Nedarim 17a

נדרים י״ז ע״א

Learn Nedarim 17a step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Nedarim 17a in Gemara Clarity

Topic

Why both פסוקים are needed to exempt an oath to cancel a מצוה; the משנה of נדר בתוך נדר versus שבועה בתוך שבועה; and the מחלוקת between רב הונא and שמואל about a repeated vow of נזירות.

Overview

The amud opens by finishing a challenge. The פסוק 'להרע או להיטיב' already teaches that an oath to cancel a מצוה does not take effect, so why do we also need 'לא יחל דברו'? The גמרא answers that each פסוק exempts from something different. One exempts from the קרבן, and the other exempts from the לאו. Then a new משנה teaches that a נדר can take effect on top of a נדר, but a שבועה cannot take effect on top of a שבועה. It shows this with two vows of נזירות and two oaths not to eat. In the גמרא, רב הונא says a second נזירות takes effect only if it adds something, like 'today' and then 'tomorrow.' שמואל says it takes effect even when the words are exactly the same. The גמרא then challenges רב הונא: if he is right, the משנה should have shown the contrast inside נדרים alone, instead of setting נדרים against שבועות. That challenge continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

The steps (7)

1. ChallengeThe verse 'to do evil or to do good' already excludes an oath against a מצוה
2. ResolutionEach verse exempts from something different
3. StatementThe משנה: a vow can stack on a vow, an oath cannot stack on an oath
4. StatementThe משנה's examples: two nazirite vows versus two oaths
5. Statementרב הונא: a second נזירות takes effect only if it adds a day
6. Statementשמואל: even an identical second נזירות takes effect
7. ChallengeWhy didn't the משנה contrast two kinds of vows?