Nedarim 30a — the Talmud in English

And this is because at the beginning of the consecration, when he said, “until they are cut down,” he intended to consecrate them today, and he also intended to consecrate them again after he redeems them. If so,

resolve

this from our Mishna,

which Rav Hoshaya required:

Since when one says to his wife, “Be betrothed to me after I divorce you,” she is not betrothed, for this is included in something that has not yet come into the world, since today he cannot betroth her to himself, as she is already betrothed to him, and anything that he cannot do today, he cannot do tomorrow—what is the law concerning

one who gives two perutot to a woman and says to her: With one, become betrothed to me today, and with one, become betrothed to me after I divorce you

if she is betrothed after he divorces her?

Shall we say that since he can betroth her today, this is not included in something that has not yet come into the world; or shall we say: Since in the interim, from the time he betrothed her until the betrothal takes effect, this will be something that has not yet come into the world, he cannot betroth her today?

And according to Bar Padda’s interpretation, resolve from our Mishna that

indeed, it is also a betrothal

that the betrothal takes effect, for:

One who says concerning a consecrated object that it shall be consecrated when he redeems it from the consecration—its consecration does not take effect, even if he redeems it, because at the time when he consecrated it, he cannot apply consecration to it, since the object is already consecrated; and just as when one says to his wife, “Behold, you are betrothed to me after I divorce you,” the betrothal does not take effect,

nevertheless, it is explicitly established in our Mishna that if, at the time when he consecrated the object, it was not yet consecrated, and he consecrated it for after he would redeem it, the consecration takes effect—for this reason, when he redeemed the saplings from the consecration, they became consecrated again—and from here you learn the same with regard to a woman who is betrothed, and Rav Hoshaya’s problem is resolved.

He was awakened

the expression of awakening from sleep

in them, Rabbi

Jeremiah,

that is, Rabbi Jeremiah rose up against them and

said to them:

What are you comparing

consecration after redemption, when

he himself redeemed them

the one who consecrated them himself,

to

the betrothal of a woman, which is like

others redeemed them

and what are you comparing? The law of the saplings when the one who consecrated them redeemed them, to the betrothal of a woman, which is comparable to others redeeming them!? And as he proceeds to explain:

But

this is what Rabbi Yoḥanan said:

If he himself redeemed them,

that is, the one who consecrated them himself from the consecration, indeed the saplings

become consecrated again,

because since the saplings did not pass into another domain, and throughout the entire time they were in the domain of the consecration—which is the one destined to acquire the object even after he redeems it—or in the domain of the one who consecrated them, therefore the consecration takes effect when the one who consecrated them redeems them.

But

if others redeemed them

from the consecration, since at the time when they were redeemed, before the second consecration took effect, they were neither in his domain nor in the domain of the consecration—

the saplings

do not

become consecrated again,

even though they returned to his domain.

And a woman,

when she is divorced, is

comparable to others redeeming them,

for at that time she is in her own domain; therefore his betrothals, with which he betrothed her for after he would divorce her, are not effective.

It was also stated

in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan, as Rabbi Jeremiah said in his name:

Rabbi Ami said in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan: They taught only when he himself redeemed them.

But if others redeemed them, they do not become consecrated again.

Mishna:

The general rule with regard to vows is: “Follow the language of people.”

That is, the way a person ordinarily uses language determines whether there is a vow in his words and, accordingly, what his vow includes.

And in the following Mishnayot several expressions will be explained: how people ordinarily use them, what becomes forbidden, and what remains permitted after a person vows with these expressions.

One who vows

not to derive benefit

from “

those who go down to the sea”—

he is

permitted to “

those who dwell on the land,” even if from time to time they travel by sea, because only those people who regularly sail in ships at sea are called “those who go down to the sea.”

But one who vows

from “

those who dwell on the land”—

he is

forbidden

also

from those who go down to the sea,

since

also

those who go down to the sea—

those who go down to the sea

are included in “

those who dwell on the land,”

for all those who go down to the sea eventually go up onto the land.

And the Mishna explains who “those who go down to the sea” are—

Not like those who go

who sail in a ship for a short distance, along the coast of the Land of Israel,

from Akko to Jaffa, but rather one whose way is to sail

on the sea over long distances.

And in the Gemara it will be explained whether the last sentence continues the sentence before it, or whether it continues what was said at the beginning of the Mishna.

Gemara:

Rav Pappa and Rav Aḥa, son of Rav Ika,

disagreed in explaining the last sentence of the Mishna.

One teaches,

one of them teaches “Not like those who go from Akko to Tiberias”

with regard to the first clause,

and the intention of the Mishna is to be lenient, as will be explained below.

And one teaches “

not like those who go from Akko to Tiberias”

with regard to the latter clause,

and the intention of the Mishna is to be stringent, as will be explained below.

And the Gemara explains:

The one who teaches,

the one who teaches “Not like those who go from Akko to Jaffa”

with regard to the first clause—

teaches it thus,

he teaches the Mishna as follows:

One who vows with regard to those who go down to the sea—

is permitted with regard to those who dwell on the land,

who are not accustomed to sail at sea.

But with regard to those who go down to the sea—

he is

forbidden.

And the Mishna continues to explain, and to be lenient, that he is not forbidden with regard to all those who go down to the sea—