Nedarim - Daf 26
- Rava’s explanation of the machlokes of Beis Shammai and Beis Hillel regarding נדר שהותר מקצתו
The Mishnah on Daf 25b brought a machlokes between Beis Shammai and Beis Hillel regarding someone who made a neder against a group of people and discovered his father among them and regretted the neder against his father. They disagree whether we say, נדר שהותר מקצתו הותר כולו - a neder which is nullified in part, is nullified entirely. After bringing Rabbah’s explanation of the machlokes, the Gemara on this Daf presents Rava’s, who said that everyone agrees that if the vower had said, “Had I known that my father is among you, I would have changed my neder and said: ‘Ploni and Ploni are forbidden and my father is permitted,’” that all of them are permitted. Since he changed the formulation of the neder, the entire neder is nullified. They argue in a case where he said, “Had I known that my father is among you, I would have said, ‘All of you are forbidden except my father.’” In this case, the neder remains the same as the original, and the vower is stating that he never intended that his father be included in the neder . Beis Shammai hold like Rebbe Meir, who says elsewhere, תפוס לשון ראשון - grasp the first phrase, i.e., give primacy to the first phrase used. Therefore, the final neder is identical to the original one, and since the father was never to be included, the neder is not considered partially void. Beis Hillel hold like Rebbe Yose, who says בגמר דבריו אדם נתפס- a person is also held by the end of his words, therefore the final neder which adds the exception of his father is different than his original neder, and it is thus a partially voided neder, which is completely void.
- “This one shall be forbidden like this one, and this one like this one.”
Rav Pappa challenged Rava from the following Mishnah: In what case did Rebbe Akiva say thatנדר השהותר מקצתו הותר כולו - that a neder nullified in part is nullified entirely: If he said: קונם שאיני נהנה לכולכם, הותר אחד מהן הותרו כולם - “konam that I will not benefit from all of you,” then if one is permitted, all of them are. But if he said: שאיני נהנה לא לזה ולזה - “that I will not benefit from him, and him…” הותר הראשון הותרו כולם, הותר האחרון האחרון מותר וכולן אסורין - if the first became permitted, they are all permitted, but if the last became permitted, he is permitted, and the rest are forbidden. The Gemara asks how Rava can explain why the Rabbonon disagree with Rebbe Akiva in the second case, since Rava holds that when one changes his neder to be directed towards individuals, all agree that the neder is completely void? Rava ultimately interprets the case as speaking of כגון שתלאן זה בזה - a case in which he made each dependent on the next. The Rosh explains that each was an independently made neder, so there is no discussion of partial nullification. Rather, each neder was successively made dependent on the one before it, where he said, “This one shall be forbidden like this one, and this one like this one.” Therefore, when the first is nullified, they are all permitted, but when the last is nullified, the rest remain forbidden.
- קונם בצל שאנו טועם שהבצל רע ללב
The Gemara challenges Rava from a Baraisa, which states: If one said: קונם בצל שאני טועם שהבצל רע ללב - “Konam onions from my tasting, because onions are bad for the heart. ”אמרו לו "והלא הכופרי יפה ללב- They said to him, “Isn’t the Kufri onion good for the heart?” Rebbe Meir taught in this Baraisa that since the Kufri onion is permitted, all varieties are. The Gemara presumes the case is where he subsequently said that had he known the truth, he would have said, “All onions shall be forbidden, but the Kufri is permitted.” Rava had taught that such a case was the machlokes in which Beis Shammai held like Rebbe Meir to forbid the remainder of the neder. Yet here, Rebbe Meir permits other varieties!? Rava answers that the case is where he named specific varieties to prohibit and permitted the Kufri onion. Since he changed the formulation of the neder, it is to be entirely nullified according to all opinions.