Nedarim - Daf 84

  • Why נטולה אני מן היהודים includes her husband

Rava challenged Rav Nachman, who said that the husband is not included in a neder from “people,” from a Mishnah: A woman who vowed נטולה אני מן היהודים – “I am removed from Jews,” the husband can revoke what pertains to him and she may have relations with him, but she remains prohibited in relations to all other Jews even after divorce. Now, if the husband is included in a neder from “people” (or “Jews”), this neder can refer to relations, because the neder has an impact on her (permitted) husband. He may therefore revoke the neder as it pertains to him as “matters between him and her,” and she remains forbidden to all others. But if the husband is not included, then the neder cannot be about relations, for it would not prohibit anyone. Rather, it must refer to receiving produce of other people. If so, it should be a neder of inuy nefesh, and the husband can revoke it entirely! The Gemara answers that although the husband is generally not included in a neder from people, here he is included in the neder from relations, since we presume that she intends to prohibit someone who was permitted.

  • Whether one who is prohibited in benefits from all people may collect maaser ani

Our Mishnah allows one who is prohibited in benefits from all people, to receive leket, shich’chah, and peah, because they are ownerless. The Gemara notes: ולא קתני מעשר עני - that our Mishnah does not seem to allow her to receive maaser ani, and this contradicts a Baraisa which allows it. Rav Yosef answered that they reflect the opinions of a machlokes Tannaim, which according to Rav Yosef’s understanding (explained below), they would also argue if the owner has rights to distribute maaser ani to whom he pleases (and if he can, she cannot receive maaser ani). After Abaye rejects Rav Yosef’s understanding of the machlokes, Rava offers a different answer to the contradiction: Our Mishnah is discussing maaser ani which is distributed in the house, which the Torah describes with “נתינה” -“giving,” indicating that the owner determines to whom he gives it. She may not receive such maaser ani. The Baraisa is discussing maaser ani distributed at the granary, which the Torah says, “והנחת בשעריך” – and you shall set it down within your cities, indicating that anyone may take it without the owner’s consent, so she may receive it.

  • The machlokes Tannaim if maaser ani of demai requires verbal designation

Rav Yosef above presented a machlokes Tannaim: Rebbe Eliezer says: אין אדם צריך לקרות שם על מעשר עני של דמאי - that one does not need to designate maaser ani of demai (produce purchased from an am haaretz), and the Chochomim say he must designate it. Rav Yosef suggested the machlokes is if produce remains tevel until maaser ani is designated. Rav Yosef adds that the Chochomim, who say that designating maaser ani removes its tevel status, would also hold that the owner can distribute it to whom he pleases; Rebbe Eliezer, who holds that it was already permitted chullin before maaser ani was taken, would consider maaser ani analogous to leket, etc., and it can be taken without the owner’s consent. Abaye disagreed and said that all Tannaim hold that produce is tevel until maaser ani is designated. Their machlokes is whether we can assume that the am haaretz removed the maaser ani. Rebbe Eliezer maintains that he would remove it, because he can be mafkir his possessions (making him a pauper), allowing him to retain the maaser ani, and then reacquire his possessions. The Chochomim say he is unwilling to be mafkir his possessions, for fear that someone may take them, so there is concern that an am haaretz may not remove maaser ani.