Nedarim 63a — the Talmud in English

The meitivi objection is raised

from that which was taught in a Tosefta in tractate Ta'anit:

What is the time of the rainfall?

The rainfall

the early —

on the third

of Marḥeshvan.

The intermediate —

on the seventh

of it.

The late

the last rainfall —

on the twenty-third

of it,

These are the words of Rabbi Meir.

Rabbi Judah says:

the early

on the seventh

of Marḥeshvan,

and

the intermediate

on the seventeenth

of it,

and the late on the twenty-third

of it.

Rabbi Yose says:

the early

on the seventeenth

of Marḥeshvan,

and

the intermediate

on the twenty-third

of it,

and

the late

at

the beginning

of the month of Kislev.

And Rabbi Yose would likewise say:

Individuals do not fast

on Monday, Thursday, and Monday when rain does not fall

until the beginning of the month of Kislev arrives,

which is the last time for the falling of rain.

And we say concerning it

of that beraita:

Granted

the time of

the first rainfall

has a practical consequence

for requesting “

Give dew and rain” in the blessing of the years.

And the time of rainfall

the third

has a practical consequence

for fasting

the individuals, for if rain has not fallen by the time of the third rainfall even once, the individuals fast on Monday, Thursday, and Monday.

But

the time of rainfall

the second —

for what

is it of practical consequence?

And Rabbi Zeira said:

It has a practical consequence

for one who vows

“until the rains,” for he is forbidden until the second rainfall, as we learned in our Mishna.

And we say

further

concerning it: In accordance with whom is that which was taught

in accordance with whose view is the following beraita:

Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says:

If rains fell for seven days one after the other, you count them as —

with regard to one who vows —

the first and second rainfall; in accordance with whom?

It is in accordance with Rabbi Yose

for according to Rabbi Meir there are fewer than seven days between the first rainfall and the second rainfall, whereas according to Rabbi Judah there are more than seven days between them.

And it was initially understood that this beraita deals with one who vowed and said “until the rain,” for that is the way of those who vow. But now this is difficult for Rabbi Zeira: if you say that when one says “until the rain,” even the Rabbis agree that the law does not depend on the falling of rain but on the time of its falling, then why do we say that the second rainfall is included in the first falling? Surely the time of the second rainfall has already certainly arrived.

And we answer:

That

beraita deals with one

who said “

until the rains,”

and according to the Rabbis, the time of his prohibition ends with the actual falling of rain.

And Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel said to them: In this situation—where the rains fell for seven days one after the other—even according to your view, he is prohibited only until the time of the second rainfall, because the second rainfall became connected with the first rainfall.

Mishna:

One who said: “

Konam, wine that I taste this year” —

And

the year became intercalated,

he is

forbidden in it and in its intercalation

of the year.

And this is not only when he was standing in the middle of the year, for then it is obvious that he is forbidden until the end of the year; rather, even if he was standing at the beginning of the year, and there was room to say that he intended to prohibit himself for no longer than the twelve months found in most years, and his intention when he said “this year” was “the measure of a year,” which is twelve months, it teaches us that since he said “this year,” he intended to prohibit himself during this year until its end.

And if he said: “Konam, wine that I taste

until the beginning of the month of Adar,”

he is forbidden

until the beginning of the first month of Adar.

And if he said: “

until the end of Adar,”

he is forbidden

until the end of the first month of Adar,

and in the Gemara the reason for the law—that “Adar” is interpreted as the first Adar—will be explained.

Gemara:

We learned in the Mishna: “Until the beginning of the month of Adar”—until the beginning of the first Adar; “until the end of Adar”—until the end of the first Adar:

Thus evidently,

it is proven from the view of the tan-na of our Mishna that

the anonymous wording of “

Adar”

that he says—

Adar

is the first one.

The anonymous “Adar” means the first Adar; and since he said “Adar” and did not specify which Adar, his words are therefore interpreted as referring to the first Adar.

Shall we say,

shall we say that

our Mishna is Rabbi Judah’s

who holds that an anonymous “Adar” is the first Adar?

For it was taught:

If a person wishes to write in a document the date of

the first Adar,

he

writes

explicitly “

Adar

the first.”

But if he wishes to write in a document the date of

the second Adar,

he

writes “

Adar”

anonymously—these are the words of Rabbi Meir.

Rabbi Judah says:

For the first Adar he writes “

anonymously,”

and

for the second Adar he writes “

Adar

the second [

second].”

And our Mishna, in which it is explained that an anonymous “Adar” is the first Adar, follows Rabbi Judah of the beraita.

Abaye said:

You may even say

that our Mishna

is Rabbi Meir

who holds that an anonymous “Adar” is the second Adar.

This—

the beraita—

is where he knew that the year would be intercalated

[he knew that it was an intercalated year], and therefore, if he wishes to designate the first Adar, he must write “the first Adar.”

This—

our Mishna—

is where he did not know

at the time of his vow that the year would be intercalated, and therefore, when he said “Adar” without specification, this means the first Adar.