Nedarim 8a — the Talmud in English

From where do we know that one may take an oath to fulfill a mitzva?

As it is stated in Psalms [chapter 119]: “

[глава 119]: «

I have sworn and I will fulfill it, to observe the judgments of Your righteousness.”

It is therefore evident that King David became obligated to fulfill the oath he had taken to fulfill the mitzvot.

The Gemara—the Talmudic discussion of the Mishna—had understood that Rav Giddel intended to teach that this oath takes effect.

Therefore, the Gemara asks:

But he is already under oath, having stood at Mount Sinai,

to fulfill the mitzvot! If so, his oath is an oath concerning an oath, which does not take effect to obligate him to bring an offering, as with other oaths of expression [as is derived in Tractate Shevuot 27a, that an oath to fulfill a mitzva was excluded from the passage concerning an offering for an oath of expression]!?

You might say that although an oath to fulfill a mitzva was excluded from liability for an offering, nevertheless Rav Giddel came to teach that this oath takes effect with regard to the prohibition “He shall not profane his word.”

This cannot be said. For Rav Giddel would not have needed to bring this verse from the Book of Psalms, which is considered “words of tradition,” in order to prove his statement. Rather, we must learn this matter from the Torah: the Torah’s limitation, “to do harm or to do good,” is stated only in the passage concerning an offering for an oath of expression, and no such limitation was stated concerning the prohibition “He shall not profane his word.”

If so, the question arises: What did Rav Giddel mean!?

The Gemara answers: Rav Giddel did not intend to teach that the oath takes effect with regard to “He shall not profane his word,” since that is obvious.

Rather, Rav Giddel teaches us this:

Rav Giddel teaches

that it is permitted

for a person to spur himself on

to fulfill the mitzvot. [It is permitted and proper for a person to swear in order to motivate himself.]

This is what Rav Giddel said: From where do we know that it is proper to swear in order to fulfill a mitzva, and that even those who are careful to avoid oaths may swear for this purpose? The verse states: “I have sworn and I will fulfill it, to observe the judgments of Your righteousness.” It is thus clear that even King David did so.

And Rav Giddel said that Rav said: One who says

in the language of an oath:

“I will study

or

“I will study this tractate”—

has made a great vow

[he has taken a great oath]

to the God of Israel.

The Gemara asks: Since Rav Giddel says that he “has made a great vow,” this implies that it is an oath in every respect, even with regard to liability for an offering if he does not fulfill it.

If so, the question arises:

But he is already under oath, having stood at Mount Sinai,

to study Torah,

and an oath does not take effect upon an oath

to obligate him to bring an offering for the second oath if he does not fulfill it!? You might say that when Rav Giddel said “a great vow,” he did not mean that it is a full-fledged oath. Rather,

what does Rav Giddel teach us?

—

That even

mere motivation,

to motivate himself to study Torah, is a great thing—

The question arises: This is

the first teaching of Rav Giddel,

so why did Rav Giddel need to say it twice!?

The Gemara answers: In fact, when Rav Giddel said “a great vow,” he meant that it is a full-fledged oath in every respect. As for what troubled you—“But he is already under oath, having stood at Mount Sinai”—

Rav Giddel teaches us this:

the oath takes effect. This is his innovation:

Since, if he wished, he could exempt himself

from the obligation to study Torah that is stated explicitly in the Torah, he could exempt himself

by reciting the morning and evening Shema.

This is because we do not find an explicit obligation in the Torah to study Torah throughout the entire day and night. The mitzva “You shall contemplate it day and night” is a verse in the Book of Joshua, and is not stated explicitly in the Torah.

Nevertheless, every Jew is obligated to study the entire Torah and know it, as it is stated: “You shall teach them diligently to your children”—so that the words of Torah will be sharp in your mouth. As long as a person has not studied the entire Torah and does not know it, he is commanded to study Torah during every free moment, according to his strength and ability, so that he will know what he does not yet know.

However, the fact that a person must engage in Torah study during all his free time is only a result of the obligation to study the Torah; it is not stated explicitly in it. Therefore, he can swear that he will study Torah at a particular time, since one may swear concerning anything that is not stated explicitly in the Torah.

And

for this reason the oath takes effect upon it.

This is what Rav Giddel came to teach us: an oath takes effect concerning something that is not stated explicitly in the Torah, even though he is obligated in it by Torah law, through the exposition of the Sages.

And Rav Giddel said that Rav said:

One who says to his fellow: “

Let us rise early

in the morning

and study this chapter,” or who sets another time with his fellow to study a chapter of Torah, even without mentioning the language of a vow or an oath—

or who sets another time with his fellow to study a chapter of Torah, even without mentioning the language of a vow or an oath—

he must rise early!

He must arrive before his fellow to study, because this is what is implied: Just as I awaken you to a mitzva, so too I will awaken myself when we do what we accepted upon ourselves. Once he accepted this upon himself, he is obligated in it, because an undertaking concerning a mitzva does not require the language of an oath.

From where do we know that his words include that he should arrive before his fellow?

As it is stated in Ezekiel [chapter 3]: “

“And He said to me, ‘Arise, go out to the plain, and there I shall speak with you.’

So I went out to the plain, and behold, the glory of the Lord was standing there.””

And I went out to the valley, and behold, the glory of the Lord

was standing there.”

It is therefore evident that the Holy One, blessed be He, came before Ezekiel.

Rav Yosef said:

One who

was placed under a ban in a dream needs ten people

among whom the Divine Presence rests, in order

to release him

from his ban, because it is possible that he was placed under the ban as an emissary of Heaven.

This applies

when those ten are among the people

who teach halakha [that is, who teach Gemara]

to others, because they are fit for the Divine Presence to rest among them —

but

if they

teach

only themselves and do not teach others—

no.

But if there are no people who teach halakha

[if he cannot find people who teach others],

even if they teach

only themselves, it is acceptable.

If there are no

[if he cannot immediately find ten] who teach or are taught—

he should go and sit at a crossroads

[he should go and sit at a crossroads], where he will be able to find ten people who can release him from his ban.

And

in the meantime

he should offer greetings to ten people [he should greet ten ordinary people, so that this will protect him from suffering],

[he should greet ten ordinary people with peace, so that this will protect him from suffering],

until ten people who study halakha happen to come to him ] [until ten people who teach or study halakha happen to come to him] and release him together from his ban.

[until ten people who teach or study halakha happen to be available to him] and they release him together from his excommunication.

Rav Aha

asked

Rav Ashi:

If the dreamer

knew

who

had placed him under the ban

[who had placed him under the ban in the dream],

what is the law—can he release him?

Can that person release him alone? For this is the law concerning every ban: the person who imposed the ban has the power to release him alone.

He said to him,

Rav Ashi said to Ravina: He is not effective without ten people who teach or study halakha, because:

It is possible that Heaven

appointed him as an agent to place him under the ban

[although the person who imposed the ban was made an agent to ban him], but

it did not appoint him as an agent to release him

[he was not made an agent of Heaven to release him from the ban].

Rav Aha

asked

Rav Ashi:

If he

was placed under a ban and released

in his dream

[he was placed under a ban and was also released in a dream],

what

is his law? Does he need a formal release, or does the principle apply that “the same mouth that prohibited is the mouth that permitted”?

He said to him,

Rav Ashi said to Rav Aha:

It is written [Jeremiah 23]: “The prophet who has a dream, let him recount the dream; and he who has My words, let him speak My words truthfully. What has straw in common with grain, declares the Lord.” And we learn from this:

Just as grain cannot exist

[produce]

without straw

[chaff]—