Vows--Don't Take Them; Or Do
by R. Gidon Rothstein
Yoreh De’ah 203, Laws of Vows
The Torah enabled Jews to obligate or prohibit themselves from what the Torah itself did not address (the possibility to add an oath/vow to a pre-existing obligation will come up later). In Parshat Matot, Bamidbar 30;3—this week’s parshah, making our current discussion more clearly timely than usual—the Torah says lo yachel devaro, a person cannot break his/her word.
This despite the Torah elsewhere prohibiting bal tosif, adding to the Torah.
The Limited Way Out of a Vow
Still in se’if 1, AH says the Torah created a way to exit an oath/vow, hatarat chacham, a process we will see later in this siman, where a Torah scholar determines the person mistook the situation when s/he vowed. The process only works with the person who took the vow; if a Jew bound someone else with a vow regarding his/her own property, the hatarah would have to be for the person who took the vow (Ruth can prohibit her car to Alice, with the force of a vow; Alice cannot then go to a Torah scholar to have it nullified).
AH adds an aside that I think indicates there was a very contemporary element to the comment, because he says all the more so when the king of the realm binds people with an oath, that they cannot find a way out. He includes a parenthesis, when it comes to army service or other governmental jobs, no Jew would think hatarah, release of vows, would work.
[Service in the Russian army traumatized Jewish memory. According to Wikipedia, before 1834, it was indeed the feared twenty-five years, but by 1856—long before AH started writing—it was already reduced to six years, plus nine in the reserves, and after 1874, the last 24 months of those six years were given as extended leave.
His felt need to include a passage denying the possibility of hatarah to evade a vow reminds me of a responsum of Noda B’Yehuda, who stressed that Jews cannot lie under oath in court. Jews get a reputation for using loopholes, and these rabbis were reassuring their contemporaries those loopholes were untrue.]
When a Jew Violates a Vow
Should a Jew disregard a vow s/he took, se’if two tells us the Jew has violated the obligation stated in the end of the verse, ke-chol ha-yotsei mi-piv ya’aseh, as well as the prohibition we opened with. Rambam adds another verse in his presentation, Laws of Nedarim 1;4, from Devarim 23;24, we must guard and keep what we let leave our lips. AH thinks Rambam meant only to include another type of vow, where a Jew commits to bring a sacrifice. Most of the laws of nedarim deal with prohibitions, but there could be this other kind.
In se’if three, AH explains why the promise to bring a sacrifice needs a verse of its own. Most vows take effect right away, but the obligation of the promise of sacrifice only becomes immediately obligatory at the next major holiday (because only then were Jews expected to be at the Temple, I think; if a Jew at Chanukkah time promises to bring an offering, motza sefatecha tishmor, be sure to fulfill what leaves your lips, becomes neglect-possible the following Pesach).
More, the Jew violates a prohibition only if three major holidays go by with no fulfillment. Should the Jew bring the sacrifice on Shavu’ot or Sukkot, in the example above, s/he will have failed to keep motza sefatecha, but will not have breached bal te’acher, do not delay.
Discouraged and Encouraged Vows
Many sources evince a dislike of vows, despite the Torah’s permitting them. AH quotes Yerushalmi Nedarim 9, in se’if four, where the Talmud asks, rhetorically, what the Torah prohibited is not enough, you have to add? In the first chapter, Yerushalmi saw vows as a reason for the Heavenly Court to pull out our ledgers, waiting to hold us to account for all our failures, should the person fail to fulfill the vow. (Since this person felt comfortable adding to his/her obligations, s/he must feel s/he is doing so well at the already required to have energy for more, so the Heavenly Court will check that out.)
Nedarim 2a warns against frequent vowing, because violations will come. A Mishnah on 9a is interested in the language of vows, with the pungent example of one who says “ke-nidrei kesheirim, like the vows made by properly righteous people.” The Mishnah says the vow will not take hold, because kesheirim, properly righteous people, do not take vows.
In se’if twelve, AH returns to this idea, to wonder at Rambam’s phrasing, Laws of Vows 1;26, a vow ke-nidrei kesheirim doesn’t obligate because such people do not vow out of anger. Sounds as if any non-angry vow is fine, where no other writers had thought so.
AH minimizes the problem, is sure Rambam agreed with the consensus that no such vow takes effect, as he himself said in the Commentary to the Mishnah. To explain this passage, AH says Rambam meant only that people generally take vows in moments of extreme emotion, such as Nedarim 9a, where R. Yonah says people take on nezirut in moments of passion (in that case, regret over sins), then regret it later. Many of the Talmudic examples of vows give the impression they were taken in anger (you cannot get any benefit from me, or vice verse).
Shulchan Aruch, se’if one, says anyone who fulfills a vow is still called a sinner, based on Nedarim 22a, where the Gemara thought the failure to find release from a vow, if available, rendered one a rasha, an evildoer. Taz thought the person would be called a chotei, a sinner, if there was no way out of the vow (even if s/he fulfilled it), and the Mishnah’s mention of nidrei resha’im, the vows of evildoers, showed its view the taking of the vow made one an evildoer.
There are more sources along these lines, but let’s move on.
Yet Vows Have Value
Were this the whole story, we would have to wonder why God included vows in halachah at all. More, Avot 3;13 has R. Akiva’s view, vows cultivate perishut, proper care in partaking of this world’s pleasures. There must be something good about vows. In se’if five, AH gives one answer, a vow to focus oneself better, or improve one’s actions, such as to abstain from drink or meat for a year or two (his numbers) to teach oneself to do these less, or someone who tends to leech off of others vowing to take no gifts or benefits from a period of time, is the kind of vow R. Akiva meant.
Such vows are la-Hashem, for a Godly purpose, the way the verse said. Still, use with caution, adds AH, we should learn to abstain from whatever we would have included in a vow even without the vow, just as a Torah scholar is not supposed to fast too often. While fasts teach valuable lessons, Orach Chayyim 571 thinks Torah scholars need their energy for their studies.
Try Not to be Obligated
Se’if six enunciates the preference to find a Torah scholar to release a vow, other than a promised donation to the Temple or to a charity, where the Jew should fulfill the vow (although the possibility of release exists for those vows as well). Even there, it is still better not to vow, lest circumstances impede the fulfillment. Unless one has the money in hand, AH says, and vows to give it to a cause. [Much of se’ifim 7-10 discuss this idea, the preference to vow when fulfillment will be immediate and the person has the wherewithal to keep the vow right now. I’m not going to go into the details.]
With communal appeals, where everyone is expected to announce a number [and perhaps should, to spur others to give], s/he should say the commitment is beli neder, intended not to have the force of a vow.
Times of Trouble
Se’if seven describes situations of acceptable vows. Tosafot at the beginning of Chullin, recorded by Shulchan Aruch in paragraph five, permitted vows in times of trouble, similar to what Ya’akov did on his way to Charan, what Yonah did in the belly of the whale.
AH asserts allowed translates to should, because the Midrash, accepted by Piskei Tosafot, the short recap of Tosafot’s rulings found at the end of tractates, equated vows in such a situation to prayers to God. We supplicate God for salvation from a problem, we should also give specific indications of how we will change for the better, to deserve God’s repeat mercy.
There’s a bit left, but it’s a whole new topic, so I will leave it for next time, when we will also start Even HaEzer 129, on putting the right names in a get, a bill of divorce.
by R. Gidon Rothstein
Yoreh De’ah 203, Laws of Vows
The Torah enabled Jews to obligate or prohibit themselves from what the Torah itself did not address (the possibility to add an oath/vow to a pre-existing obligation will come up later). In Parshat Matot, Bamidbar 30;3—this week’s parshah, making our current discussion more clearly timely than usual—the Torah says lo yachel devaro, a person cannot break his/her word.
This despite the Torah elsewhere prohibiting bal tosif, adding to the Torah.
The Limited Way Out of a Vow
Still in se’if 1, AH says the Torah created a way to exit an oath/vow, hatarat chacham, a process we will see later in this siman, where a Torah scholar determines the person mistook the situation when s/he vowed. The process only works with the person who took the vow; if a Jew bound someone else with a vow regarding his/her own property, the hatarah would have to be for the person who took the vow (Ruth can prohibit her car to Alice, with the force of a vow; Alice cannot then go to a Torah scholar to have it nullified).
AH adds an aside that I think indicates there was a very contemporary element to the comment, because he says all the more so when the king of the realm binds people with an oath, that they cannot find a way out. He includes a parenthesis, when it comes to army service or other governmental jobs, no Jew would think hatarah, release of vows, would work.
[Service in the Russian army traumatized Jewish memory. According to Wikipedia, before 1834, it was indeed the feared twenty-five years, but by 1856—long before AH started writing—it was already reduced to six years, plus nine in the reserves, and after 1874, the last 24 months of those six years were given as extended leave.
His felt need to include a passage denying the possibility of hatarah to evade a vow reminds me of a responsum of Noda B’Yehuda, who stressed that Jews cannot lie under oath in court. Jews get a reputation for using loopholes, and these rabbis were reassuring their contemporaries those loopholes were untrue.]
When a Jew Violates a Vow
Should a Jew disregard a vow s/he took, se’if two tells us the Jew has violated the obligation stated in the end of the verse, ke-chol ha-yotsei mi-piv ya’aseh, as well as the prohibition we opened with. Rambam adds another verse in his presentation, Laws of Nedarim 1;4, from Devarim 23;24, we must guard and keep what we let leave our lips. AH thinks Rambam meant only to include another type of vow, where a Jew commits to bring a sacrifice. Most of the laws of nedarim deal with prohibitions, but there could be this other kind.
In se’if three, AH explains why the promise to bring a sacrifice needs a verse of its own. Most vows take effect right away, but the obligation of the promise of sacrifice only becomes immediately obligatory at the next major holiday (because only then were Jews expected to be at the Temple, I think; if a Jew at Chanukkah time promises to bring an offering, motza sefatecha tishmor, be sure to fulfill what leaves your lips, becomes neglect-possible the following Pesach).
More, the Jew violates a prohibition only if three major holidays go by with no fulfillment. Should the Jew bring the sacrifice on Shavu’ot or Sukkot, in the example above, s/he will have failed to keep motza sefatecha, but will not have breached bal te’acher, do not delay.
Discouraged and Encouraged Vows
Many sources evince a dislike of vows, despite the Torah’s permitting them. AH quotes Yerushalmi Nedarim 9, in se’if four, where the Talmud asks, rhetorically, what the Torah prohibited is not enough, you have to add? In the first chapter, Yerushalmi saw vows as a reason for the Heavenly Court to pull out our ledgers, waiting to hold us to account for all our failures, should the person fail to fulfill the vow. (Since this person felt comfortable adding to his/her obligations, s/he must feel s/he is doing so well at the already required to have energy for more, so the Heavenly Court will check that out.)
Nedarim 2a warns against frequent vowing, because violations will come. A Mishnah on 9a is interested in the language of vows, with the pungent example of one who says “ke-nidrei kesheirim, like the vows made by properly righteous people.” The Mishnah says the vow will not take hold, because kesheirim, properly righteous people, do not take vows.
In se’if twelve, AH returns to this idea, to wonder at Rambam’s phrasing, Laws of Vows 1;26, a vow ke-nidrei kesheirim doesn’t obligate because such people do not vow out of anger. Sounds as if any non-angry vow is fine, where no other writers had thought so.
AH minimizes the problem, is sure Rambam agreed with the consensus that no such vow takes effect, as he himself said in the Commentary to the Mishnah. To explain this passage, AH says Rambam meant only that people generally take vows in moments of extreme emotion, such as Nedarim 9a, where R. Yonah says people take on nezirut in moments of passion (in that case, regret over sins), then regret it later. Many of the Talmudic examples of vows give the impression they were taken in anger (you cannot get any benefit from me, or vice verse).
Shulchan Aruch, se’if one, says anyone who fulfills a vow is still called a sinner, based on Nedarim 22a, where the Gemara thought the failure to find release from a vow, if available, rendered one a rasha, an evildoer. Taz thought the person would be called a chotei, a sinner, if there was no way out of the vow (even if s/he fulfilled it), and the Mishnah’s mention of nidrei resha’im, the vows of evildoers, showed its view the taking of the vow made one an evildoer.
There are more sources along these lines, but let’s move on.
Yet Vows Have Value
Were this the whole story, we would have to wonder why God included vows in halachah at all. More, Avot 3;13 has R. Akiva’s view, vows cultivate perishut, proper care in partaking of this world’s pleasures. There must be something good about vows. In se’if five, AH gives one answer, a vow to focus oneself better, or improve one’s actions, such as to abstain from drink or meat for a year or two (his numbers) to teach oneself to do these less, or someone who tends to leech off of others vowing to take no gifts or benefits from a period of time, is the kind of vow R. Akiva meant.
Such vows are la-Hashem, for a Godly purpose, the way the verse said. Still, use with caution, adds AH, we should learn to abstain from whatever we would have included in a vow even without the vow, just as a Torah scholar is not supposed to fast too often. While fasts teach valuable lessons, Orach Chayyim 571 thinks Torah scholars need their energy for their studies.
Try Not to be Obligated
Se’if six enunciates the preference to find a Torah scholar to release a vow, other than a promised donation to the Temple or to a charity, where the Jew should fulfill the vow (although the possibility of release exists for those vows as well). Even there, it is still better not to vow, lest circumstances impede the fulfillment. Unless one has the money in hand, AH says, and vows to give it to a cause. [Much of se’ifim 7-10 discuss this idea, the preference to vow when fulfillment will be immediate and the person has the wherewithal to keep the vow right now. I’m not going to go into the details.]
With communal appeals, where everyone is expected to announce a number [and perhaps should, to spur others to give], s/he should say the commitment is beli neder, intended not to have the force of a vow.
Times of Trouble
Se’if seven describes situations of acceptable vows. Tosafot at the beginning of Chullin, recorded by Shulchan Aruch in paragraph five, permitted vows in times of trouble, similar to what Ya’akov did on his way to Charan, what Yonah did in the belly of the whale.
AH asserts allowed translates to should, because the Midrash, accepted by Piskei Tosafot, the short recap of Tosafot’s rulings found at the end of tractates, equated vows in such a situation to prayers to God. We supplicate God for salvation from a problem, we should also give specific indications of how we will change for the better, to deserve God’s repeat mercy.
There’s a bit left, but it’s a whole new topic, so I will leave it for next time, when we will also start Even HaEzer 129, on putting the right names in a get, a bill of divorce.
Vows--Don't Take Them; Or Do
by R. Gidon Rothstein
Yoreh De’ah 203, Laws of Vows
The Torah enabled Jews to obligate or prohibit themselves from what the Torah itself did not address (the possibility to add an oath/vow to a pre-existing obligation will come up later). In Parshat Matot, Bamidbar 30;3—this week’s parshah, making our current discussion more clearly timely than usual—the Torah says lo yachel devaro, a person cannot break his/her word.
This despite the Torah elsewhere prohibiting bal tosif, adding to the Torah.
The Limited Way Out of a Vow
Still in se’if 1, AH says the Torah created a way to exit an oath/vow, hatarat chacham, a process we will see later in this siman, where a Torah scholar determines the person mistook the situation when s/he vowed. The process only works with the person who took the vow; if a Jew bound someone else with a vow regarding his/her own property, the hatarah would have to be for the person who took the vow (Ruth can prohibit her car to Alice, with the force of a vow; Alice cannot then go to a Torah scholar to have it nullified).
AH adds an aside that I think indicates there was a very contemporary element to the comment, because he says all the more so when the king of the realm binds people with an oath, that they cannot find a way out. He includes a parenthesis, when it comes to army service or other governmental jobs, no Jew would think hatarah, release of vows, would work.
[Service in the Russian army traumatized Jewish memory. According to Wikipedia, before 1834, it was indeed the feared twenty-five years, but by 1856—long before AH started writing—it was already reduced to six years, plus nine in the reserves, and after 1874, the last 24 months of those six years were given as extended leave.
His felt need to include a passage denying the possibility of hatarah to evade a vow reminds me of a responsum of Noda B’Yehuda, who stressed that Jews cannot lie under oath in court. Jews get a reputation for using loopholes, and these rabbis were reassuring their contemporaries those loopholes were untrue.]
When a Jew Violates a Vow
Should a Jew disregard a vow s/he took, se’if two tells us the Jew has violated the obligation stated in the end of the verse, ke-chol ha-yotsei mi-piv ya’aseh, as well as the prohibition we opened with. Rambam adds another verse in his presentation, Laws of Nedarim 1;4, from Devarim 23;24, we must guard and keep what we let leave our lips. AH thinks Rambam meant only to include another type of vow, where a Jew commits to bring a sacrifice. Most of the laws of nedarim deal with prohibitions, but there could be this other kind.
In se’if three, AH explains why the promise to bring a sacrifice needs a verse of its own. Most vows take effect right away, but the obligation of the promise of sacrifice only becomes immediately obligatory at the next major holiday (because only then were Jews expected to be at the Temple, I think; if a Jew at Chanukkah time promises to bring an offering, motza sefatecha tishmor, be sure to fulfill what leaves your lips, becomes neglect-possible the following Pesach).
More, the Jew violates a prohibition only if three major holidays go by with no fulfillment. Should the Jew bring the sacrifice on Shavu’ot or Sukkot, in the example above, s/he will have failed to keep motza sefatecha, but will not have breached bal te’acher, do not delay.
Discouraged and Encouraged Vows
Many sources evince a dislike of vows, despite the Torah’s permitting them. AH quotes Yerushalmi Nedarim 9, in se’if four, where the Talmud asks, rhetorically, what the Torah prohibited is not enough, you have to add? In the first chapter, Yerushalmi saw vows as a reason for the Heavenly Court to pull out our ledgers, waiting to hold us to account for all our failures, should the person fail to fulfill the vow. (Since this person felt comfortable adding to his/her obligations, s/he must feel s/he is doing so well at the already required to have energy for more, so the Heavenly Court will check that out.)
Nedarim 2a warns against frequent vowing, because violations will come. A Mishnah on 9a is interested in the language of vows, with the pungent example of one who says “ke-nidrei kesheirim, like the vows made by properly righteous people.” The Mishnah says the vow will not take hold, because kesheirim, properly righteous people, do not take vows.
In se’if twelve, AH returns to this idea, to wonder at Rambam’s phrasing, Laws of Vows 1;26, a vow ke-nidrei kesheirim doesn’t obligate because such people do not vow out of anger. Sounds as if any non-angry vow is fine, where no other writers had thought so.
AH minimizes the problem, is sure Rambam agreed with the consensus that no such vow takes effect, as he himself said in the Commentary to the Mishnah. To explain this passage, AH says Rambam meant only that people generally take vows in moments of extreme emotion, such as Nedarim 9a, where R. Yonah says people take on nezirut in moments of passion (in that case, regret over sins), then regret it later. Many of the Talmudic examples of vows give the impression they were taken in anger (you cannot get any benefit from me, or vice verse).
Shulchan Aruch, se’if one, says anyone who fulfills a vow is still called a sinner, based on Nedarim 22a, where the Gemara thought the failure to find release from a vow, if available, rendered one a rasha, an evildoer. Taz thought the person would be called a chotei, a sinner, if there was no way out of the vow (even if s/he fulfilled it), and the Mishnah’s mention of nidrei resha’im, the vows of evildoers, showed its view the taking of the vow made one an evildoer.
There are more sources along these lines, but let’s move on.
Yet Vows Have Value
Were this the whole story, we would have to wonder why God included vows in halachah at all. More, Avot 3;13 has R. Akiva’s view, vows cultivate perishut, proper care in partaking of this world’s pleasures. There must be something good about vows. In se’if five, AH gives one answer, a vow to focus oneself better, or improve one’s actions, such as to abstain from drink or meat for a year or two (his numbers) to teach oneself to do these less, or someone who tends to leech off of others vowing to take no gifts or benefits from a period of time, is the kind of vow R. Akiva meant.
Such vows are la-Hashem, for a Godly purpose, the way the verse said. Still, use with caution, adds AH, we should learn to abstain from whatever we would have included in a vow even without the vow, just as a Torah scholar is not supposed to fast too often. While fasts teach valuable lessons, Orach Chayyim 571 thinks Torah scholars need their energy for their studies.
Try Not to be Obligated
Se’if six enunciates the preference to find a Torah scholar to release a vow, other than a promised donation to the Temple or to a charity, where the Jew should fulfill the vow (although the possibility of release exists for those vows as well). Even there, it is still better not to vow, lest circumstances impede the fulfillment. Unless one has the money in hand, AH says, and vows to give it to a cause. [Much of se’ifim 7-10 discuss this idea, the preference to vow when fulfillment will be immediate and the person has the wherewithal to keep the vow right now. I’m not going to go into the details.]
With communal appeals, where everyone is expected to announce a number [and perhaps should, to spur others to give], s/he should say the commitment is beli neder, intended not to have the force of a vow.
Times of Trouble
Se’if seven describes situations of acceptable vows. Tosafot at the beginning of Chullin, recorded by Shulchan Aruch in paragraph five, permitted vows in times of trouble, similar to what Ya’akov did on his way to Charan, what Yonah did in the belly of the whale.
AH asserts allowed translates to should, because the Midrash, accepted by Piskei Tosafot, the short recap of Tosafot’s rulings found at the end of tractates, equated vows in such a situation to prayers to God. We supplicate God for salvation from a problem, we should also give specific indications of how we will change for the better, to deserve God’s repeat mercy.
There’s a bit left, but it’s a whole new topic, so I will leave it for next time, when we will also start Even HaEzer 129, on putting the right names in a get, a bill of divorce.
0 Comments
0 Shares
57 Views
Arabic
French
Spanish
Portuguese
Deutsch
Turkish
Dutch
Italiano
Russian
Romaian
Portuguese (Brazil)
Greek