Study Nedarim folio 14A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
a negative statement you can infer a positive statement? How then can it be inferred that it should be like an offering? And if it is rather the opinion of R' Yehuda, who disagrees with R' Meir in this matter, the ruling of the Mishnah is superfluous, as this is identical to the ruling of the Mishn
The Talmud answers: The ruling is superfluous. However, since the Mishnah teaches that the vow does not take effect when he says that the food will be like pig meat or like an object of idol worship, it therefore teaches incidentally that this ruling also applies when he says that it will be non-sac
Ravina said that this is what the Mishnah is teaching: And these are the vows that do not take effect at all and therefore the item mentioned in the vow remains permitted: One who said that a certain item will be like non-sacred food, or like pig meat, or like an object of idol worship. And if it
The Talmud asks: But is there any reason to consider this interpretation? But from the fact that the latter clause teaches with regard to a man who says to his wife: You are hereby to me like my mother, that dissolution is broached with him by suggesting a different extenuation, it may be inferred
§ With regard to the principle that a prohibition cannot be created by associating a permitted item with one forbidden by Torah law, the Talmud asks: From where is this matter derived? The Talmud answers that the verse states: “When a man takes a vow to YHWH” (Numbers 30:3), which indicates that a v