Nedarim 21a (כא.) — the Talmud in English

Gemara:

We learned in the Mishna:

The Sages permitted four types of vows

and

etc.

Rabbi Abba bar Memel said to Rabbi Ami: You told us in the name of Rabbi Yehuda Nesi'a: Who is the tanna

of the Mishna of

the four vows? -

It is Rabbi Yehuda, who said in the name of Rabbi Tarfon:

Two people were walking along the road and saw a third person. One of them said: “I will be a nazirite if that is so-and-so,” and the other said: “I will be a nazirite if that is not so-and-so” -

neither of them ever becomes a nazirite, because

they made their naziriteship conditional on something that was uncertain to them, and any naziriteship undertaken conditionally is not naziriteship, since

naziriteship was instituted only for unequivocal declaration.

When accepting naziriteship, one must express something explicit and definite, not something uncertain.

The same applies to vows: since vows were compared to naziriteship, they do not take effect when made in an uncertain manner. Since they made their vows conditional on the price of the transaction and did not establish it as something definite, the vow does not take effect.

Rava said: You may even say that our Mishna is also in accordance with

the view of

the Rabbis,

who maintain that naziriteship and a vow take effect even when made conditionally. Nevertheless, here their vow does not take effect, because the Sages assessed their intent and determined that when they made their vows they did not intend to vow; rather, they said this in order to urge the other party to agree to their price.

For

does it teach that both of them “

wanted” the price

now, after they ultimately agreed on three dinars, despite the fact that at first each maintained his position, and it was then that they made their vows!?

It teaches that both of them “

want”

three dinars

!

Thus, this was their position from the beginning to the end, and they uttered their vows only in order to urge the other party.

He said

he asked

Rabina to Rav Ashi:

If

the seller said to him

that the price was

more

than

a sela, and the other

the buyer

said

a price that he was prepared to pay

less

than

a shekel -

is this

a vow, or merely exhortation

alone

?

A sela contains two shekels. Thus, if the seller says that he demands more than a sela and the buyer is prepared to pay less than a shekel, the difference between them is more than double. Is such a difference also considered a vow of exhortation, or do they genuinely intend their vows?

He said to him,

Rav Ashi,

We learned it;

your question can be resolved from the words of the beraita:

As it was taught:

If one was urging his fellow to eat at his home and said to him,

“Konam, I will not enter your house,”

or, “Konam,

I will not taste a drop of cold water” -

he is permitted to enter his house and drink cold water from it,

because

this person did not intend

to vow to prohibit benefit

but only

to refrain from

eating and drinking

there in actuality. Even though his words stated that he would derive no benefit from it at all.

And why

is he permitted to drink cold water from it?

But

even

“a drop of cold water”

he said,

meaning that he vowed not to drink any of it!

Rather, people speak this way,

and they do not intend to prohibit something through a vow even when they speak in such an extreme manner, saying that they prohibit even a drop of water to themselves; their intention is not to impose a prohibition.

Here too,

despite the large difference between them—the seller demanding more than a sela and the buyer agreeing to less than a shekel—they do not specifically intend to vow; rather,

people speak this way!