Nedarim 19a — the Talmud in English

All the more so, he does not introduce

a person

into uncertainty,

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

And the Mishna in tractate Tohorot, which says that an unspecified nazirite status is treated leniently, is according to Rabbi Eliezer.

Abaye said to him: In accordance with whom did you establish

according to whom did you establish

the

Mishna in tractate Tohorot that says that

uncertainty concerning nazirite status is treated leniently? —

According to Rabbi Eliezer,

who holds that a person does not introduce himself and his property into uncertainty.

If so,

say the latter clause

of that Mishna in tractate Tohorot:

With regard to uncertain firstborns, whether

uncertain redemption of

human firstborns, or whether

uncertain giving of

animal firstborns, whether

a firstborn of an animal

that is impure

[the firstborn of a donkey, which must be redeemed with a lamb and given to a priest],

or whether

a firstborn of an animal

that is pure,

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

the one who seeks to extract from his fellow, must produce the proof.

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

And

nevertheless,

it was taught concerning it

of that same Mishna, in a beraita:

And they are forbidden

uncertain animal firstborns

in shearing and labor!

But according to Rabbi Eliezer, a person does not introduce himself and his property into uncertainty!

He said to him:

This is not merely not a difficulty!

On the contrary, one should wonder at you:

Why do you compare,

how can you compare

the sanctity

of a firstborn,

which comes on its own, to sanctity that comes through a person,

through his vow?

Rather, if there is a difficulty

with Rabbi Eliezer’s words concerning uncertainty,

this is the difficulty,

in another matter, where we find a contradiction in his words concerning uncertainties:

For it was taught: If there arose

an uncertainty

concerning the impurity of

liquids—

if the uncertainty is with regard

to becoming impure,

if the liquid became impure, then it is

impure,

because of the uncertainty.

But if the uncertainty concerning impurity is with regard

to rendering others impure,

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

pure; these are the words of Rabbi Meir.

And Rabbi El

i

ezer likewise used to say in accordance with his words,

of Rabbi Meir.

And concerning this one can raise a difficulty, for Rabbi Eliezer contradicts himself:

And does Rabbi El

i

ezer hold

that when the uncertainty is with regard

to becoming impure

[receiving impurity] by liquids, its uncertainty is

impure?

But it was taught: Rabbi El

i

ezer says: There is no impurity for liquids

by Torah law

at all,

but only by rabbinic ordinance!

Know that this is so, for Yosei ben Yo’ezer of Zeredah testified concerning

the eil kamtza,

a type of locust,

that it is pure,

that it is a species of pure locust, permitted for eating.

And

likewise he testified

concerning the liquids of the slaughterhouse,

the liquids in the slaughterhouse in the Temple courtyard, in the Temple,

that they are pure,

that they are pure from impurity, and even rabbinic impurity does not apply to them, because the Sages did not decree the reception of impurity upon the liquids in the Temple.

This works out well according to Shmuel, who says

that the liquids of the slaughterhouse

that are pure

are pure only

from rendering others impure, but they do have their own impurity—

it works out well.

But according to Rav, who says that they are pure

pure

in the fullest sense

they are—

what is there to say?

Rather,

this is how one should distinguish:

This

Mishna in Tohorot, which says that uncertainty concerning nazirite status is treated leniently, is according to

Rabbi Judah

it is.

And this

Mishna of ours, which says that unspecified vows are treated stringently, is according to

Rabbi Shimon

it is.

For it was taught:

One who said: “

I am hereby a nazirite if there are one hundred kor in this heap,”

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

the heap, and the matter is uncertain whether there are one hundred kor in it—

Rabbi Judah permits,

because uncertainty concerning nazirite status is treated leniently. Since a person does not introduce himself into uncertainty, his intention was that his nazirite status should take effect only once it became clear that there were one hundred kor in this heap.

And Rabbi Shimon forbids,

because he holds that a person does introduce himself into uncertainty.

And he raises

a contradiction

from Rabbi Judah against Rabbi Judah—

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

And he raises a contradiction

in his words from what we learned in our Mishna:

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

it is permitted, for the people of the Galilee do not recognize the terumat ha-lishka.

And we should infer:

The reason is that they do not recognize

the people of the Galilee the terumat ha-lishka.