POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
Prepared by Rabbi N. Slifkin
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous daf Nedarim 67
1) ANNULMENT OF THE HUSBAND
(a) If only 1 of them annulled the vow, it is not annulled -
it goes without saying, if 1 affirmed the vow, it is not
2) THE SOURCE THAT THEY BOTH ANNUL
(b) (Gemara) Question: The end of the Mishnah merely
reiterates what was learned in the beginning!
(c) Answer: One might have thought, the 1st clause says that
either may annul by himself - the 2nd clause makes clear
that this is not so.
(d) (Mishnah): It goes without saying, if 1 affirmed the vow
(e) Question: What does this teach?
1. If only 1 of them annulled, this does nothing - do
we need to hear, if 1 affirmed?!
(f) Answer: We need to hear the case when 1 annulled and the
other affirmed, and then he annulled his affirmation.
1. One might have thought, he uproots his affirmation -
we hear, this is not so, both must annul together.
(Ramban - they can now annul together; Rambam - the
vow can not be annulled).
(a) (Mishnah): An engaged Na'arah, her father and husband
annul her vows.
(b) Question: What is the source of this?
(c) Answer (Rava): "And if she will be to a man, and her vows
are on her" (the verse speaks by engagement, and says
that the husband may annul; the word "And" connects to
the law of the previous passage, that a father may annul
his daughter's vows).
(d) Suggestion: Perhaps this verse speaks of a (fully)
(e) Rejection #1: Another verse teaches that - "If she vowed
in her husband's house..."
1. Suggestion: Perhaps both speak of a married woman.
i. Question: If so, why is the 2nd verse needed?
ii. Answer: To teach that a husband cannot annul
vows taken before he married her.
2. Rejection: We could learn this from the 2nd verse
(f) Rejection #2: The language "will be" suggests engagement,
not full marriage.
(g) Suggestion: Perhaps the father can annul himself!
(h) Rejection: If so, why did the Torah have to say "If she
vows in her father's house, her father may annul"?
1. If the father can annul (himself) even when she is
engaged, all the more so when she is single!
(i) Suggestion: Perhaps the father cannot annul alone, but
the engaged husband may.
1. Question: If this would be true - why did the Torah
mention the father at all?
(j) Rejection: If so, why did the Torah write, "If she vowed
in her husband's house"?
2. Answer: It would teach, if the father affirmed the
vow, the husband cannot annul it.
1. If an engaged husband can annul by himself - all the
more so, a married husband!
(k) Question: We could say, this latter verse teaches that he
cannot annul vows that precede the marriage!
(l) Answer: From this itself (that a married husband cannot
annul vows that precede the marriage) we can deduce (that
an engaged husband cannot annul by himself).
1. Rhetorical question: Why is an engaged husband able
to annul vows that precede the marriage, which a
married husband cannot?
2. Answer: Because he annuls together with the father.