|
Welcome to Perek 2!
Mishna 1 reiterates the idea that a neder must reference an object that is ordinarily permissible, but which the neder-taker is now prohibiting upon himself. Thus, if the object being used as a referent is intrinsically prohibited, the neder has no effect.
Also interesting in Mishna 1 (and in subsequent mishanyot as well) is that if a husband takes a neder relative to his sexual relationship with his wife, even if the neder is not binding on technical grounds, the husband will be hauled through a Bet Din process to "undo" that neder. The purpose of this is to deter him from ever trying a stunt like that again.
Mishna 2 reiterates the difference between a neder (which can only be taken with regard to an object) and a shevuah (which is taken with regard to an action). It also makes the point that a shevuah through which a person exempts himself from a pre-existing Biblical obligation (such as taking lulav and etrog on Sukkot) is pre-empted by our collective shevuah to observe the Torah.
Mishnayot 4 and 5 explore the interesting phenomenon of a neder or shevuah that is followed either by:
(a) an explicit "what I actually meant by that was...."
OR
(b) an implicit interpretation based on how particular words are used in specific locales (Judea vs. the Galil).
As a general rule, this sort of clarification is accepted as credible, and is determinative in terms of whether or not the neder or shevuah is binding.
Our study of Nedarim is a great opportunity to think about how we use language, hoe we convey meaning, and the seriousness with which our words are heard.
As a reminder, please save the date for our next Zoom shiur, with Rabbi Shlomo Weissman the administrator of the Beth Din of America, on March 17th. Save the date!
| 
