Study Shevuot folio 28A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Even if he had left any amount it would also be possible for him to dissolve the oath, as he had not yet broken his oath.
Rav Ashi answers: If you wish, say that the halakha stated by Rava is referring to a case where he took an oath, saying: I will not eat this loaf, and if you wish, say that it is referring to a case where he took an oath, saying: I will not eat it. The Talmud elaborates: If you wish, say that the h
And if you wish, say that the halakha stated by Rava is referring to a case where he took an oath, saying: I will not eat it. If he left an olive-bulk, that is a sufficiently significant quantity for which to request dissolution of the oath. But if he did not leave that much, it is not a sufficient
Rava assumes that once one has eaten the entire loaf, it is no longer possible to dissolve the oath. The Talmud raises an objection to this from a baraita: With regard to one who took two vows of naziriteship, and counted the first term and separated an offering for it, and afterward requested and r
The Talmud answers: What are we dealing with here? We are dealing with a case where he has not yet atoned, i.e., he has not yet brought the offerings that one brings at the conclusion of naziriteship.