Study Nedarim folio 12B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Having made this inference, Ravina comments: But the teruma of the loaves of the thanks-offering is designated only after the sprinkling of the blood. Consequently, the individual must have made his vow after the sprinkling of the blood, when these loaves are permitted to priests. If the vow nevert
The Talmud refutes this: Say that when the Mishnah specifies that if one said the food should be like the teruma of Aaron it remains permitted it thereby indicates that if he said it should be like the collection of the Temple treasury chamber, which is also called a teruma and is always forbidden,
The Talmud asks: But according to this, if one said the food should be like the teruma of the loaves of the thanks-offering, what, does the food remain permitted? If so, let it teach in the Mishnah that if one said the food should be like the teruma of the loaves of the thanks-offering it remains
The Talmud offers an alternative response to Ravina’s attempted proof from the case of the teruma of the loaves of the thanks-offering, that one has in mind the original status of an item when one expresses a vow. And if you wish, say that the teruma of the loaves of the thanks-offering can also be
And this is in accordance with that which Rav Tovi bar Kisna said that Shmuel said: If one baked the loaves of the thanks-offering as 4 loaves rather than the 40 loaves that should ideally be baked, he has fulfilled his obligation. The Talmud asks: Isn’t it written that 40 loaves must be brought wi