Study Nedarim folio 10B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
From where is it derived that a person should not say: To YHWH a burnt-offering, or: To YHWH a meal-offering, or: To YHWH a thanks-offering, or: To YHWH a peace-offering, but should mention the offering first and then state that it is for YHWH? The verse states: “An offering to YHWH” (Leviticus
And it is an a fortiori inference: Just as with regard to this individual discussed in the baraita, who intended to mention the name of Heaven only upon an offering, the Torah said that he should say: An offering to YHWH, in order to avoid possibly mentioning the name of God in vain, with regard to
The Talmud suggests: Let us say that this dispute between R' Yoḥanan and R' Shimon ben Lakish is parallel to a dispute between tanna’im, as it was taught in a baraita that Beit Shammai say: If one expresses a vow with substitutes for the substitute terms mentioned in the Mishnah, the vow takes eff
What, is it not correct that the one who says that a vow expressed with substitutes for the substitute terms mentioned in the Mishnah takes effect and that the item is consequently forbidden likewise holds that substitutes for the language of vows are terms from the language of other nations, and t
The Talmud responds: No, it is possible that everyone holds that substitutes for the language of vows are terms from the language of other nations, and Beit Shammai hold that the nations speak using these substitutes for the terms mentioned in the Mishnah also, and Beit Hillel hold that the nations