Study Nedarim folio 17B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
in this case there is no vow within a vow. The Talmud concludes: This question is difficult, although it is not a conclusive refutation.
The Talmud raises several problems with the opinion of Rav Huna. We learned in the Mishnah: There is a vow within a vow, but there is no oath within an oath. What are the circumstances? If we say that the case of a vow within a vow is where one said: I am hereby a nazirite today, I am a hereby a naz
Rather, what are the circumstances in which a second oath does not take effect after an oath was already made? For example: where one said: I hereby take an oath that I will not eat figs, and he again said: I hereby take an oath that I will not eat figs. In the corresponding situation with regard
The Talmud answers that Rav Huna could have said to you that the Mishnah is referring to a case where one said: I am hereby a nazirite today, I am hereby a nazirite tomorrow; that in the corresponding situation with regard to an oath where one said: I hereby take an oath that I will not eat figs,
The Talmud asks: But didn’t Rabba say that if one said: I hereby take an oath that I will not eat figs, and then said: I hereby take an oath that I will not eat figs and grapes, and he subsequently ate figs, violating the oath, and he then set aside an offering for the violation of an oath on a st