json/Mishnah/Rishonim on Mishnah/Bartenura/Seder Nashim/Bartenura on Mishnah Nedarim/English/Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020.json

{
    "language": "en",
    "title": "Bartenura on Mishnah Nedarim",
    "versionSource": "http://sefaria.org",
    "versionTitle": "Bartenura on Mishnah, trans. by Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020",
    "license": "CC-BY",
    "versionNotes": "",
    "shortVersionTitle": "Rabbi Robert Alpert, 2020",
    "actualLanguage": "en",
    "languageFamilyName": "english",
    "isBaseText": false,
    "isSource": false,
    "direction": "ltr",
    "heTitle": "ברטנורא על משנה נדרים",
    "categories": [
        "Mishnah",
        "Rishonim on Mishnah",
        "Bartenura",
        "Seder Nashim"
    ],
    "text": [
        [
            [
                "In the Gemara (Tractate Nedarim 2b), we maintain that our Mishnah is deficient and should be read as follows: all intimations/ידות (i.e., a term for words uttered by a person conveying a certain intention that can be understood from the context or from the general subject of the statement, although it is not clearly and explicitly expressed – are intimations regarded as explicit statements) of vows are like vows; all substitutes/כנויי for the language of vows (i.e., and it is obvious that he intended his statement to be a vow, his words assume that status) are like vows. Which are intimations of vows? A person who says to his fellow: “I am forbidden by vow from you,” “I am separated from you,” etc. Which are substitutions of vows? “A person who states (see Mishnah 2 of this chapter): קונם/Konam, קונח/Konakh, קונס/Konas, etc., (i.e., a specific type of vow whereby one prohibits himself from eating something or deriving benefit from something or someone by saying: “That person or object is to a KONAM;” the word KONAM is a substitute for the Hebrew word for offering/קרבן – and is used in order to avoid uttering that word). The intimations of vows/ידות נדרים are like the handle of a utensil that one holds it by, so are intimations of vows by which vows are held. Substitutes for vows, like [Tractate Bava Metzia 58b] when one calls his neighbor by a nickname which is not the essence of the name [of that person].",
                "מודר אני ממך – if he said one of these linguistic formulations: “I am forbidden by vow from you that I don’t eat your [food], or/and I taste your [food],” or “I am separated from you that I don’t eat your [food], or/and if I taste your [food],” or “I am distanced from you that I don’t eat your [food] or/and I don’t taste your [food],” this is an intimation of vows and it is forbidden to eat or to taste with him. But if he said to him: “I am forbidden by vow” alone, there is no implication in his words other than he doesn’t speak with him. And “I am separated from you” alone, implies that he will not engage in business with him, and “I am distanced from you” alone, implies that he will not sit within his four cubits, and does not prohibit eating with him unless he specified and stated with one of these linguistic formulations, “that I don’t eat [food] with you,” or “I don’t taste anything with you.”",
                "רבי עקיבא היה חוכך וכו' (had some hesitation about deciding in favor of greater stringency) – meaning to say, rubbed/scratched his lips on against the other, but did not want to forbid explicitly, but it had appeared from his temperament/mind that it was forbidden.",
                "כנדרי רשעים נדר בנזיר ובקרבן ובשבועה – if he said: “May this be upon me like the vows of wicked people whose vows in the case of a Nazir or in bringing a sacrifice or in taking of an oath if I eat this loaf, and he transgressed and ate it, he is liable to become a Nazir for thity days and to bring a sacrifice of a burnt offering and would liable for flogging/stripes like one who transgresses an oath on a statement (i.e., an oath taken by a person to reinforce a promise or an obligation or o confirm he veracity of a story –he brings a sacrifice based upon his financial situation/קרבן עולה ויורד ) because he mentioned in his oath the Nazir, and/or a sacrifice and/or an oath. But when he stated, “like the vows of the wicked,” since he wicked are those who make vows and take oaths, not the suitable people, for he suitable ones fear not to transgress (Deuteronomy 23:22): “[When you make a vow to the LORD your God,] do not put off fulfilling it, [for the LORD your God will require it of you, and you will have incurred guilt],” and they (i.e., the suitable/appropriate people) are warned not to bring forth an oath from their lips, and therefore “like the vows of the suitable/appropriate [people],” he has said nothing whatsoever.",
                "וכנדבותם נדר נזיר ובקרבן (as their free-will offerings – he has made a binding vow in the case of a Nazir or in the case of bringing an offering) – if he said, “like the free-will offerings of the suitable/appropriate [people], I will be a Nazir or this is an offering if I eat this loaf,” and he consumed it, he is liable regarding becoming a Nazir, or in bringing a sacrifice, for the suitable/appropriate people sometimes make vows of becoming a Nazir in order to separate from prohibition. But when they make a free-will donation of a sacrifice that they bring their offering to the entrance of the Temple courtyard and sanctify it there in order that they will now come through it as a hindrance/stumbling-block. And the free-will offering is when he says, “May this be,” or “A vow be upon me.” Therefore, the worthy people make a free-will offering but do not make a vow, in order that one may not be led to commit an offernse through it."
            ],
            [
                "קונם קונח קונס הרי אלו כנויין לקרבן – these are the languages of non-Jews, and there are from them one who calls for a certain sacrifice, and there is one wo calls such, and in every language when he states from these [forms of language] he causes to take hold of a sacrifice.",
                "נדר במותא – meaning to say that he took an oath to curse, which is a substitute of an oath/imprecation, and it is a an oath in the language of an Aramaic translation"
            ],
            [
                "לחולין שאוכל לך – The LAMED/ל has the vocalization of a PATACH, and it implies Something not unconsecrated will be what I will eat with you, but rather holy/sanctified.",
                "לא כשר – it will be, but rather invalid. And these are Holy Things that are connected with things that are fit/appropriate and invalid/inappropriate.",
                "לא דכי – not permitted, like a pure species of locust (see Tractate Eduyot, Chapter 8, Mishnah 4), in Tractate Avodah Zarah [37a – which is kosher, according to Rashi] and even though that the language of permitted and forbidden belongs also regarding a carrion that died of itself and an animal torn by a wild beast, but we hold that we don’t cause to take hold of it other than with something that is vowed or made as a free-will offering, for since there is an implication in “permitted” also in Holy Things, therefore it is taught in the Mishnah (Tractate Nedarim, Chapter 2, Mishnah 4): “Vows that are not spelled out are subject to a more stringent ruling,” for since it is his intention to cause to take hold of a vow, we state regarding a thing that is vowed he intended.",
                "טהור – if he stated: “it is not pure what I eat of yours.”",
                "טמא נותר פיגול – if he said: “it is impure what I eat of yours,” and similarly for all of them. It is forbidden, that all of these things that are engaged with the Holy Things.",
                "כאימרא – like the lamb/young sheep of a Sacrifice.",
                "כדירים – like the chamber of wood or like the chamber of lambs.",
                "כעצים – like the pieces of wood of the pile of wood on he altar in the Temple.",
                "כאישים – like the sacrifices that are upon the fire.",
                "כמזבח – like the sacrifices that are upon the altar.",
                "כהיכל – like the sacrifices that are in the hall of the golden altar.",
                "כירושלים – like the sacrifices that are in Jerusalem. Another explanation: like the walls of Jeruslaem, for he holds that the walls of Jerusalem from the remnants of the chamber they have come.",
                "באחד מכל משמשי המזבח (by one of the utensils used for the altar) – as, for example, the forks, bowls (out of which the sprinkling is done), coal-pans. If he said, “like the forks that I eat of yours,” or “like the bowls that I eat of yours,” and similarly for all of them, even though he didn’t mention [specifically], “sacrifice,” behold this is like making a vow for a sacrifice.",
                "רבי יהודה אומר האומר ירושלים – without the “KAF/כ ,” he did not say anything. But the first Tanna/teacher disputes him. And the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda."
            ],
            [
                "האומר קרבן עולה מנחה חטאת תודה ושלמים – all of hese are obligatory sacrifices, and the thanksgiving-offering also is similar to an obligation, for four require givng thanks, but you might think I would say that this one takes a vow in something that is the legitimate subject of a vow.",
                "ורבי יהודה מתיר – because they were said without the \"כ\"/KAF they are compared to someone who took an oath regarding the life of the burnt offering, and thee isn’t here either a vow nor an oath. But the first clause [of the Mishnah] teaches us that the first Tanna/teacher disputes that of Rabbi Yehuda, even regarding Jerusalem if he mentioned it without the \"כ\"/KAF and stated that it is a vow. But the concluding clause [of the Mishnah] comes to inform us that Rabbi Yehuda disputes that [opinion] of the first Tanna/Teacher, even with a sacrifice of a burnt-offering, etc., when he mentioned them without a \"כ\" /KAF – for it is not a vow.",
                "קרבן הקרבו כקרבן שאוכל לך אסור (May what I eat of yours be the Korban” “like the Korban,” [By] a Korban [do I vow] be what I eat with you, he is bound) – even though we we heard all of them already, “the KORBAN” is required for it, for you might I would say that he says, “By the life of the KORBAN.” But surely it is taught in the Mishnah further on in Chapter 2 [Mishnah 2], “Korban” be what I eat with you,” he is not bound, there it is speaking of a KORBAN/sacrifice, which implies the life of the Korban.",
                "לקרבן אל אוכל לך רבי מאיר אוסר (for a KORBAN shall be what I eat with you) – that it is made like saying, “it shall be like a sacrifice,” therefore, I will not eat with you. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Meir.",
                "קונם פי מדבר עמך – but even though that the vows do not take effect on a matter lacking substance, and speech has no substance in it, nevertheless, when he says, “KONAM be my mouth with speaks to you,” he prohibits his mouth from speaking, and his mouth spoke something that has substance. And similarly, “my hands be forbidden from their actions,” and/or “my feet from their walking,” and all similar things to this."
            ]
        ],
        [
            [
                "ואלו מותרין. חולין שאוכל לך (and these [vows] are not binding: may what I eat of yours be unconsecrated food) – he (i.e., the teacher of the Mishnah) took these merely as a sign, ust as unconsecrated food that I may eat of yours – there is no need for a request made to a Sage (i.e., if a person makes a vow or takes an oath, or consecrates property, and afterwards regrets having done so, he may go to a Sage and request that he release him from his vow). So also, all of these that we mention in our Mishnah in the first clause there is no need for a request made to a Sage.",
                "כעורות לבובין (like hides pierced at the heart) – they wud make incisions in the animal while it is living opposite the heart and remove the heart and sacrifice it to idolatry, and this sacrifice to idolatry is prohibited to derive any benefit.",
                "כחלת אהרן – who was first for the Kohanim (see Numbers 15:20 – “You shall make a gift to the LORD from the first yield of your baking, throughout the ages). And it cannot be something that is vowed, for Hallah and heave-offering/Terumah come as a vow or a free-will offering.",
                "הרי זה מותר – as it states in Scripture (Numbers 30:3): “If a man makes a vow [to the LORD],” until he should make a vow with a thing that is vowed. But a sin-offering that I won’t eat with you , as we stated in the first chapter [of Tractate Nedarim, Mishnah 4], even though it is not something that is vowed, there is reason, for it is possible that he will bring a sin-offering through a vow, as for example, that he took a vow to be a Nazir, and is liable to bring a sin-offering [upon the conclusion of the thirty-day length of serving as a Nazir].",
                "הרי את עלי כאמא (Lo, you are like mother to me) – even though this this is not a matter that is vowed, it is more severe from all of the others that are above, he requires a release from the Rabbis if he is an illiterate individual (i.e., “Am HaAretz) ",
                "and we make an opening for retracting a vow from another place (i.e., reason) meaning to say, we request for him and opening and reason for his remorse. But it is not sufficient [to ask him]: Do you now regret [that you had vowed]? Or that your heart is upon you – that you bear a grudge (see Tractate Nedarim 21b), and all of this in order that he may not behave lightly in such a matter and that he should not become accustomed to forbid his wife upon him.",
                "קונם שאיני ישן כו' – Lo, this is (Numbers 30:3): “he shall not break his pledge” according to the Rabbis, but from the Torah, there is no vow taking effect, for vows do not take effect other than on something that has substance (see Talmud Nedarim 15a).",
                "קונם שאיני משמשך (that I will not have sexual relations with you) – In the Gemara (Tractate Nedarim 15b) a difficulty is raised if he is subservient to her, how is he able to release her subservience through his vow, for it is like prohibiting the produce of his fellow on his fellow? But it [i.e., the Gemara] responds, as, for example, when he stated that he takes a vow against enjoying the benefit of her sexual relations with me,” that he forbade this benefit upon himself, and we don’t feed a person something that is forbidden to him.",
                "שבועה שאיני ישן וכו' – this is forbidden form the Torah, for oaths take effect whether there is something in it of substance, or whether it is on something that has no substance. But if he took an oath to not sleep for three consecutive days, night and day, he is flogged/whipped and he sleeps immediately, because he took an oath on something that is impossible to fulfill."
            ],
            [
                "קרבן לא אכל לך כו' (KORBAN,I shall not eat with you) – he is permitted (i.e., he is not bound), for this would be like he took an oath with a KORBAN that he would become like he says: “by my Life, a KORBAN if I eat with anything with you.”",
                "שבועה שלא אוכל לך – and we don’t say, “by my life with an oath it is said,” as we say with a KORBAN, for an oath has no substance and it doesn’t belong to say with it, “by my life with an oath.”",
                "שבועה שאוכל לך – sometimes, “the taking of an oath that I shall eat with you” is not that I will actually eat, as, for example, that his fellow would refuse him to him and he says, “I will not eat, I will not eat,” and thereafter he says, “by an oath I will eat with y,” that he will not actually eat,” and this is what he said, “with an oath that will be upon me, if I eat with you.”",
                "זה חומר בשבועות – we are not able to maintain an oath that I shall not eat with you, for since it teaches that this is more stringent, it implies that it is a vow, but it is not more stringent like an an oath, and regarding “Korban, I will not eat with you,” it is taught in the Mishnah that he is not bound, and that it is not a vow at all. Because of this, one needs to establish it on what is taught above (Chapter 2, Mishnah 1): “KONAM that I shall not sleep,” “that I won’t speak,” for behold, this [applies] to (Numbers 30:3): “he shall not break his pledge.” But we establish from the Rabbis that according to the Torah, the vow has not effect other than on something which has substance, and this is the stringency regarding oaths from that of vows, that an oath takes effect even on something that has no substance.",
                "תפילין שאני מניח – because he forbid a sacred object held in hand at the delivery of an oath that is upon him, and it doesn’t appear like taking a vow to void the Mitzvah, for behold, he didn’t accepted it upon himself, but rather, prohibited the sacred object upon him, but he would fulfill the Mitzvah it would a Mitzvah that comes to be fulfilled by means of a transgression and it would be similar to someone who is required to eat Mitzvah on the nights of Passover but only found Matzah of eatables forbidden pending the separation of sacred gifts or something dedicated to the Temple, which is forbidden to consumel. But all languages of oath that he forbids upon himself from doing something, for since he is liable to perform the Mitzvah, it is not within his powers to release himself from the obligation of the commandment. But if he said, “a KORBAN is upon me if I put on Tefillin, the vow takes affect and he is liable to bring a sacrifice if he put on Tefillin."
            ],
            [
                "חייב על כל אחת ואחת – and he will a Nazir for thirty days if he said, I am an undefined Nazir, nad he will bring the Nazirite sacrifice and return to be a Nazir according to the number of times that he said, “I will be a Nazir.” But regarding an oath, he is not liable other than for one [sacrifice,” for he is not flogged/whipped other than one set of stripes. But if he made a request to be released on the first oath, the second oath takes effect. And similarly, if he made a request to be released on the second [oath], the third takes effect. But he is is forbidden to eat until he all of them are not binding, because it does not teach in the Mishnah, “behold this is one oath,” but rather, “he is only liable for one count only.”"
            ],
            [
                "ופירושם להקל – even though that when he explained his words, we follow after his explanation, for when it is undefined and he didn’t explain, we go to the most stringent [opinion], for a person who makes an undefined vow, his intention is to forbid.",
                "כבשר מליח – which is a sacrifice, as it is written (Leviticus 2:13): “[You shall season your every offering of grain with salt; you shall not omit from your grain offering the salt of your covenant with God;] with all your offerings you must offer salt.”",
                "כחרם של כהנים מותר (assigned to the private use of priests) – even though that which belongs to the priests, people commit religious sacrilege with them until they come into the hands of the Kohanim, and they are a thing that is vowed, nevertheless, undefined property of the priests implies that they have already come into the hand of a Kohen (see also Tractate Arakhin, Chapter 8, Mishnah 6)..",
                "אם כמעשר בהמה אסור – for this is something that was vowed, that one must sanctify it, but the tithe of cattle does not prohibit the stable/shed like the tithing of grain prohibits the granary/threshing floor.",
                "שאין אנשי גליל מכירין תרומת הלשכה – becase they were far from Jerusalem.",
                "שין אנשי גליל מכירין חרמי כהנים – for everything that they would dedicate for priestly use, they would set aside for the repair of the Temple. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yehuda."
            ],
            [
                "בחרמו של ים – the language of a net, as in (Ecclesiastes 7:26): “[Now, I find women more bitter than death,] she is all traps , her hands are fetters, [and her heart is snares].”",
                "הרי עצמי קרבן – he forbade himself like a KORBAN/sacrifice upon his fellow.",
                "אין נשאלים עליהם – it is not necessary for a request to a Sage [to release him from a vow] for they don’t take effect.",
                "ואם נשאלין – but if this person is an illiterate person/Am HaAretz who made a vow in such a manner and he came to request from a Sage [to release him] from his vow, we don’t make an opening for him for regret and we don’t release him. But if he transgressed on this vow, we excommunicate him.",
                "פוחתין לו פתח ממקום אחר – we show him that the matter exists and we make an opening for him for another reason and release him from his vow. But we don’t punish him and we are not stringent with him. And such is the Halakha."
            ]
        ],
        [
            [
                "ארבעה נדרים (vows intended for urging to buy/sell or while bargaining; vows made dependent upon an impossibility/an exaggeration; vows made in error; vows made on conditions unavoidably fulfilled/under compulsion) – all of them will be explained further on.",
                "קונם שאני פוחת לך מן מסלע – KONAM this loaf of bread if I [pay] less to you than a Sela. And a SELA is four Denarim.",
                "על השקל – it is one-half of a SELA.",
                "שניהם רוצים בשלשה דינרים – but it was not in their hearts for the sake of a vow, but rather, the seller vowed to urge/encourage the purchaser that he should increase they money, and similarly, the purchaser, in order that the seller should lessen the cost of the purchase, therefore, it was not a vow. But even though that matters that are in the heart are not matters, where a matter can be proven like here, for such is the manner of all sellers and purchasers to do this, we follow after the things that are in the heart.",
                "ר\"א בן יעקב אומר אף כל הרוצה להדיר את חבירו כו' – The Gemara (Tractate Nedarim 23b) that our Mishnah is deficient and should be read as follows: A person who wants that his fellow should eat with him but refuses him and forces him to take a vow, it is the vow intended for urging to buy/sell. And the person that wants that he will not vows will not be fulfilled all year will stand up on Rosh Hashanah and state, “every vow that I will someday make is nullified.” And that he will stand up on Rosh Hashanah is not exact, but rather, the same law applies at every time that he wishes and for every time that he establishes.",
                "ובלבד שיהיה זכור – from the condition at the time of the vow, and his mind/intention is upon the condition that it will be fulfilled, then the vow is nullified. But if he is not reminded of the condition at the time of the vow and not at an interval equivalent to the time of speaking (i.e., the amount of time it takes to say in Hebrew, “Greetings to you, my teacher and rabbi”), from the time that he made the vow, the vow exists/endures. But it is not necessary to state that if he is reminded from the condition at the time of the vow and it is his intention that the condition will be nullified and vow existent, for it is clear that the vow exists. But the laws of oaths and vows are equivalent in this law. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov."
            ],
            [
                "נדרי הבאי – exaggeration and additional speech, but he himself knows that it was not the case.",
                "קונם אם לא ראיתי – KONAM upon me this loaf of bread if I did no see, etc. (i.e., a snake as s big as the beam of an olive press).",
                "נדרי שגגות – he said, KONAM upon me this loaf of bread.",
                "אם אכלתי אם שתיתי ונזכר שאכל ושתה – and at the time of the vow he thought that he did not eat and did not drink, it would not be a vow.",
                "קונם שאיני אוכלך לך ואיני שותה, ושכח ואכל ושתה – that at the time that the vow takes place which is at the time of eating and/or drinking, he forgot the vow, it is permitted/annulled, as we derive it from an oath as it is written (Leviticus 5:4): “[Or when a person uttes an oath to bad or good purpose –] whatever a man may utter in an oath – [and though he has known it, the fact has escaped him, but later he realizes his guilt in any of these matters -]” that we require that he will be a man at the time when the oath takes place upon him, meaning to say, that he will be mindful from the oath, and the same law applies with regard to a vow.",
                "קונם אשתי נהנית לי שגנבה את כיסו – these are vows made in error, for since it became known that she did not steal from him, it is found that there was no vow.",
                "אלו ואלו מותרין – for a vow that was partially permitted is completely permitted, for he does not want that his vow would take place, but rather, similar to that he made the vow, and since part of it was in made inadvertently in error, all of it is nullified."
            ],
            [
                "מדרי אונסין – that from the initial point, it was not his intention that the vow would come to pass if an unavoidable interference would prevent him, and in a case like this when the matters prove it, the matters of the heart are matters."
            ],
            [
                "להרגין – robbers that kill a person and take his money.",
                "ולחרמים – thieves that do not kill, and not only this, even that is taught (i.e., the cases in the Mishnah that are in descending order of demonstrability).",
                "ולמוכסין – a customs/tax collector that stands on his own. But a tax-collector that was appointed by the king (i.e., “the state”) whether the king is an Israelite or a non-Jew and takes a specified amount as the law of the kingdom, “the law of the land is the law,” and it is forbidden to flee from the tax-collector, and all the more so, that it is forbidden to take a vow or to swear to him a falsehood/lie.",
                "שהן של תרומה – even though they kill and steal, we don’t eat something that is forbidden (other than to Kohanim). Alternatively, heave-offering is not important to them because it is not eaten other to pure Kohanim and is sold very cheaply.",
                "לא יפתח לו בנדר – if the violent man did not ask of him to take an oath, he should not begin with an oath.",
                "כמה שהוא מדירו ([one takes a vow] only in the matter concerning which a vow is imposed) – if the violent man did not ash of hm to take a vow, he should not take a vow to him other than in what he asked alone, and not take a vow to him in another matter. And ll of these four vows that are taught in our Mishnah, the laws of vows and oaths are equal, but what is permissible in a vow is permissible in an oath and it doesn’t require a release, except for vows of incitement alone, that require release from the words of the Scribes, therefore, an oath is forbidden with them."
            ],
            [
                "הרי נטיעות האלו קרבן אם אינן נקצצות – he saw the storm-wind and was afraid lest it would cut down his plants, and he said, “Lo, these are KORBAN (i.e., dedicated to the Temple) if they are not cut down.” Or he saw conflagration that fell upon the city and was fearful about his cloak lest it would be burned and he states, “Lo this is a KORBAN, if it is not burned.",
                "יש להם פדיון – like the rest of the things dedicated [to the Temple], and he can redeem them and purchase with their monetary proceeds a sacrifice. But since he didn’t say, “Lo, these are upon me as a KORBAN,” they are not to be delivered as a sacrifice, but rather, that he will be able to purchase with their monetary proceeds a sacrifice.",
                "אין להם פדיון – but rather the money is seized in its holiness and the plants return to become holy, for since he said, “until they are cut down,” this is what he said: when I redeem they will return and be sanctified until they are cut down."
            ],
            [
                "מותר ביושבי יבשה – for it is nt their practice to go down to the sea.",
                "בכלל יושבי היבשה – for eventually they will go down [to the sea] and to dwell on dry land.",
                "לא כאלו ההולכים מעכו ליפו – there are those who interpret this as such: That which is taught in the opening clause of our Mishnah: “He who takes a vow [not to gain benefit] from those who go down to the sea, are permitted [to gain benefit] from those who dwell on dry land, which implies, that those who go down to the sea are prohibited [to gain benefit from them], not the like of those who go from Acre to Jaffa, for a person who makes a vow from those who go down to the sea is not prohibited to them, for because of a short distance like this, they are not called, “those who go down to the sea.” There are those interpret: “not like those who go from Acre to Jaffa lon, because hey are included in those who go down to the sea that are prohibited, but also they are called hose who dwell on dry land, but rather, even those sail out of sight, because eventually, they will go down to dry land."
            ],
            [
                "מי שהחמה רואה אותו – for he didn’t say from those who see [the sun]."
            ],
            [
                "אמר בקרחים ובבעלי השיבות – since he didn’t say, “with those who have hair.”",
                "שאין נקראים שחורי הראש אלא אנשים – because the men sometimes cover heir heads and sometimes reveal and blacken their heads that is recognized that they are men, but women always walk and their heads are covered. But the small children, whether boys or girls walk with their heads revealed and they are not recognized as to whether they are boys or girls, and because of this, they are not called, “black-haired,” but rather, the adult men."
            ],
            [
                "מן שילודים – implying that they have already been born.",
                "מן הנולדים – implying those who will in the future be born.",
                "מן הנולדים רבי מאיר מתיר אף בילודים (from those who are born) – In the Gemara (Tractate Nedarim 30b) it explains that the Mishnah is deficient and should be read as follows: [those who take a vow] from those who may be born thereafter, are prohibited to those who are already born. Rabbi Meier states, even those who make a vow [to be prohibited] from those who will be born thereafter are permitted to those who are [already] born, in order that one who takes a vow [to be prohibited from those who have been already been born are permitted to those who may be born thereafter.",
                "אלא ממי שדרכו להוליד – as for example, humans and beasts, to exclude fowl and fish who do not give birth but rather lay eggs."
            ],
            [
                "מאוכלי שום – one of ten enactments made by Ezra [the Scribe] that they would eat garlic on Friday evenings, because it increases seed (i.e., semen) and Friday evening is the time for fulfillment of marital duties of Sages (see also Tractate Ketubot, Chapter 5, Mishnah 6).",
                "ומותר בכותים – they do not make pilgrimage [to Jerusalem]. But even though that this is according to the Torah, because they hare Jerusalem and chose for themselves Mount Gerizim."
            ],
            [
                "מותר בישראל – they have department from the category of the children of Noah/Noahides.",
                "ואסור באומות העולם – and even those who are from the seed of Abraham (i.e. Abraham’s other children such as Ishmael or the children of Keturah, etc.).",
                "אסור בישראל – and converts also are within the category of he seed of Abraham, as it is written (Genesis 17:5): “[but your name shall be Abraham,] for I make you the father of a multitude of nations.”",
                "ומותר באומות העולם – and even with those who are from the seed of Abraham, for only the children of Jacob were called the seed of Abraha, as it is written (Genesis 21:12): “for it is through Isaac that offspring shall be continued/called for you,” but no all of Isaac/כל יצחק (i.e., Esau).",
                "שאיני נהנה לישראל – that of Israel.",
                "שאין ישראל נהנין לי – of what is mine.",
                "ומוכר ביותר. אם שומעין לו – this is the reading, meaning to say, he will sell the thing for more from such as it is of its value, if his fellow wishes to listen to him, and to purchase from him the object for more than what it is worth.",
                "לערלים – the opinion on whomever does not believe in ritual circumcision.",
                "למולים – that believe in ritual circumcision.",
                "מותר בערלי ישראל – as for example, whomever whose brother died on account of [ritual] circumcision.",
                "ואסור במולי אומות – as for example, an Arab who is [ritually] circumcised or a Gibeonite who is [ritually] circumcised.",
                "שלש עשרה בריתות – it is stated in the portion of circumcision (Chapter 17 of Genesis, where the word \"ברית\"/covenant, is mentioned thirteen times) which is mentioned to Abraham.",
                "שהיא דוחה את השבת – as I is written (Leviticus 12:3): “On the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised,” and even if [the eighth day is] on Shabbat.",
                "שהיא דוחה את הנגעים – that we expound, \"ימול\"/shall be circumcised (Leviticus 12:3), and even in the place of a white spot on the skin (eventually one of the symptoms of leprosy), but we don’t have here because of cutting off his white spot, which is part of the negative commandment of (Deuteronomy 24:8): “In cases of a skin affection [be most careful to do do exactly as the Levitical priests instruct you].”"
            ]
        ],
        [
            [
                "אין בין מודר. אלא דריסת הרגל – to pass through his land, or to lend out utensils that they don’t make in them food necessary for the Sabbath day, which are permissible for someone who took a vow of deriving food from him, but is forbidden if he took a vow to enjoying any benefit from him.",
                "נפה וכברה רחים ותנור (winnow, basket used as a sieve, millstone, an oven) – that they prepare in them food necessary for the [Sabbath] day. And all the more so, a pot or a spit where the food stands within it. One who takes a vow against food that is taught in our Mishnah, is he who says to him: “KONAM: benefitting from your food is upon me.”",
                "מקום שמשכירין כיוצא בהם (a place where these things are rented out) – for since it is the practice to rent out such things and he foregoes the rental payment, with those monies he can purchase food necessary for the [Sabbath] day and he made him take a vow from deriving benefit is brought through the food."
            ],
            [
                "שוקל לו שקלו – the half-shekel that everyone from Israel is obligated for in each yer for the needs of the community sacrifices. But the person making he vow is able to pay his portion [for the one-half shekel] for him, for he is performing a mere Mitzvah.",
                "ופורע לו חובו – here are those who establish it especially regarding a debt that the borrower made a condition/stipulation with the lender that he should not pay back the debt other than when he wanted and the creditor is not able to pressure him, but now he doesn’t benefit him at all when he pays back his debt. But there are those who establish it for every debt that is in the world, which is not other than preventing the creditor that he should not make a claim against him, for the preventing of a claim is not within the category of benefit.",
                "ומחזיר לו אבדתו – whether the property of the one returning [the object] are forbidden on the person who lost [the object] or whether the property of the person who lost [the object] are forbidden on the person who returns [the object], because he is performing a Mitzvah [of restoring/returning a lost object].",
                "ובמקום שנוטלין עליה שכר תפול הנאה להקדש – when both of them take a vow of deriving any benefit from each other, if he akes the reward, it is found that he benefits, and if he doesn’t take the reward, it is found that he provides benefit [to the other], therefore, that benefit should fall to the Temple property. But we don’t say that he should bring the benefit to the Dead Sea (literally, Salt Sea), because his benefit is forbidden upon him like something given to the Temple property, therefore, all benefit that comes to his hand from him is Temple property/dedicated to a sacred purpose."
            ],
            [
                "ותורם תרומתו ומעשרותיו לדעתו – as, for example, that he said, all who wish to make a heave-offering should come and make the heave-offering/Terumah. But he should not tell him to make the heave-offering, for behold that makes him an agent and it is a benefit to him that he performs his agency.",
                "ומקריב לו קיני זבין וזבות – a Kohen who made a vow with an Israelite to not derive benefit from him, he can offer his sacrifices that he brings for a male with an emission and/or a female with an emission and/or [bird-offerings] for women who have given birth.",
                "ומלמדו מדרש – Sifra (i.e., the legal Midrash to Leviticus) and Sifrei (i.e., the legal Midrash to Numbers and/or Deuteronomy) , which is the Midrash of the the verses.",
                "הלכות – a usage dating from Moses as delivered from Sinai (i.e., a traditional law or a traditional interpretation of a written law).",
                "אגדות – words of the Sages that were supported through Biblical passages. And the reason that it was permitted to teach him all of these things, is that a person is not permitted to take a salary in order to teach his fellow all these things, and there is no benefit here, for he is performing a Mitzvah.",
                "אבל לא ילמדנו מקרא – for he is permitted to take a salary for the study of Bible for it is not other than the payment for the incisions in the Bible vers according to sense to play the Biblical verses in their appropriate manner, and it is not according to the Torah, and it is permitted to take payment for this for if he does not take payment, he ends up providing benefit for him, and if he takes [payment] it is found that he benefits. And specifically in a place where it is the practice to take payment for the Scripture, but in a place where they don’t take payment for Scripture, even Scripture is permitted to teach him.",
                "אבל מלמד הוא את בניו – for even though it is a Mitzvah upon the father to teach his son, and this fulfills his obligation to do so, it is not called benefit, for the Mitzvot/commandments were not given to benefit from them. But it is also possible that he would find someone else who will teach him (i.e., his son) for free.",
                "לא יזון את בהמתו – for it is satisfactory to him (i.e., the animal) with spices and this benefits him.",
                "טמאה נפשה וגופה לשמים – that for work it exists and he doesn’t worry about the corpse.",
                "שאם ירצה מוכרה לעכו\"ם – for eating and he takes the excess monies for its corpse."
            ],
            [
                "עומד אבל לא יושב – our Mishnah deals with when those who visit [the sick] enter who are forbidden [by vow] to the sick. But in a place where they take payment on sitting with the infirm person, for if he sits with him and doesn’t take his customary payment, he causes him benefit. But standing, it is a short time and it is not customary to take payment for this.",
                "רפואת הנפש – the healing of his body.",
                "רפואת ממונן – the healing of his cattle/beast. For it is obligatory for a person to heal his fellow when he takes ill, as it states (Deuteronomy 22:2): “then you shall give it back to him,” to include he loss of his body, and he is doing a Mitzvah, therefore, even though he made a vow not to allow him to derive any benefit from him, he heals him with his hands when he becomes sick in his body. But if his beast/cattle became ill, he is not able to heal it with his hands because he provides benefit, but says to him: “this drug/medication is fine for it (i.e., the animal), [or] that drug/medication is bad/harmful for it (i.e., the animal).",
                "אבל לא בקטנה – because he provides benefit t him when he raises the water over him.",
                "אבל לא בימות הגשמים – because he warms it (i.e., through his body) And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yehuda.",
                "אבל לא מן המחוי – he doesn’t eat with him in one utensil, lest he leave over from eating a nice portion that is within in order that this one who took a vow against deriving benefit from him will eat, or lest a piece that he eat draws close in front of him and it is found that he benefitting him.",
                "אבל אוכל הוא מן התמחוי החוזר – the owner of the house. Reuven eats in a bowl that he knows that when he will return it to the owner of the house, the house owner will go back and send it to Shimon who is under a vow against benefit from him, and we don’t suspect lest he (i.e., the owner of the house) in order that Shimon will eat from it and it is found that he is benefitting him.",
                "האבוס שלפני הפועלים – a large utensil that we fill it and all of the workers will eat from it together.",
                "לא יקצור עמו באומן – he should not trim with in in the same row that he trims. For this causes him that he will hurry to do his work that when he finds the place free, and it is found tha the benefits him. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Meir."
            ],
            [
                "מן הנוטות (from the overhanging fruit) – suspended/hanging fruit that overhang outside of the orchard.",
                "ובשביעית לא ירד לתוך שדהו – even though the All-Merciful made ownerless the produce of the seventh year, the All-Merciful did not make the surface of the land ownerless, and we suspect lest at the time that he doesn’t eat from the produce, he will tarry on the field and be delayed there and benefit from the surface of the land which is not ownerless."
            ],
            [
                "המודר הנאה חמבירו לא ישאילנו – as a decree lest he borrow from him, and he forbade benefit of that person upon him. But similarly, he cannot lend him, as a decree lest he borrow from him.",
                "ולא ימכור לו – for less than its worth/value, a decree lest he also purchase from him for less than its worth/value and it is found that he is benefitting.",
                "אם היה דרכו לחרוז הוא אסור – he did not intend other than that he himself should not plow like he was accustomed, but others will plow.",
                "ואם אין דרכו לחרוש – his intention was not to plow it, neither him nor others."
            ],
            [
                "ואין לו מה יאכל – it (i.e., the Mishnah) took a usual incident, and the same law applies even if he has what to eat.",
                "ובא זה ונוטל מזה – if he wants to give him, and he doesn’t violate his vow. But he cannot force him to pay him, for this one did not say to him: “Give him and I will pay.” But if he said to him, yes, it is prohibited, for that makes him into an agent."
            ],
            [
                "ור\"י אוסר – for since there isn’t there another who would be able to provide other than him, it is like a gift. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yossi. But especially when he (i.e., the one who has taken a vow not to benefit from his fellow) has nothing to eat, that the Rabbis permit, but not with another person."
            ]
        ],
        [
            [
                "השותפין – that each one of them a house in the courtyard, and the courtyard that is in front of the houses, both of them are partners in it But at the time when the courtyard has the law of division/partition, and as such there will be four cubits in the courtyard to each and every house in front of the house, and there will remain from the courtyard another four cubits to this one (i.e., person) and four cubits to that one (i.e., person), in this everyone admits that both of them are forbidden to enter into the courtyard until they divide it, for since the law of division/partition is there. But Rabbi Eliezer and the Rabbis do not disagree other than regarding a courtyard that does not have the law of division, as the Rabbis state that each of them enters through his fellow’s [property], but Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov holds that there is a retrospective designation (i.e., the legal effect resulting from an action selection or designation or disposal of things previously undefined for their purpose/ברירה) and this one goes to his and that one goes to his.",
                "ושניהם אסורים להעמיד שם רחים וכו' – But Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov admits in all of these that the partners prevent each other, for it does not belong to permit for the reason of the retrospective designation, for since it is within his hand/power to prevent him, and if he doesn’t prevent him,it is found that he provides him benefit.",
                "ופופין את הנודר למכור את חלקו – for we are concerned that after he sees his fellow entering, he will forget and will also enter. But when both are prohibited [from entering] we don’t concern ourselves, and specifically when he took a vow on his own not to enjoy benefit from his fellow is when we force him to sell his portion but if his fellow made him take a vow that he will not benefit from him, he is the victim of an unavoidable accident, and we don’t force him to see for what can he possibly do? But if you stated such, each partner should make his friend take a vow that he will not benefit from him in order that we can force him to sell his portion."
            ],
            [
                "היה אחד מן השוק וכו'- to inform you of the power of Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov that it (i.e., the Mishnah) took this, for even one from the market that has no portion in the courtyard, Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov permits him to enter for the reason of restrospective designation/ברירה . And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov."
            ],
            [
                "המודר הנאה מחבירו ויש לו מרחץ ובית הבד וכו' – Reuven who is forbidden upon him to derive benefit with the possessions of Shimon, and Shimon has in the city a bathhouse and an olive press building that he rented out to others, and Reuven comes to use them, we see if here remains to Reuven a place in this bathhouse and/or the olive press building that he didn’t rent to him as for example, the cistern in the bathhouse, and things similar to this, it would be forbidden for Reuven to use them, but if not, it is permitted.”",
                "ומת או שמכרם לאחר מותר – for since he said, “your house”, “your field,” but he didn’t intend other than for the time when hey are his. B if he said, “this house,” or “this field,” he has forbidden them for him forever."
            ],
            [
                "הריני עליך חרם – my benefit will be forbidden upon you like a חרם/property designated for sacred use only (or like excommunication) that you wil not be able to benefit from me.",
                "המודר אסור – even though he did not answer “Amen.” For a person can forbid upon his fellow that he will not benefit from him.",
                "הרי אתה עלי חרם – that he forbid upon himself all benefit that would come to him from his fellow, the person making the vow is forbidden.",
                "בדבר של עולי בבל – as, for example, the cistern of those who ascend for the Festivals, who would come up from Babylonia to the Land of Israel for the Festival, and that cistern was found in the middle of the path and the hands of all Israel were equal upon it and it was like ownerless, and not like something that belongs to partners."
            ],
            [
                "הרחבה (town square) – the markets that are in the city.",
                "והתיבה (ark) -where they place in it the Scrolls/books.",
                "והספרים – that the people of the city buy to study them.",
                "והכותב חלקו לנשיא – It explains in the Gemara (Tractate Nedarim 48a) that this is what it is said, and what is their remedy? They should write/assign their portion to the President/Nasi, meaning to say that those who made vows are not to benefit from each other and are prohibited to use the street of the city and the Ark and the Scrolls/books, each one of them should write/assign the part/share that each has to the President/Nasi, and afterwards each one of them will be able to use them, for they are using the wealth of the President/Nasi, and not one of them is benefitting from his fellow.",
                "רבי יהודה אומר – if they wanted, let them assign their shares/portions to an ordinary person, but if they wrote/assigned them to the Nasi, there is no need to make assignment to him/to take possession of it through another person, since because of the importance of the Nasi, he acquires even though that he was not assigned it by another, but an ordinary person does not acquire until he makes assignment to him/he takes possession of it through another [person].",
                "אנשי גליל אין צריכין לזכות – the people of the Galilee were quarrelsome (see Talmud Nedarim 48a) and through their anger, they would make vows against benefiting from one another, their fathers stood up and assigned their shares to the Nasi, so that if their children after them would make vows forbidding benefit from one another, they would not be forbidden in the street of the city or the Ark or the Scrolls/Books, for they are the wealth of the Nasi."
            ],
            [
                "ומעשה בבית חורון וכו' – In the Gemara (Tractate Nedarim 48a), it explains that the Mishnah is deficient and should be read as follows: if its end proves/serves as evidence about its beginning, it is prohibited. And there is the episode in Bet Horon also with one whose last action demonstrated his first [as a mere evasion], etc.",
                "ואינן לפניך אלא כדי שיבא אבא ויאכל – so we see that he didn’t give them [the courtyard and the food as a gift] other than in order that his father could come and eat, and that is prohibited. But if he had said: “Lo, these are before you, and if it is your desire that [my father] father comes and eats,” it is permitted. But if his meal shows/proves that it he increased the meal more than what he should have and these things are recognized that it was for his father that he did this in order that he would come and eat it is prohibited."
            ]
        ],
        [
            [
                "הנודר מן המבושל – that he said: “KONAM: that which is cooked upon me [that I will not eat it].”",
                "מותר בצלי ובשלוק – all that is cooked more than the appropriate amount of cooking is called שלוק (i.e., seethed, boiled to a pulp).",
                "מעשה קדירה רך – that is eaten without bread/pita.",
                "",
                "ביצה טרמיטא (an egg boiled down to the size of a pill) – cooked in hot water and protecting it that it should not coagulate/curdle.",
                "ובדלעת הרמוצה (a gourd made edible by baking in hot ashes) – a gourd that they preserve in hot ashes/embers , which is hot ashes and it becomes sweet in this"
            ],
            [
                "ממעשה קדרה (cooked in a pot) – food made from flour that was heated in a pot. But the generall rule of he matter, regarding vows one goes according to the language of people according to the time and the place, and if there is a place that calls something roasted cooked, and something cooked roasted, a person who takes a vow from that which is cooked is forbidden with that which is roasted, and such in a similar manner to this. Bu if mst people call it this and a minority call it that, we don’t say – go after the majority, but rather it is a doubtful vow, and all doubtful vows are dealt with stringently."
            ],
            [
                "אינו אסור אלא מן הכבוש מן הירק – for undefined pickled is of vegetables.",
                "כבוש שאיני טועם – implying all kinds of pickled [foods]. And similarly, seethed, roasted and salted, without the \"ה\"/definite article “the”, implies all the kinds of seethed, and of roasted and of salted."
            ],
            [
                "דג דגים שאינו טועם – neither fishe nor fishes, and everything is implied.",
                "טפלין – without salt.",
                "בטרית טרופה (a brine containing hashed pickled fish in which you can cannot recognize the clean and unclean fish) – fish that they cut it up into small pieces and sell it and it has a name of its own and is not within the general category of fish and fishes.",
                "ציר – water/liquid that comes out from the salted fish (i.e., brine).",
                "ומורייס – fat that comes out from salted fish.",
                "צחנה (small fish preserved in brine) – a mixture of kinds of brined fish which is called צחנה /small fish preserved in brine), and its example is in the Tractate Avodah Zarah [40a] this is shiploand of small fish preserved in brine,",
                "ומותר בציר ובמורייס – since the essence of the matter of the fish is not absorbed in them.",
                "הנודר מטרית טרופה – for since it (i.e., the Mishnah) mentioned טרופה /chopped, from everything that is mixed with a species of fish is implied."
            ],
            [
                "קום (curdled milk) – it is the whey that comes out from the cheese.",
                "אבא שאול אומר כו' בין מלוחה בין טפילה – that you should not say that is the special cheese, implying, that there is no manner to eat it without salt. But the Halakha is according to Abba Shaul."
            ],
            [
                "מותר ברוטב ובקיפה (broth and sediments of boiled meat) – the broth that is curdled on the rims of the pot is called קיפה/sediments of boiled meat.",
                "רבי יהודה אוסר – since it has the taste of meat. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda.",
                "אימתי בזמן שאמר בשר זה עלי – for since he said, “this meat,” this piece [of meat] is considered ass something forbidden and its taste is forbidden. But if he said, KONAM, this meat upon me, he did not forbid upon himself other than the things that is called meat."
            ],
            [
                "מותר בתבשיל שיש בו טעם יין – according to the Rabbis of Rabbi Yehuda."
            ],
            [
                "סתוניות – bad grapes that remain in the vines in he days of the fall, bt are not appropriate for wine, and we make of them vinegar.",
                "כל ששם תולדתו קרויה עליו – but even though it has changed, it is called by its original name, like the honey of date-palms and the vinegar of winter grapes.",
                "וחכמים מתירין\\ – there is a difference between the first Tanna/teacher and the Sages, for the first Tanna/teacher holds that a person who takes a vow against winter/autumnal grape is permitted to the vinegar that comes from them, and is forbidden [to consume] winter grapes, but the Sages permit winter grapes themselves, for since winter grapes are not eatable, when he took a vow from [consuming] winter grapes, his intention was on the vinegar that comes out from them, not on the winter grapes themselves. And the Halakha is according to the Sages. Another explanation: But the Sages permit the vinegar of winter grapes like the honey of dates, for the Sages hold that whether they are things appropriate for consumption pr whether they are inappropriate for consumption a person who prohibits something upon himself is permitted [to consume] that which comes out from it."
            ],
            [
                "קפלוטות (porrets) – a kind from the species of leek-green stuff that grows in the Lnd of Israel.",
                "שהוא שם לווי ( a differentiating epithet) – he who comes to state the vegetables of the field must attach the name of the egetable and state, the vegetables of the field. And similarly for all of them. But in the Seventh year, because the vegetables of he garden are not found, for they don’t grow without work and we eat the vegetables of the field, therefore, undefined vegetables in the Seventh year are the vegetables of the field. This is not the case in the other years of the seven year cycle."
            ],
            [
                "אספרגוס – it is a kind of cabbage, but cabbage is not called by the name of asparagus. Another explanation: Asparagus, the water that the cabbage seethed in it.",
                "מן הגיסין אסור במקפה – for even though that they are placed in the stiff mass of grist, oil and onions/the porriage, the name of the dish of pounded grains is upon them.",
                "ורבי יוסי מתיר – for he holds that it is called a porridge of pounded grains, it is not called mere pounded grains.",
                "מקפה – a thick cooked dish of beans or of a sort of pudding consisting of minced meats, mixed with wine and spices.",
                "הנודר מן המקפה אסור בשום – it was customary to put garlic in every porridge in order that it would provide flavor, and the garlic is the stiff mass of grist, oil and onions.",
                "אסור באשישין (cake made with boiled lentils impregnated with honey) – the refuse of lentils, but the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yossi in these three segments of our Mishnah.",
                "חטה חטים שאיני טועם – a grain of wheat, implies baked bread; wheat [ground up] implies to chew."
            ]
        ],
        [
            [
                "הנודר מן הירק. לא מצאתי אלא דלועין – and if it is a species of vegetable, why doesn’t he purchase it for him?",
                "כן הדבר – and from there I bring a proof. Lest he say I did not find [anything] but pulse. And since I come to consult on the gourd, I can see that it is a kind of vegetable. And the Halakha is according to the Sages."
            ],
            [
                "אסור בפול המצרי יבש – that grain is anything that is from grain is implied, every thing that we make of it a heap/pile, and this also is from grain.",
                "הנודר מן הדגן אסור בכל – kinds of pulse ;hat they make of hem heaps/piles. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Meir."
            ],
            [
                "בשק ביריעה ובחמילה (sacklng, curtain, blanket of thick, coarse stuff)- kinds of large andvery thick clothing but people do not regularly cover themselves with it.",
                "מותר גביזי צמר – that he didn’t intend other than for a wool clothing.",
                "הכל לפי הנודר – according to the time of the vow. Since it is recognized that as a result of the heaviness of his load he made the vow, he is permitted to wear them as clothing. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yehuda."
            ],
            [
                "הנודר מן הבית – that he should not enter the house. He is permitted to enter into the upper story/attic, because it is not included in the house."
            ],
            [
                "דרגש (footstool) – a small bed that they place it in front of the large bed and from it one ascends to the large bed.",
                "לתחומה של עיר – two thousand cubits in every direction surrounding it.",
                "עיבורה (outskirts) – of the city. The houses that protrude from it within seventy cubits and their remnants. It is like a pregnant woman whose stomach projects outward.",
                "אגף (door-stop; moulding or eminence of the door frame against which the door shuts) – [place] of the closing of the door. And its example (Ezra) [Nehemiah 7:3]: “let the doors be closed and barred.” (the text of Bartenura lists the source as coming from chapter 3 of Nehemiah which is incorrect."
            ],
            [
                "אסור בחילופיהן ובגידוליהן – if he exchanged them ab initio, that which he exchanges for them is prohibited in their monetary value that the Rabbis decreed the prohibition of benefit on their monetary value. And their growth of [something called] KONAM Is prohibited like that dedicated to the Temple which grows.",
                "שאיני אוכל ושאיני טועם – he did not prohibit upon himself other than consuming and tasting of them alone.",
                "אבל בדבר שאין זרעו כלה – as for example, onions and things similar to it. Even what grows from what grows is like the body of the prohibition, since this is something of which the seed does not perishes."
            ],
            [
                "קונם מעשה ידיך עלי – he forbade all of what she does and what she prepares for him. And if she planted a tree, its growth is prohibited."
            ],
            [
                "שאת עושה עכשיו יני אוכל עד הפסח – it implies this – that what you do now I won’t eat of until Passover, but after Passover I will eat. But everything that you do until Passover, I do not eat, implying, every thing that you do from today until Passover comes I do not eat it ever, even after Passover."
            ],
            [
                "שאת נהנית לי עד הפסח אם הוכלת את לבית אביך עד החג – Whomever that would stand after Sukkot and prohibit his benefit upon her until Passover if she would go to her father’s house until Sukkot.",
                "לאחר הפסח בלא יחל דברו – meaning to say, if she went [to her father’s house] after Passovef, she violates (Numbers 30:2): “he shall not break his pledge; “retroactively on what she benefitted from him before Passover."
            ]
        ],
        [
            [
                "קונם יין עד שתחשך – for such is the manner of language of human beings, for when they say, “today,” they want to say until the completion of the day.",
                "שבת זו – he would stand in the middle of the week, and say, “this week is forbidden” – for the entire week.",
                "והשבת לשעבר – and he is also prohibited on the sabbath day, for it is in the category of the week that past.",
                "חודש זה אסור בכל החודש – if he is standing in the middle of the month and said, “this month,” he forbidden until the completion of the month, and the day of Rosh Hodesh of the month ahead, but it is permitted on the day of Rosh Hodesh because it is counted with the next month, and even if Rosh Hodesh is on the thirtieth [day] of the previous month. And similarly, this year, if he stood in the middle of the year and stated, “this year,” it is forbidden until the completion of the year, but it is permitted on Rosh Hashanah which is counted with the year that will come in the future.",
                "שבוע זה – he was standing in the middle of the Shmittah year and stated, “this seven-year cycle,” he is forbidden until the completion of the Shmittah, and the seventh year is included within the Shmittah year that had passed.",
                "אם אמר יום אחד, שבת אחת, חודש אחד, שנה אחת, שבוע אחד אסור מיום ליום – if he is standing in the middle of the day and states “one day” he is forbidden until the morrow at this time. And similarly, if he is standing in the eighth [day] of the month and stated, “[KONAM] this month is upon me,” he is forbidden until the eighth [day] of the next month. And similarly, for a year. And similarly, in the Shmittah year. And similarly, if he said, “KONAM that wine is forbidden upon me for an unspecified day, or week, or month, or unspecified year, even though he did not say “one day,” “one week,” “one month,” the law is the time of twenty-four astronomical hours. But one who says “KONAM that wine [will be forbidden] upon me today,” even though he is permitted when it it gets dark, he requires a request made to a Sage [to be released from his vow], as a decree that when he stated “today,” lest he (i.e., the Sage) come [to release him from his vow], when he stated, an unspecified day, that he switched/exchanged between “the day” to “today,” or between this week to an unspecified week. And similarly, for all of them."
            ],
            [
                "עד הפסל אסור עד שיגיע – that in the language of human beings, up to but not including.",
                "עד שיהא, אסור עד שיצא – that implies all the time which is the present.",
                "עד לפני הפסח ר\"מ אומר אסור עד שיגיע (see also Talmud Kiddushin 65a for an alternative reading in this dispute between Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yossi)- for a person does not inject himself into a doubt, and matter that is ascertained to call “prior to Passover” is stated, and which is until it (i.e., Passover) arrives. But Rabbi Yossi holds that a person does inject himself into a doubt to prohibit all that he is able to have doubts about. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yossi."
            ],
            [
                "עד הקציר – of wheat and barley.",
                "עד הבציר – of grapes.",
                "עד המסיק – of olives.",
                "אינו אסור עד שיגיע – for since the harvesting season [of wheat and barley), and vintage season [of grapes] do not have a fixed time, as will be explained further on, it does not make a difference if he said, עד שיהא/until it will be or whether he saidעד שיגיע /until it comes, it is not prohibited until it comes, for everything whose time is not determined, it is not the intention of the person making a vow to inject himself into a prohibition of time that is not known to him, and therefore, we state that surely, it states “until it arrives/comes.”"
            ],
            [
                "עד הקיץ עד יה הקיץ – whether he said “until the summer,” or whether he said “until it will be the summer,” he is not prohibited other than until people begin to bring in the basket containing chosen fruits designated for use, meaning to say, they cut many figs and bring them in with baskets.",
                "עד שיקפלו המקצועות – (up to the time when they lay figs in layers; alternatively, when they fold up the knives to store them away) - the matting that they dry the figs on them, after they have dried they fold up the matting and set them aside until the next year.",
                "הכל לפי מקום נדרו – if the majority of the grain of the place is wheat, until the harvesting of wheat. But if [the majority of the grain] is barley, until the harvesting of the barley. And similarly, if he was in the mountain at the time of the vow, until the time of the harvesting [of wheat/barley] and the vintage [of grapes] on the mountain. And if he is in the valley, until the time of the harvesting and vintage of the valley arrives."
            ],
            [
                "עד הגשמים עד שיהיו גשמים – in which expression from these two phraseologies that he expressed from his lips, he is permitted since when the rains begin to fall in the second rainfall/fructification which is, in a late year, on Rosh Hodesh Kislev. Therefore, one who takes a vow “until the rains [come]” is prohibited until Rosh Hodesh Kislev, unless it (i.e., rain) fell at the beginning of their time which is in an early year on the seventeenth of Heshvan, and in an average year on the twenty-third of it (i.e., Heshvan). And such is the Halakah. But not according to Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel who states until the time arrives for the rainfall/fructification.",
                "ר\"י ומר עד שיעבור הפסח – and the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yehuda."
            ],
            [
                "לליל הצום – the night of the fast of [Yom] Kippur, for it is a Mitzvah to increase the meal on the eve of the fast of [Yom] Kippur.",
                "קומם שום שאיני טועם וכו' – that Ezra established that they should eat garlic on Friday nights because it increases the semen (see Tractate Nedarim, Chapter 3, Mishnah 10). But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda nor according to Rabbi Yossi his son, but as we stated above in our Mishnah (see Tractate Nedarim, Chapter 8, Mishnah 3), “everything whose time is fixed, he stated, until it arrives, it is forbidden until it arrives; “until it will be,” it is forbidden until after it has passed."
            ],
            [
                "זהו כבודי – that I will support my child from my own [possessions].",
                "מסרבין בו לשאת את בת אחותו – they were urging hin that he should marry the daughter of his sister because she is his age and we state [Tractate Yevamot 62b] that a person who marries the daughter of his sister, upon him Scripture states (Isaiah 58:7.9): “And not to ignore your own kin…Then when you call, the LORD will answer.”",
                "שלא נתכוין זה אלא לשם אכילה ושתיה – But however,also eating and drinking are permitted, for since he did not state from his mouth “eating and drinking” and wih vows, we require that he issue it from his lips, as it is written (Numbers 30:3): “he must carry out all that has crossed his lips (i.e., literally, come out of his mouth),” and it is not similar to the first clause [of the Mishnah], for marriage is included within the benefits that he has."
            ]
        ],
        [
            [
                "רבי אליעזר אומר פותחין לאדם בכבוד אביו ואמו – as, for example, that they would say to him: “if you would know that the world would say to your father and your mother, ‘see the rearing of your children that you raised, how much your children are lax in the taking of vows’ and it would be found that they despise their honor (i.e., that of their parents), you would not ever take a vow.”",
                "וחכמים אוסרין – for we suspect that perhaps he would lie, for he is embarrassed to state that he would not allow him from taking a vow because of their honor, and it is found that the Sage pardons this vow without regret and there is no need to find for him an opening [to release him from his vow] at the time that he feels sorry on his own from the beginning.",
                "יפחתו לו בכבוד המקום – he (Rabbi Tzadok) is raising an objection on the matter of Rabbi Eliezer, for just as that you open [to elicit regret] with the honor of his father and mother, and we don’t suspect that perhaps he will lie, let him open [to elicit regret] with the honor of “the Place” (i.e., God) and they will inform him, that if you had known that you would be called wicket before “the Place” (i.e., God), you would never take a vow? But the Sages said to him according Rabbi Eliezer, that from here, you will not find you will not support them, for even Rabbi Eliezer admits to this, specifically that he may lie, for a person a person is not so impudent that he would not set aside something for the honor of “the Place” (i.e., God), and it is not similar to that of Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel (see Talmud Nedarim 22a) who opened [to elicit regret] for that person (Proverbs 12:18): “There is blunt talk like sword thrusts [But the speech of the wise is healing].” That there he says to him from the Biblical verses like that which is taught in our Mishnah (see Tractate Nedarim, Chapter 9, Mishnah 4) that he is transgressing on (Leviticus 19:17): “You shall not hate your kinfolk in your heart,” (Leviticus 19:18): “You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against your countrymen.” But when we mention to him the honor of God (i.e., המקום ), then he certainly is lying. And the Halakha is according to the Sages.",
                "שבינו לבין אביו ואמו – as, for example when he made his father take a vow from his possessions,"
            ],
            [
                "ועוד אמר רבי אליעזר – another leniency in making vows/Nedarim.",
                "פותחין – in [the releasing from] vows with a נולד/a new situation (i.e., a vow may not be dissolved on grounds of lack of intent if the person who vowed failed to anticipate an unpredictable situation that would have led him to refrain from making the vow, though they can be dissolved if it is shown that they were not made with full intent and knowledge), as for example a thing which is not found and is a new situation and it became established as a new interpretation after he had vowed but if he had known at the time of the vow this thing would be established as a new interpretation, he would not have made the vow.",
                "וחכמים אוסרים – that the reason of regret is because through regret, the vow is uprooted from its essence, and for a thing that is not found, it doesn’t become a vow that is uprooted/removed from its essence, but for this, he would not have allowed [himself] from making a vow, for he would have thought that it would not ever come to pass.",
                "ונעשה סופר – a Sage and everyone needs him.",
                "או שהיה משיא את בנו ברקוב לא הייתי נודר – and for example, that he took a vow for a period of time and didn’t think that he would marry off his son within that time, and that he would have to go to the wedding of his son. But the Halakha is according to the Sages."
            ],
            [
                "יש דברים שהם כנולד – they appear like a new situation/נולד",
                "ואינם כנולד – and he opens with them [as a means of getting a person to regret that he vowed].",
                "אמרו לו מת וכו' – even though that death is like a new situation, since he specified at the time of his vow on account of what he is vowing, it is made as if he is making his vow dependent upon a thing, as if he specified all the time that her father is alive, therefore, it is not a new situation. But a it is not a complete condition, therefore, it requires renunciation. But in the Jerusalem Talmud it is proven that he doesn’t require renunciation [of the vow]. And so explained Maimonides (see The Laws of Vows/הלכות נדרים, Chapter 8, Halakhot 1-2)."
            ],
            [
                "אילו הייתי יודע שכן הוא לא הייתי נודר הרי זה מותר – after the Sage loosens/absolves him [from his vow], and all that he vowed [against] benefit from his fellow, when they release him, they don’t release him other than in the presence of his fellow, as it is written (Exodus 4:19): “The LORD said to Moses in Midian, ‘Go back to Egypt, [for all the men who sought to kill you are dead’],” the Holy One Blessed be He said to Moses: “In Midian, you made a vow; in Midian go and releave your vow.” Because Moses swore to his father-in-law (i.e., Jethro) that he would not move from Midian without his permission, as it is written (Exodus 2:21): “Moses consented to stay with the man, [and he gave Moses his daughter Zipporah as wife],” and it was necessary for the Holy One Blessed be He to go and release his vow in his presence."
            ],
            [
                "פותחין לו בכתובת אשתו – payment of her Ketubah if he took a vow to divorce her."
            ],
            [
                "פותחין בימים טובים ובשבתות – if he vowed to fast, or not to eat meat for a specified time, they say to him: “If you had placed upon your heart for the Sabbaths and Holy Days that are within this time [period], you would not vow at all. But this does not [provide] and opening [for the absolution/renunciation of his vows] with the honor of “the Place” (i.e., God).",
                "אותן הימים – that he found for them an opening to express regret.",
                "מותרים – that the Sage releases them.",
                "ושאר הימים – where they do not have regret, they remain in their prohibition [of deriving benefit].",
                "שנדר שהותר מקצתו הותר כולו – even though he did not find an opening [for the release though regret] for the entire vow, for he had nowed initially other than with the knowledge that it would be completely fulfilled, and it was found that the absolution/release of part of it (i.e., the vow) opened [an expression of regret] for all of it."
            ],
            [
                "לזה ולזה – as, for example, he prohibited the first upon himself by KONAM, and said regarding the second [person], “behold this is like the first,” and on the third [person], “behold this is like the second,” and similarly all of them. If the first was released, all of them are released, for all of them are dependent upon this one.",
                "לזה קרבן ולזה קרבן – surely our Mishnah is [according to] Rabbi Shimon who stated concerning the oath of a deposit (i.e., with the intention of falsely denying a deposit or a debt; he must add one-fifth to it and bring a ram as a guilt-offering); if there were five people make claims against him and he denied it and took an oath and admitted that he is not liable for a sacrifice on each one until he takes an oath for each and every one, and here too, he must state, to this one a sacrifice/KORBAN and to that one a sacrifice/KORBAN. But the Sages state that if he made an oath that I am not liable to youm nor to you nor to you, he is liable for each and every one, and here too if he said to this one, but not to that one nor to that one, even though he did not mention KORBAN on each one, for each one is a vow on its own. And such is the Halakha."
            ],
            [
                "לא במיושן בלבד הותר אלא בכל היין – and especially that he said,”if I knew this, I wouldn’t have taken a vow at all, or I would have said: that which is old is permitted/released, and that which is new is prohibited. But he aid, if I had known I would have said: “all wine is prohibited upon me except from the old,” behold this is not permitted/released to him other than the old alone, and all the rest of the wine is prohibited (for definition of “old” see Tractate Bava Batra, Chapter Six, Mishnah 3)."
            ],
            [
                "פותחין לאדם בכבוד עצמו ובכבוד בניו – if he vowed to divorce his wife.",
                "מה ראתה אמן להתגרש – if there wasn’t found in her \"ערות דבר\" /something obnoxious [about her] (Deuteronomy 24:1) and it was found that he discredits his children, and we aren’t concerned lest he would lie, for he doesn’t express regret but rather, he is embarrassed to state that he doesn’t feel pain for the honor of his children."
            ],
            [
                "אלא שהנדר טעות – from its essence, for at the time of the vow, she was white, and it doesn’t require a request made to a Sage [to release him from his vow].",
                "מעשה באחד שנדר וכו' – In the Gemara (Tractate Nedarim 66a), it explains that the Mishnah is deficient and should be read as follows: Rabbi Yishmael states: Even if she was ugly and became pretty/beautiful; black and became white, and there is a story/episode also, etc., for the first Tanna/teacher did not permit other than at a time when the vow was in error from its essence, such as, for example, that she was beautiful at the time of the vow. But Rabbi Yishmael holds that even though she didn’t become beautiful until after the vow [was taken], the vow is annulled, for since one can make her beautiful, she was not ugly from the beginning. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yishmael."
            ]
        ],
        [
            [
                "נערה המאורסה – a girl who is twelve years and one-day old, and who brought forth two [pubic] hairs, is called a נערה/a young woman/lass, until six months. But a woman who is eleven years and one-day old, her vows are examined, if she knew for whom she made the vow, and in the name of whom she sanctified, her vow is vow, and even regarding her, her father and her husband annul her vows.",
                "הפר האב ולא הפר הבעל – because it was possible to err and to explain [the phrase]: “her father and her husband annul her vows,”/\"אביה ובעלה מפירין נדריה\" as or her father or her husband, it teaches in he Mishnah:\"הפר האב ולא הפר הבעל\"/”if her father annulled her vows, but not her husband, etc.,” to inform us that both need to nullify [her vows].",
                "ואין צריך לומר שקיים אחד מהם – if one of them confirmed [her vows] the second is not able to nullify them. But this tells us that even though the even though that one of them (i.e., the father or the husband was consulted that he established his confirmation, as we hold, we consult on the confirmation (i.e, the privilege of confirming a vow – see also Tractate Nedarim 10:7), , this one who was asked for confirmation cannot nullify any further, since both of them are not able to nullify [a vow] at the same time."
            ],
            [
                "מת האב לא נתרוקנה רשות לבעל – the husband does not annul the vows of his wife until she marries.",
                "מת הבעל נתרוקנה רשות לאב – and he annuals all of the days of her being a lass, as it is written (Numbers 30:17): “while in her father’s house by reason of her youth.”",
                "והאב אינו מפר בבגר – as it is written (there – Numbers 30:4): “while still in her father’s household by reason of her youth.”"
            ],
            [
                "נתגרשה בו ביום – that the father heard, for if the day passed, he can no longer annul [her vows].",
                "ונתארסה – [and she became betrothed] to another, on that selfsame day.",
                "אביה ובעלה האחרון מפירין נדריה – that she vowed in the presence of the first betrothed man, for the betrothed man releases those who preceded him.",
                "כל זמן שלא יצאת לרשות עצמה – not on account of becoming an adult nor on account of marriage."
            ],
            [
                "עד שלא היתה בתו יוצא מאצלו – prior to her coming to the domain of the husband. And similarly the betrothed man says to her the same thing.",
                "עד שלא תכנס לרשותו – since from when she enters into his domain, he cannot annul [her vows], for the husband cannot annul what proceeded, and we learn from our Mishnah that the husband can annul the vows of his wife even without hearing [about it], since it is taught [in the Mishnah]: “And so the husband before she enters his domain, says to her, etc.”"
            ],
            [
                "בוגרת ששהתה י\"ב חודש – an adult woman whose father does not annul her vows, and she was claimed to [get ready to] marry and she waited twelve months that from then onwards, her husband would be liable for her food [and support].",
                "ואלמנה – that waited thirty days, from when she was claimed [to get ready to] marry, that she eats from her husband.",
                "רבי אליעזר אומר הואיל ובעלה חייב במזונותיה = and he annuls her vows. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Eliezer."
            ],
            [
                "שומרת יבם וכו' ר\"א אומר יפר when he made her the widow of a brother who died without children (יבמה) , it (i.e., the Mishnah) is speaking of the Yavam’s betrothal (by word of mouth, as opposed to the consummation of marriage, for Rabbi Eliezer holds that מאמר/statement - betrothal of the widow of a brother who died without children/a יבמה – that this betrothal should be effected by means of a marriage document or money should be accompanied by a statement of betrothal, which acquires the childless widow of his dead brother completely from the Torah, But if she is a נערה/a young woman/lass and she has a father, the father and her Yavam/dead husband’s brother [both] annul her vows.",
                "רבי יהושע אומר לאחד ולא לשנים – for Rabbi Yehoshua does not hold that מאמר/the statement does not acquire In a complete acquisition. However, he holds that there is a זיקה/a levirate bond (between the Yevama waiting for her brother-in-law to act and her deceased husband’s brothers during the period after the husband’s death before one of the brothers performs a levirate marriage) and this levirate bond is like she is a married woman, but when there is only one levir/יבם , he annuls [her vows, vut when there are two levirs, not a single one of them can annul [her vows] for there is no retroactive designation.",
                "ר\"ע אומר לא לאחד ולא לשנים – for he holds that the levirate bond/זיקה is not like someone who is married, and the “statement”/מאמר – does not effect a complete acquisition from the Torah.",
                "אשה שקנה הוא לעצמו – that is his betrothed woman.",
                "הרי הוא מיפר נדרהי – in partnership with her father.",
                "אשה שהקנו לו מן השמים – which is the widow of his dead brother who died without children/יבמתו – his Yevamah.",
                "אינו דין שיפר נדריה – in partnership with her father.",
                "שיש לאחרים רשות בה – for she is also in a levirate bond with the other brothers [of her dead husband].",
                "מה אתה משיב על יבם אחד – meaning to say, your response is good on the words of Rabbi Eliezer who states that he annuls even when there are two [potential] levirs, what can you respond to me on my words that I state, to one, but not to two [levirs]?",
                "אין היבמה גמורה ליבם – to make liable for death o someone who comes upon her in the same manner that the betrothed woman is completely his wife (of the betrothed man) in regard to the liability for death (if someone comes upon his betrothed wife). And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Akiva."
            ],
            [
                "הרי הן קיימין לא אמר כלום – for this is an errant confirmation, because there are vows that he would not desire in their confirmation.",
                "הרי הן מופרין רבי אליעזר אומר מופר – for in general, a man does not desire in the vows of his wife.",
                "נדרים שבאו לכלל איסור – for after she vowed, she is prohibited in them if [her] husband did not annul them.",
                "שבאו לכלל הקם – vows that took place already."
            ],
            [
                "הפרת נדרים – as the Torah stated (Numbers 30:9): “But if her husband restrains her on the day that he learns of it, [he thereby annuls her vow which was in force or the commitment to which she bound herself.”",
                "כל היום – until it gets dark, as it states (Numbers 30:6): “[But if her father restrains her] on the day he finds out (literally, “hears it”). But as it is written (Numbers 30:15): “[If her husband offers no objections] from that day to the next, [he has upheld all the vows or obligations she has assumed],” it is necessary, that you don’t say, yes, in the daytime, but now at night, we hold (Numbers 30:15): “from that day to the next/\"מיום אל יום\" – for sometimes he has the time to annul [her vows] during the period of twenty-four astronomical hours/\"מעת לעת\", as, for example, if she took a vow at the beginning of the night.",
                "ויש בדבר להקל ולהחמיר – meaning to say, sometimes when he can annula them within a short time and sometimes within a longer time.",
                "נדרה בלילי שבת – this that it (i.e., the Mishnah) took/used the phrase \"בלילי שבת\"/”on Friday nights” to teach us that we annul vows on Shabbat (see Tractate Shabbat, Chapter 24, Mishnah 5), and even not for the need of the Sabbath. But the Sage does not release [from vows] on Shabbat other than vows that are for the needs of the Sabbath, and even though he had the free time while it was still day, he can release for the needs of the Sabbath.",
                "שאם לא הפר וחשכה אינו יכול להפר – for there is no absolution of vows during the period of twenty-foru astronomical hours unless she vowed from the beginning of the night. But regarding absolution for cause, it has no affect until he says, \"מופר לך\"/”you are annulled,” like the language of Scripture, for the absolution of the husband is from now and into the future without reason, like (Genesis 17:14): “[And if any male who is uncircumcised fails to circumcise the flesh of his foreskin, that person shall be cut off from his kin;] he has broken My covenant.” But the Sage who states, “you are permitted” there is no vow here, and there is no oath here which uproots the vow from its essence. But if the Sage stated in the language of הפרה/absolution and the husband in the language of התרה/permission, he is not permitted and he is not absolved (see Talmud Nedarim 77b). But if he (i.e., the husband) said: “if you did not vow, I put you under the influence of a vow,” his words are fulfilled, and he does not have to state that they are fulfilled to you, since for even if he kept silent all of the entire day, the vow is fulfilled, for any speech is also fulfilling. But on Shabbat, he should say [to the woman]: “take, eat; take drink,” and he doesn’t absolve in the manner that he states on weekdays, for the vow is nullified on its own. But if he is unable to force her, he annuls it in his heart, and he doesn’t need to release it from his lips. And specifically, nullification such as “take it, eat,” where he forces her to violate her vow is effective if he thought in his heart even though he did not release it from his lips, but absolution In which he does not force her to violate the vow, he needs to release it from his lips, and it is not sufficient if he nullified it in his heart."
            ]
        ],
        [
            [
                "ואלו נדרים – In the Gemara (Tractate Nedarim 80b) it explains that vows and oaths are taught, that in the language of the Sages, oaths are within the category of vows.",
                "אם ארחץ ואם לא ארחץ – this is what it said: “the benefit of washing is forbidden upon me forever if I shall wash today,” behold this is a vow. “If I shall not wash, an oath that I shall not wash,” behold this is an oath. And similarly, “if I shall adorn myself, the benefit of adorning/dressing is forbidden upon me forever if I adorn myself today,” “if I don’t adorn myself,” is an oath that I will not adorn myself.",
                "אמר ר\"י אין אלו נדרי עינוי נפש (vows referring to privation of the necessities of life) – regarding the vow alone Rabbi Yossi disputes the first Tanna/teacher, and [when he] states that the benefit of washing is forbidden upon me if I shall wash today,” this is not a vow of privation of the necessities of life, for behold, it is possible for her that she will not wash today and that the benefit of washing won’t be forbidden upon her forever. But the prevention/refraining from washing for one day is not a privation of the necessities of life, for a neglected appearance for one day (by not bathing) is not considered self-neglect (see Tractate Nedarim 80a). But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yossi. But whether the father or the husband, vows of privation of the necessities of life are ones that are absolved, as it is written (Numbers 30:17): “[These are the laws that the LORD enjoined upon Moses] between a man and his wife, and between a father and his daughter [while in her father’s household by reason of her youth],” there is an analogy between two laws that rest on a biblical intimation of the father to the husband. Just as the husband does not absolve anything other than vows of privation of the necessities of life, so also the father does not absolve anything other than vows of privation of the necessities of life. But Maimonides made the legal determination that the father absolves all vows and oaths, even those that are not referring to privation of the necessities of life, as it states (Numbers 30:6): “none of her vows or self-imposed obligations [shall stand].”"
            ],
            [
                "אם לא היתה פרנסתו אלא ממנו – that he believes in him until he will earn enough and will repay him.",
                "הרי זה יפר דברי ר' יוסי – Rabbi Yossi, according to his reasoning who holds that the husband does not absolve every vow that has in it privations of the necessities of life, since he distinguishes between greater privation and lesser privation and between privation for a lengthy period of time to that of a short period of time, but all of the Mishnayot of this chapter go according to him and are not Halakha. Rather, the husband annuls/absolves all vows that have in them privations of the necessities of life, whether of one day and even one hour, whether for a lengthy period of time, whether the privation is great or whether the privation is small, and similarly absolves vows and oaths in matters that are between him and her, even though they are not privations of the necessities of life, as, for example, if she took an oath or a vow not to paint her eyelids or not to adorn herself. And similarly, if she vowed that she would not eat from the produce of this province, the husband annuls/absolves, for it is troublesome for him to bring her produce from another province, and these are things between him and her. But what is the difference between vows and oaths that are between him and her to vows and oaths that have in them privations of the necessities of life? Vows and oaths that have in them privations of the necessities of life he absolves/annuls for himself and for others, as for example, if she took a vow that she would not eat meat or drink wine, he absolves her and she is permitted ot eat and to drink and even after she becomes a widow or a divorcee and marries another [man]. But vows and oaths that are between him and her, as, for example, if she forbade upon herself sexual intercourse of every man in the world, or that she wouldn’t ever paint her eyelids or adorn herself, he absolves his part, and she would perform her marital duty and paint her eyelids and adorn herself all the time that she is under him , and when she is widowed or divorced, she would be forbidden in engaging in sexual relations with all men and to paint her eyelids and to adorn herself And so forth in a similar manner."
            ],
            [
                "קונם שאיני נהנית לבריות אינו יכול להפר – this is not from the vows of privations of the necessities of life, for behold she is able to support herself from that of her husband, for the husband is not included in the category of בריות/humanity. But our Mishnah is also according to Rabbi Yossi, and it is not the Halakha, as I have explained above (see the Bartenura commentary to Mishnah 2). And not only/needless to say, if she said, “KONAM, that I will not benefit from anyone,” that she forbids the benefit of all of humanity upon her, that he absolves her because according to the Sages, these are vows of privation of the necessities of life, but even if she said, “KONAM, that I will not benefit from this certain individual,” that she only forbade for herself the benefit of that person alone the husband absolves [the vow] because of matters between him and her, for it is trouble for him that she will not benefit from that person, and the Torah stated (Numbers 30:17): “Between a man and his wife,” everything that is between a man and his wife, the husband can absolve/annul.",
                "ויכולה ליהנות בלקט שכחה ופאה – this is what it says, and furthermore, another reason that “KONAM that I don’t benefit from humanity,” that the husband does not annul, for she can benefit from gleanings, the forgotten sheaf and the corner of the field, that she doesn’t benefit from anyone, for these are the gifts to the poor, and it is found that there is no privations of the necessities of life.",
                "קונם כהנים ולוים נהנים לי – for just as that “KONAM that I don’t benefit from anyone,” but she is permitted [to benefit from] the gifts to the poor, so also, he who makes a vow against Kohanim and Levites from benefitting from his property are permitted to the gifs of the priesthood and the Levitical class."
            ],
            [
                "קונם שאיני עושה על פי אבא – [It will be prohibited like] being dedicated to the Temple all what I do from coming [to work] for Father, meaning to say, that Father will not be able to benefit from the work of my hands.",
                "אינו יכול להפר – this is not one of the matters between him and her, and in this everyone agrees that she prohibits her benefit upon a particular person, the husband cannot absolve it. And such is the Halakha.",
                "על פיך אינו צריך להפר – because she is subjugated to him and even though that [stating that] something is dedicated to the Temple removes it from subjugation, the Rabbis strengthened her subjugation to the husband for [the use of] KONAM does not release from his subjugation.",
                "יפר שמא תעדיף עליו יותר מן הראוי לו (let him annul it lest she place a burden upon him more than is appropriate for him) – since [the vow] of dedicating something to the Temple takes effect on the excess part which is not under his subjugation, therefore, he must annul/absolve [her vow], and the absolution is effective for him because this is a matter that is between him and her, for it is impossible that the surplus will not be mixed in with that of her husband.",
                "רבי יוחנן בן נורי אומר יפר שמא יגרשנה – and the essence/principal of her handiwork requires absolution lest he divorce her and her husband’s subjugation will be released, and then the vow will take effect and she will be forbidden from returning to him. And the Halakah is according to Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri. But when she says, “May my hands be sanctified to their Maker (i.e., God), her hands are already in existence and the dedication to the Temple takes effect."
            ],
            [
                "הרי זה יחזור ויפר – for it is an errant absolution is not an absolution until he intends regarding the woman that vowed, as it is written (Numbers 30:12): “[And her husband learns of it, yet offers no objection-] thus failing to restrain her – [all her vows shall stand and all her self-imposed obligations shall stand],” until the abolution will be for herself of the person making the vow. And also, that he should intend to the vow that she made (Numbers 30:5): “and her father learns of her vow,” until he knows which vow that she made."
            ],
            [
                "קיים לתאנים כולו קיים כו' (he confirmed the vow regarding figs, the whole is deemed confirmed) – and the reason, as it is written (Numbers 30:14): “[Every vow and every sworn obligation of self-denial] may be upheld by her husband [or annulled by her husband,” he will uphold from it, that when he upholds part of it, he upholds all of it. But, (ibid.,) “annulled [by her husband],” one cannot expound as such, for it is not annulled until he annuls all of it. But these are the words of an individual opinion, and is not Halakha, but the Halakha is according to the Sages who sate that one makes an analogy on the principle common in both, making an analogy between הקמה/upholding and הפרה/nullifying/absolving. Just as regarding absolution, what he absolved, he absolved, and what he didn’t absolve, he didn’t absolve, for there is no expounding from annulling/יפרנו (Numbers 30:14), partial annulment, even upholding – what he upheld heupheld, and what he didn’t uphold, he didn’t uphold, and from יקימנו/upheld [by her husband] (Numbers 30:14),also, we don’t expound partial upholding, but it is the manner of Scripture to write like this. But even though the declaring permitted by a Sage we state that a vow that was partially permitted, all of it was permitted, but the absolution of the husband and the father is not like this."
            ],
            [
                "איני יודע שיש מפירין – that I have permission to absolve [a vow].",
                "יפר – on the day that it becomes known to him that he has permission to absolve [vows], it is upo him like (Numbers 30:13): “the day that he finds out.”",
                "אינו יודע שזה נדר – and it requires absolution.",
                "רבי מאיר אומר לא יפר for since he knows that he has in his hand [the ability] to absolve, even though he doesn’t know that it is a vow, nevertheless, he should have absolved/nullified [the vow]. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Meir."
            ],
            [
                "ובלבד שלא יהא לבעליך רשות בהם – and his condition is fulfilled, and the husband did not acquire it (i.e., the money). But even though this that this present saves im from the the troubler, for behold, his wife is supported/fed from these monies, but her sustenance was upon him, hs being saved from the trouble is not considered benefit."
            ],
            [
                "ונדר אלמנה וגרושה – for itself, it does not require a [verse from] Scripture, for since she doesn’t have a husband, who will annul/absolve [her vow? But rather, when she made a vow when she is a widow for a time, and the time for the vow didn’t arrive until she married.",
                "אינו יכול להפר – even though that the vow takes effect when she is under him, for we follow/go after the time of the vow.",
                "נדרה בו ביום גרשה בו ביום והחזירה בו ביום – and aftwerards, he heard about her vow.",
                "אינו יכול להפר – since she left to her own domain, between the vow and its absolution, for the husband does not absolve things that precede [him]."
            ],
            [
                "תשע נערות נדריהן קימים – not specifically lasses/young women.",
                "בוגרת והיא יתומה – who married and her husband died when she was a young woman/lass, and she is an orphan in her father’s lifetime for after she married, her father does not have domain over her, when she became an adult woman/reached maturity afterwards and made a vow, her vow is upheld, for the father is not able to absolve her vow when she is an adult woman/reached maturity, and furthermore, she is an orphan during her father’s lifetime.",
                "נערה ובגרה והיא יתומה – that she married and her husband died. Hat she made a ow when she was a young woman and she reached maturity after this ,and she is an orphan in her father’s lifetime, as I explained.",
                "נערה – [a young woman/lass] at the time that she made a vow. She didn’t reach maturity/become an adult woman as yet, and she is an orphan in the lifetime of her father. And these three: orphan girl during her father’s lifetime are measurements for them.",
                "בוגרת ומת אביה – that at the hour/time that she vowed, she was an adult woman/reached maturity, and her father died, that is an actual orphan.",
                "נערה ובוגרת וכו' – and these three also, her father’s passing is measured/generalized to them.",
                "נערה שמת אביה ומשמת אביה בגרה כו' – these three [things] that they taught, her having reached maturity/become an adult woman is measured to them, But in the Gemara (Tractate Nedarim 89b) we stated, that the Sages did not teach any other than three young women: an adult woman/who reached maturity, an orphan, and an orphan during her father’s lifetime.",
                "ור\"י אומר כו' – that since she entered the marriage canopy, she left/departed from the domain of her father, through these marriages."
            ],
            [
                "קונם שאינ נהנית לאבא ולאביך כו' הרי זה יפר – for since she was forvidden to the venefit of her father and his father through the fact that she works for her husband, it is a disgrace to the husband for these are matters between him and her."
            ],
            [
                "האומרת טמאה אני לך – we are speaking of the wife of a Kohen, that is forbidden to her husband through unavoidable acci and she does not lose her Ketubah [settlement]. And the Sages believed her to forbid herself upon her husband, and since she leaves [the marriage] with a Jewish bill of divorce, she takes her Ketubah [settlement], that from the document of her Ketubah we will learn, that when you get married to another [man], take what is written for you.",
                "השמים ביני ובינך – It explains in the Gemara (Tractate Nedarim 91a) that [his] spermatic emission which does not permeate (i.e., shoot forth) like an arrow, that is to say, that things that are before heaven are revealed and she cannot verify them. And we are speaking of when she comes on account of a claim that she stated, that I require a staff for the hand and a master for the grave (which Rashi explains that the staff is for her to lean on in her old age and she dies, he will bury her) for it if is not this, we say to her, go, you do not have marital connection with “being fruitful and multiplying” (see Genesis 1:28 and 9:7 – as it is the male’s prerogative only).",
                "נטולה אני מן היהודים – that she forbade sexual connection of all Israelites upon her. But even though we stated in the chapter [Tractate Ketubot, chapter 7; Talmud Ketubot 71a] “He who prohibits his wife by vow from deriving benefit from him,” where she vowed and she is divorced without a Ketubah [settlement] and she placed her finger between her teeth, Rashi explained in [Tractate] Yevamot [112a] since she prohibited the benefit of sexual intercourse of all Israelites upon her, she is certainly a victim of unfortunate circumstance, for sexual intercourse is difficult for her. And the earlier version of the Mishnah held that even things are that are between him and her don’t exist, and it is possible that he can divorce her.",
                "חזרו לומר כו' – that the generations were corrupted and they suspected that she is lying to release her from under her husband.",
                "תביא ראיה לדבריה – and we don’t believe her without proof.",
                "יעשו דרך בקשה – they would request from her that she not speak any further to him, but in the Jerusalem Talmud it explains, “let them make a meal [together] and let him appease her.",
                "יפר חלקו ותהא משמשתו – and these are things between him and her and he will absolve it to himself."
            ]
        ]
    ],
    "sectionNames": [
        "Chapter",
        "Mishnah",
        "Comment"
    ]
}