Nedarim 87b

נדרים פ״ז ע״ב

Learn Nedarim 87b step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Nedarim 87b in Gemara Clarity

Topic

Partly upholding or cancelling a two-part vow, and a husband or father who missed the time to cancel because he did not know the law

Overview

The amud opens at the end of a משנה about a woman who vowed off figs and grapes together. If her husband cancels only the figs, רבי ישמעאל says nothing is cancelled until he cancels the grapes too. רבי עקיבא learns from the פסוק that cancelling part of the vow works, just like upholding part. רבי יוחנן then reports that חכמים read the same היקש the other way: whatever he upholds or cancels covers only what he named. רבא says that the משנה's ruling, that repeating the vow word for each fruit makes two vows, follows רבי שמעון. A new משנה follows about a husband or father who let the day pass without cancelling. If he did not know vows could be cancelled, he may still cancel. If he did not know this was a vow, רבי מאיר and חכמים disagree. The גמרא then challenges these positions with a ברייתא about a blind person who kills by accident, where רבי מאיר and רבי יהודה seem to hold the reverse. The answer comes on the next amud.

Opening lines

The steps (9)

1. StatementCancelling only the figs does not work, according to רבי ישמעאל
2. Statementרבי עקיבא: a husband can cancel part of a vow
3. Challengeרבי ישמעאל: the פסוק never says 'cancel part of it'
4. Resolutionרבי עקיבא: the פסוק puts cancelling next to upholding
5. Statementחכמים: upholding is also only as much as he upheld
6. Statementרבא: the 'two separate vows' ruling follows רבי שמעון
7. StatementHe didn't know vows could be cancelled, so he may still cancel
8. StatementHe didn't know it counted as a vow: רבי מאיר and חכמים argue
9. ChallengeA contradiction from the blind person who kills by accident