Nedarim 89a (פט.) — the Talmud in English

She took a vow while she was under her husband’s authority -

he may annul it.

What are the circumstances? She said

while she was married:

“I hereby become a nazirite after thirty

days,

and her husband annulled the vow. Even

if she was widowed or divorced within thirty

days,

the vow is annulled.

Since when she took the vow she was married, her husband was able to annul it.

If she took the vow on that very day, and was divorced on that very day,

and

was remarried on that very day -

he cannot annul it.

Once she was divorced, her husband’s authority regarding the vow was nullified, and he does not reacquire that authority when they marry a second time. He may annul only vows that she takes from that point onward.

This is the principle: Whenever she entered her own authority even for a single hour, he cannot annul it!

Gemara:

It was taught in a beraita: If a widow or divorcee said, “I hereby become a nazirite when I marry,” and she married -

Rabbi Yishmael says: He may annul it -

because he holds that we follow the time when the vow takes effect.

And Rabbi Akiva says: He may not annul it -

because he holds that we follow the time when the vow was made, and at that time she was not yet married.

(And the mnemonic is yod-lamed-lamed-yod)

This is a mnemonic for remembering the dispute, namely: “He may annul it; he may not annul it. He may not annul it; he may annul it.”

If a married woman said, “I hereby become a nazirite when I am divorced,” and she was divorced,

Rabbi Yishmael says: He may not annul it -

since the determining factor is the time when the vow takes effect.

And Rabbi Akiva says: He may annul it -

since the determining factor is the time when the vow was made.

Rabbi Yishmael said

to prove his position from the verses:

The verse says: “And the vow of a widow and a divorcee,”

and we interpret it:

It must be that the

vow

takes effect

at the

time of widowhood or divorce.

But if the vow takes effect while she is married, the husband may annul it.

Rabbi Akiva holds: The verse says: “Whatever she prohibited upon herself,”

and we interpret it:

It must be that the prohibition of the vow

by which she prohibits herself

is at the time of widowhood or divorce,

but if she prohibited herself while she was married, her husband may annul it, even though the vow takes effect only afterward.

Rav Ḥisda said: Our Mishna is in accordance with Rabbi Akiva -

our Mishna follows the view of Rabbi Akiva.

Abaye said: You may even say that it is in accordance with Rabbi Yishmael -

it is possible to say that Rabbi Yishmael too agrees with our Mishna that we follow the time when the vow was made,

and the difference is that

in the Mishna she tied herself to days -

in our Mishna she stipulated that her vow should take effect only after thirty days in general,

but

in the beraita she tied herself to marriage -

in the beraita she stipulated that the vow should take effect only after she married or was divorced,

and therefore it is specifically in the beraita that Rabbi Yishmael holds that we follow the time when the vow takes effect, since the vow cannot take effect under the authority in which she is situated at the time it is made. For she stipulated and said that the vow should take effect only if she married or, alternatively, was divorced; therefore, the time when it takes effect is the determining factor.

But in the case of the Mishna, the taking effect of the vow is not dependent on whose authority she is under, and it is possible that

the days will elapse and she will not be divorced

that thirty days will pass and she will not be divorced; and likewise it is possible that

the days will elapse and she will not marry

that thirty days will pass and she will not marry. If so, it is possible for the vow to take effect under the same authority in which she was situated when the vow was made. Therefore, in this case Rabbi Yishmael agrees that we follow the authority under which she was situated at the time the vow was made.

The Gemara explains the end of the Mishna, which states: “This is the principle,” and so forth.

The principle in our Mishna is also stated above, in the chapter “The Betrothed Maiden,” and the Gemara explains what is added by the principles in these Mishnayot.

“This is the principle,” which is taught with regard to the betrothed maiden

the principle stated above in the chapter “The Betrothed Maiden,” was written in order

to include

the case where the father went with the husband’s agents, or where the father’s agents went with the husband’s agents, in the case of a betrothed maiden,

that is, a betrothed maiden whose husband’s agents came to take her to her husband’s home, and her father or his agents went with them,

that her father and her husband may annul her vows -

the woman has not yet left her father’s authority; rather, her father and her husband may annul her vows, since the father or his agents are still accompanying her.

“This is the principle,” which is taught with regard to “And these are the vows”

the principle stated in the chapter “And These Are the Vows,” was written in order

to include:

the case where the father handed her over to the husband’s agents, or where the father’s agents handed her over to the husband’s agents

that is, if the father had already handed his daughter over to the husband’s agents, or the father’s agents had already handed her over to the husband’s agents,

in which the husband does not annul prior vows -

from that point onward she is considered entirely under her husband’s authority, and the husband may annul only vows that she takes from then onward. But he cannot annul vows that she had already taken, since he does not annul prior vows,

and the father too cannot annul them, since she has left his authority.

Mishna:

There are nine young women whose vows remain in force,

and it is impossible to annul them for them. And these are they: 1.

A bogeret who is an orphan -

she took the vow after reaching maturity, and she is an orphan, meaning that she is not under her father’s authority; for example, she married and was subsequently widowed, having already left her father’s authority.

2.

A na’ara who reached maturity and is an orphan -

she took the vow while she was a na’ara, and afterward reached maturity, and she is an orphan, so that she is not under her father’s authority, as in the first case.