Study Nedarim folio 85B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
she may work and sustain herself from her earnings, as the consecration is ineffective. And with regard to the surplus earnings, i.e., if she produced more than she needs for her sustenance, R' Meir says the surplus becomes consecrated property, whereas R' Yoḥanan HaSandlar says that it is non-sacre
And if you would say that when Shmuel is saying that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of R' Yoḥanan ben Nuri he was saying only that the halakha is such with regard to the surplus, there is a difficulty. One might say that since R' Yoḥanan ben Nuri disagrees with R' Akiva, he apparentl
But if so, let Shmuel clearly say: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of R' Yoḥanan ben Nuri with regard to the surplus. Alternatively, he could have said that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of the first tanna, who also maintains that the surplus belongs to the husband.
Rather, Rav Yosef said that the apparent contradiction between Shmuel’s rulings can be resolved in the following manner: Although one cannot consecrate an entity that has not yet come into the world, konamot are different; since a person can prohibit to himself another’s produce by means of a konam,
Abaye said to him: This is no proof at all. Granted, a person can prohibit another’s produce to himself, since a person can prohibit his own produce to another. But does it follow that he can also prohibit an entity that has not yet come into the world to another person, seeing that a person canno