About this episode
Study Guide Nedarim 19 Today's daf is sponsored by Stacey Goodstein Ashtamker in loving memory of my mother Arlene Goodstein's 7th yahrzeit. "My mother's love of Judaism and the land of Israel set the stage for my life. Missing her always." In order to resolve a contradiction between our Mishna and the Mishna in Taharot 4:12, regarding the issue of whether we rule stringently or leniently with regard to vows, the Gemara suggested that each Mishna reflected a different tannaitic opinion. First, they try to establish that the lenient opinion matches Rabbi Elazar (Eliezer), but difficulties are raised against this suggestion, first from the continuation of the Mishna in Taharot and then from the Tosefta Taharot Chapter 5. The first difficulty is resolved but the second is not. The second suggestion is that the Mishnayot each represents a different tannaitic opinion regarding a debate between Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Shimon about a case where one says "I will be a nazir if there are 100 kur in the pile." If the pile is lost or stolen before they measure it, Rabbi Yehuda ruled the person is not a nazir and Rabbi Shimon rules the opposite. Based on this understanding, Rabbi Yehuda's reasoning is based on the fact that when one vows, one does not put oneself into a situation of uncertainty. This contradicts an inference from a statement of Rabbi Yehuda in our Mishna regarding a case of doubt when one said a vow using the language of teruma where the ruling is to be stringent. Rava answers by explaining the case of the nazir differently as the case of doubt for a nazir is worse than a doubt regarding a regular vow as one has no way to end the nazir prohibitions. Therefore, we can assume the person did not want to get into a situation of becoming a nazir out of doubt. Two questions are raised against Rava and one is resolved, but the other is not. Rav Ashi answers that Rabbi Yehuda by nazir is not his own opinion but him stating Rabbi Tarfon's position that nazir can only be taken on by a definitive declaration. A difficulty is raised against Rav Ashi as well, but it is resolved. The Mishna has brought two cases where the law is different between those living in Judea and the Galilee. However, they seem to contradict each other and therefore the Gemara concludes that one is Rabbi Yehuda's position and the other is Rabbi Elazar b'Rabbi Tzadok.