Nedarim 19a (יט.) — the Talmud in English

All the more so, he would not bring

a person

into uncertainty,

and he does not include the side of uncertainty in his vow.

And the Mishna in tractate Taharot, which states that an unspecified naziriteship is treated leniently, is in accordance with Rabbi Eliezer.

Abaye said to him: In accordance with whom have you established

according to whom did you establish

the

Mishna in tractate Taharot, which states that

uncertain naziriteship is treated leniently? —

In accordance with Rabbi Eliezer,

who holds that a person does not place himself or his property in a state of uncertainty.

If so,

say the latter clause

of that Mishna in tractate Taharot:

With regard to uncertain firstborn cases, one

uncertain redemption of

firstborn humans, and one

uncertain giving of

firstborn animals, whether

a firstborn animal that is

impure

a firstborn donkey, which must be redeemed with a lamb and given to a kohen,

or

a firstborn animal that is

pure,

which is a sacrifice and must be given to a kohen; since the matter is uncertain, the kohen, who is

the one seeking to take from his fellow, bears the burden of proof.

As long as he has not brought proof, the matter remains in the Israelite’s possession.

And

nevertheless,

it is taught concerning it

in a beraita dealing with that same Mishna:

And they are prohibited

uncertain firstborn animals

from shearing and labor!

But according to Rabbi Eliezer, a person does not place himself or his property in a state of uncertainty!

He said to him:

This is not merely not a difficulty!

On the contrary, there is a difficulty with your question:

Why do you compare

how can you compare

the sanctity

of a firstborn

which comes about by itself, to sanctity that comes through a person

through his vow?

Rather, if there is a difficulty

with Rabbi Eliezer’s statement concerning uncertainty

this is the difficulty,

in another matter, in which we find a contradiction in his statements concerning uncertainties:

As it was taught: If there arose

an uncertainty

concerning the ritual impurity of

liquids—

If the uncertainty concerns

becoming impure,

if the liquid became impure, it is

impure,

due to the uncertainty.

But if the uncertainty concerning impurity concerns

rendering others impure,

that is, if the uncertainty is whether the liquids rendered the food they touched impure, its status is

pure; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir.

And Rabbi El

i

ezer likewise said

the same as Rabbi Meir.

And concerning this it is difficult, as Rabbi Eliezer contradicts himself:

And does Rabbi El

i

ezer hold

that when the uncertainty concerns

becoming impure

receiving impurity, with regard to liquids, its status is

impure?

But was it not taught: Rabbi El

i

ezer says: There is no impurity of liquids

by Torah law

at all,

but only by rabbinic ordinance!

Know this, for Yose ben Yo'ezer of Zeredah testified concerning

Eil Kamtza,

a type of locust,

that it is pure,

as it is a species of pure locust, permitted for consumption.

And

he likewise testified

concerning the liquids of the slaughterhouse,

the liquids in the slaughterhouse in the Temple courtyard,

that they are pure,

as they are not susceptible to impurity; even rabbinic impurity does not apply to them, because the Sages did not decree that the liquids in the Temple become susceptible to impurity.

This works well for Shmuel, who says

that the liquids of the slaughterhouse

that are pure

are pure only

with regard to rendering others impure, but they themselves are susceptible to impurity—

it is well.

But according to Rav, who says that they are pure

pure

in fact

they are—

what can be said?

Rather,

this is how the matter should be distinguished:

This

Mishna in Taharot, which states that uncertain naziriteship is treated leniently, is in accordance with

Rabbi Judah

.

And this

our Mishna, which states that unspecified vows are treated stringently, is in accordance with

Rabbi Shimon

.

As it was taught:

One who said,

“I am a nazirite if this heap contains one hundred kor,”

and he went and found that it had been stolen or lost,

the heap, and it is uncertain whether it contained one hundred kor—

Rabbi Judah permits,

because uncertain naziriteship is treated leniently. Since a person does not place himself in a state of uncertainty, he did not intend his naziriteship to take effect until it became clear that this heap contained one hundred kor.

But Rabbi Shimon prohibits,

because he holds that a person does place himself in a state of uncertainty.

And they raise

a contradiction

between one statement of Rabbi Judah and another statement of Rabbi Judah—

Did Rabbi Judah say that a person does not bring himself into uncertainty?

And they raise a contradiction

from what we learned in our Mishna:

Rabbi Judah says: Unspecified teruma in Judea is prohibited, but in the Galilee—

it is permitted, as the people of the Galilee are not familiar with the teruma of the chamber.

And we must infer:

The reason is that they are not familiar

the people of the Galilee with the teruma of the chamber.