B'nei Merivah' - to a man who has relations with his wife after a quarrel (without first pacifying her).

(c) 'B'nei Shikrus' and 'B'nei Gerushas ha'Lev' are self-explanatory.

1. 'B'nei Irbuvya' - refers to a woman with whom a number of men performed Tashmish (see also Rosh DH 'B'nei').
2. 'B'nei Chatzufah' - to a woman who takes the initiative in asking for Tashmish.

(d) Rebbi Shmuel bar Nachmeini Amar Rebbi Yonasan assures a man whose wife initiates Tashmish, children who will outshine even the children in the generation of Moshe Rabeinu - if she does this by dropping a hint (like Le'ah, who said "Eilai Tavo" meaning "into my tent", rather than "Alai Tavo"), but not when she does so explicitly (see Agados Maharsha).

(a) In the Pasuk "mi'B'nei Yisachar Yod'ei Binah la'Itim", in view of the face that with regard to the judges that Moshe chose, the Torah first writes in Devarim "Havu Lachem Anashim Chachamim u'Nevonim" and then "va'Ekach es Roshei Shivteichem, Anashim Chachamim vi'Yedu'im" - the word that stands out is "Binah".

(b) "Yisachar Chamor Garem" refers to the incident when Le'ah greeted Ya'akov on his return from the fields with the words "Elai Tavo", hinting that she had bought Rachel's turn to be with him, and that he should visit *her* tent instead of Rachel's (proving the statement that we just quoted from Rebbi Shmuel bar Nachmeini Amar Rebbi Yonasan).

14)

(a)

1. Nidrei Ziruzin - are Nedarim that one makes in order to encourage the opposite side to meet one's demands.
2. Nidrei Hava'i - Nedarim which are obviously meaningless.
3. Nidrei Shesgagos - are Nedarim that one declared in error.
4. Nidrei Onsin - Nedarim that one is forced to make.

(b) All four have in common - that the Neder is void at its inception.

(c) In the Tana's example of Nidrei Ziruzin, he speaks about a seller and a buyer haggling over the price of the article - where the seller vows that he will not sell it for less than a Sela, and the buyer vows that he will not pay more than a Shekel (half a Sela).

(d) Their Nedarim not void; their thoughts are not considered 'Devarim she'ba'Lev' (unspoken words, which have no validity) - because of the principle that when it is obvious that that is what a person means, then the unspoken words are considered as having been spoken. In this case, it is obvious that each one is willing to settle for three Dinrim (there are four Dinrim in a Sela).