POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
Prepared by P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous daf Nedarim 27
1) A PARTIALLY PERMITTED VOW
(a) He said, 'Had I known that Bnos Shu'ach were inside, I
would not have vowed' - the (other figs in the) basket
are forbidden, the Bnos Shu'ach are permitted;
2) THE EXEMPTION OF ONES
(b) Later, R. Akiva taught that a vow that is partially
permitted is entirely permitted.
1. Suggestion: He said, 'Had I known that Bnos Shu'ach
were inside, I would not said, black and white figs
are forbidden, Bnos Shu'ach are permitted'; this is
R. Akiva's opinion, and Chachamim argue.
(c) Answer: No - he said, 'Had I known that Bnos Shu'ach were
inside, I would have said, all the (other figs in the)
basket are forbidden, the Bnos Shu'ach are permitted'.
(d) Question: Who is the Tana of the following Beraisa?
1. (Beraisa): Reuven took 1 vow not to benefit from 5
people. If one of them became permitted, all 5 are
(e) Answer: According to Rabah, the 1st clause is as R.
Akiva, and all agree to the last clause;
2. If he said, (had I known, I would have said) all are
forbidden except for Ploni, Ploni is permitted, the
others are forbidden.
1. According to Rava, the last clause is as Chachamim,
and all agree to the 1st clause.
(a) (Mishnah): Vows of Ones - Shimon made Reuven vow that he
will eat by him; Reuven (was unable to because he) or his
son fell ill, or he could not cross the river - these are
vows of Ones.
(b) (Gemara): Reuven was holding documents in his favor in
Beis Din. He said, 'If I do not return within 30 days,
these proofs should be void'; an Ones prevented him from
returning in time;
(c) (Rav Huna): His proofs are void.
(d) Question (Rabah): But the Torah exempts one when there is
an Ones - "You will not do anything to the girl (that was
1. Suggestion: Perhaps this only applies to capital
(e) Counter-question #1: According to Rabah, why is this
different than the following?
2. Rejection (Mishnah): Vows of Ones - Shimon made
Reuven vow that he will eat by him; Reuven or his
son fell ill, or he could not cross the river -
these are vows of Ones.
1. (Mishnah): "This Get should make you divorced now,
if I do not come within 12 months". He died within
this time - the Get worked.
(f) Answer: Perhaps that case is different - had he known
that he would die, he would have divorced her immediately
i. According to Rabah, since Ones prevented him
from returning, we should say that the Get is
(g) Counter-question #2: According to Rabah, why is Rav
Huna's case different than the following?
1. A man told witnesses, if I do not come within 30
days, this Get should be valid. On the last day, he
was unable to get the ferry to cross the river. He
screamed, 'See, I am coming'!
(h) Answer: Perhaps the law is different by a common Ones.
2. (Shmuel): This does not count as coming.
3. According to Rabah, the Get should not work because
of the Ones!
(a) Question: Why did Rav Huna rule that the man's proofs are
void - this was Asmachta (an exaggeration) which is not
4) FALSE VOWS
(b) Answer: This case was different for he was holding his
(c) Question: Is it really true that holding them prevents it
from being Asmachta?!
1. (Mishnah): Reuven paid part of his debt. The
document was given to a 3rd party; Reuven said 'If I
do not pay the rest within 30 days return the
document to the lender (and he can collect the full
loan)'; he did not pay up in time.
(d) Answer: This case is different - since he said that the
proofs should be void, this is as an admission that they
2. R. Yosi says the document is given to the lender; R.
Yehudah says it is not.
i. (Rav Nachman): The law is not as R. Yosi,
who says that Asmachta is binding.
(e) The law is, Asmachta is binding, when there is no Ones,
and when the stipulation was made in a respected Beis
(a) (Mishnah): One may falsely vow to murderers, robbers and
tax-collectors, to convince them that (what they want to
take) is Terumah, or belongs to the king;