Study Nedarim folio 39A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Talmud: With what are we dealing? If it is a case where the property of the visitor is forbidden to the ill person, even if he is sitting, this should also be permitted. If it is a case where the property of the ill person is forbidden to the visitor, even if he is standing, it should also not be
Why was this distinction stated without qualification? There is no apparent fundamental difference between sitting and standing when visiting the ill. The Talmud answers: It teaches us this: Even in a place where one takes payment for visiting the ill, for sitting, one ought to take payment, but fo
Ulla said: Actually, it is a case where the property of the ill person is forbidden to the visitor, and where the ill person did not vow that his property would be forbidden in cases where its use enables the visitor to meet needs pertaining to his continued existence. The Talmud asks: If so, the
The Talmud raises an objection from a baraita: If he became ill, he enters to visit him; if his son became ill, he inquires about his son’s health in the marketplace but may not enter the house to visit him. Granted, according to Ulla, who said: It is a case where the property of the ill person is
However, according to Shmuel, who said: It is a case where the property of the visitor is forbidden to the ill person, what is different about him and what is different about his son? Why is it prohibited for him to visit when the son is ill? The Talmud answers: Shmuel could have said to you: The