## Mishnah Nedarim Chapter 11

###### Mishnah Nedarim 11:1
[Mishnah Nedarim 11:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishnah%20Nedarim/r/11:1)

וְאֵלּוּ נְדָרִים שֶׁהוּא מֵפֵר, דְּבָרִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהֶם עִנּוּי נֶפֶשׁ, אִם אֶרְחָץ וְאִם לֹא אֶרְחָץ, אִם אֶתְקַשֵּׁט וְאִם לֹא אֶתְקַשֵּׁט. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, אֵין אֵלּוּ נִדְרֵי עִנּוּי נָפֶשׁ:

**The Mishna with Obadiah Bartenura by Rabbi Shraga Silverstein:**
And these are the vows that he annuls [The gemara explains that vows and oaths are intended; for in the language of the sages oaths are included in vows.]: things which entail affliction, viz.: "If I bathe" and if "I shall no bathe,"; "If I adorn myself," and if "I shall not adorn myself." [i.e., "The pleasure of bathing is forbidden to me forever if I bathe today" — this is a vow. "Shevuah, that I shall not bathe" — this is an oath. And, similarly, "if I adorn myself," viz.: "The pleasure of adornment is forbidden to me forever if I adorn myself today." "and if "I shall not adorn myself,'" viz.: Shevuah, that I shall not adorn myself."] R. Yossi said: These are not vows of affliction. [R. Yossi differs with the first tanna only in respect to vows alone, saying that "The pleasure of bathing is forbidden to me forever if I bathe today" is not a vow of affliction; for it is possible for her not to bathe today and the pleasure of bathing not be forbidden to her forever. And a one-day abstinence from bathing is not considered affliction, for a one-day foulness is not considered foulness. The halachah is not in accordance with R. Yossi. And both the father and the husband annul vows of affliction, it being written (Numbers 30:17): "between a man and his wife, between a father and his daughter." The father is hereby being likened to the husband. Just as the husband annuls only vows of affliction, the father, too, annuls only vows of affliction. And Rambam rules that the father can annul all vows and oaths, even those which are not of affliction, viz. (Ibid. 30:6): "all of her vows and her bonds."]


###### Mishnah Nedarim 11:2
[Mishnah Nedarim 11:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishnah%20Nedarim/r/11:2)

וְאֵלּוּ הֵם נִדְרֵי עִנּוּי נֶפֶשׁ. אָמְרָה, קוֹנָם פֵּרוֹת הָעוֹלָם עָלָי, הֲרֵי זֶה יָכוֹל לְהָפֵר. פֵּרוֹת מְדִינָה עָלָי, יָבִיא לָהּ מִמְּדִינָה אַחֶרֶת. פֵּרוֹת חֶנְוָנִי זֶה עָלָי, אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְהָפֵר. וְאִם לֹא הָיְתָה פַרְנָסָתוֹ אֶלָּא מִמֶּנּוּ, הֲרֵי זֶה יָפֵר, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יוֹסֵי:

**The Mishna with Obadiah Bartenura by Rabbi Shraga Silverstein:**
And these are vows of affliction: If she said: "Konam, (that I shall not eat) the fruits of the world," he can annul it. (If she said: "Konam, that I shall not eat) the fruits of that country," he can bring her fruits from a different country. "the fruits of that shopkeeper," he cannot annul it. And if his (the husband's) livelihood came only from him (that shopkeeper) [the shopkeeper giving the husband credit until he earned and repaid him], he may annul it. These are the words of R. Yossi. [R. Yossi is consistent with his view that the husband does not annul every vow of affliction, differentiating between great affliction and moderate affliction, and between long-term and short-term affliction. And all of the mishnayoth of this chapter are according to him and are not the halachah. But the husband may annul any vow of affliction, whether a one-day vow, a one-hour vow, or a long-term vow; whether it entails great affliction or moderate affliction. Likewise, he can annul vows and oaths in things "between him and her" even though it entails no affliction, as when she swore or vowed not to paint her eyes or not to adorn herself. Likewise, if she vowed not to eat the fruits of this country, the husband can annul it, bringing them from a different country entailing exertion. These are things which are "between him and her." And what is the difference between vows and oaths which are between him and her and vows and oaths of affliction? Vows and oaths of affliction he annuls both for himself and for others, e.g., if she vowed not to eat meat or to drink wine he annuls it and she is permitted to eat and drink, even after she is widowed or divorced and married to another. And vows and oaths "between him and her," e.g., if she forbade to herself cohabitation with all men forever or painting or adorning herself forever, he annuls what pertains to him, and she cohabits with him and paints and adorns herself so long as she is his wife. And when she is widowed or divorced, she is forbidden cohabitation with any man, as well as painting and adornment; and, likewise, in similar instances.]


###### Mishnah Nedarim 11:3
[Mishnah Nedarim 11:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishnah%20Nedarim/r/11:3)

קוֹנָם שֶׁאֵינִי נֶהֱנָה לַבְּרִיּוֹת, אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְהָפֵר, וִיכוֹלָה הִיא לֵהָנוֹת בְּלֶקֶט וּבְשִׁכְחָה וּבְפֵאָה. קוֹנָם כֹּהֲנִים וּלְוִיִּם נֶהֱנִים לִי, יִטְּלוּ עַל כָּרְחוֹ. כֹּהֲנִים אֵלּוּ וּלְוִיִּם אֵלּוּ נֶהֱנִים לִי, יִטְּלוּ אֲחֵרִים:

**The Mishna with Obadiah Bartenura by Rabbi Shraga Silverstein:**
(If she said;) "konam, that I shall not benefit from people" he cannot annul it, [this not being a vow of affliction, for she can be fed by her husband, her husband not being included in "people." And this Mishnah, too, is according to R. Yossi and is not the halachah, as explained above. And not only if she says: "Konam, that I shall not benefit from people, where she forbids herself benefit from all people, can he annul it by reason of "vows of affliction" according to the sages; but even if she says: "Konam, that I shall not benefit from that man," where she forbids herself benefit only from that man alone, the husband may annul her vow by reason of "things between himself and her," it involving exertion for him if she does not benefit from that man, and the Torah having stated (Numbers 30:17): "between a man and his wife" — Everything "between a man and his wife" the husband can annul.] And she can benefit from leket, shikchah, and peah. [This is the intent: Another reason that if she says: "Konam that I shall not benefit from people," the husband cannot annul it is that she can benefit from leket, shikchah, and peah, in which instance she does not benefit from people, these being gifts for the poor, and there is no affliction here.] (If one says: "Konam,) Cohanim and Levites benefitting from me," they may take against his will. [For just as if she said: "Konam, that I shall not benefit from people," she is permitted to take the poor-gifts, here, too. If one bevows Cohanim and Levites from his possessions, they are permitted to take the gifts of the Cohanim and the Levites.] (If he said: "Konam) these Cohanim and these Levites benefitting from me," others may take it.


###### Mishnah Nedarim 11:4
[Mishnah Nedarim 11:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishnah%20Nedarim/r/11:4)

קוֹנָם שֶׁאֵינִי עוֹשָׂה עַל פִּי אַבָּא, וְעַל פִּי אָבִיךָ, וְעַל פִּי אָחִי, וְעַל פִּי אָחִיךָ, אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְהָפֵר. שֶׁאֵינִי עוֹשָׂה עַל פִּיךָ, אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לְהָפֵר. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר, יָפֵר, שֶׁמָּא תַעְדִּיף עָלָיו יוֹתֵר מִן הָרָאוּי לוֹ. רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי אוֹמֵר, יָפֵר, שֶׁמָּא יְגָרְשֶׁנָּה וּתְהִי אֲסוּרָה עָלָיו:

**The Mishna with Obadiah Bartenura by Rabbi Shraga Silverstein:**
(If she said:) "Konam that I not work for the mouth of my father," or "for the mouth of your father," or "for the mouth of my brother," or "for the mouth of your brother," he cannot annul it. [i.e., If she said: "Hekdesh ("dedicated") shall be all of my work from coming to the mouth of my father"; that is, that my father not be able to benefit from my handiwork, he cannot annul it; for these are not "things between him and her." And in this all agree, that if she forbids others from benefitting from her, her husband cannot annul it.] (If she said: "Konam,) that I not work for your mouth," he need not annul it. [For she is obligated to him. And even though hekdesh dissolves obligations, the sages strengthened her obligation to her husband, the vower not being enabled to dissolve that obligation.] R. Akiva says: He should annul it, for she might earn in addition to what reverts to him [and "hekdesh" takes effect upon that addition, it not reverting to him. He must, therefore, annul it; and the annulment is of avail, the vow entailing "things between him and her," it being impossible that the addition not become intermixed with what reverts to her husband.] R. Yochanan b. Nuri says: He should annul it, lest he divorce her and she be forbidden to return to him. [And her basic handiwork requires annulment, lest he divorce her and her obligation to her husband be dissolved, at which point the vow will take effect, and she will be forbidden to return to him. The halachah is in accordance with R. Yochanan b. Nuri. (And we are speaking of an instance where she says: "Let my hands be hekdesh to their Maker," the hands being "in the world" (so that she is not vowing in respect to "something which is not in the world"), and hekdesh "takes" upon them.]


###### Mishnah Nedarim 11:5
[Mishnah Nedarim 11:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishnah%20Nedarim/r/11:5)

נָדְרָה אִשְׁתּוֹ וְסָבוּר שֶׁנָּדְרָה בִתּוֹ, נָדְרָה בִתּוֹ וְסָבוּר שֶׁנָּדְרָה אִשְׁתּוֹ, נָדְרָה בְנָזִיר וְסָבוּר שֶׁנָּדְרָה בְקָרְבָּן, נָדְרָה בְקָרְבָּן וְסָבוּר שֶׁנָּדְרָה בְנָזִיר, נָדְרָה מִן הַתְּאֵנִים וְסָבוּר שֶׁנָּדְרָה מִן הָעֲנָבִים, נָדְרָה מִן הָעֲנָבִים וְסָבוּר שֶׁנָּדְרָה מִן הַתְּאֵנִים, הֲרֵי זֶה יַחֲזֹר וְיָפֵר:

**The Mishna with Obadiah Bartenura by Rabbi Shraga Silverstein:**
If his wife vowed and he thought it were his daughter; if his daughter vowed and he thought it were his wife; if she vowed Naziritism and he thought she vowed an offering; if she vowed an offering and he thought she vowed Naziritism; if she bevowed herself from figs and he thought she bevowed herself from grapes; if she bevowed herself from grapes and he thought she bevowed herself from figs — he must annul it again. [For annulment in error is not annulment. He must (in his annulment) intend the woman who vowed, it being written (Numbers 30:12): "He did not constrain her" — the annulment must be directed to the vower herself. And he must also intend the specific vow which was uttered, it being written (Ibid. 5): "…and her father hear her vow" — he must know which vow she vowed.]


###### Mishnah Nedarim 11:6
[Mishnah Nedarim 11:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishnah%20Nedarim/r/11:6)

אָמְרָה, קוֹנָם תְּאֵנִים וַעֲנָבִים אֵלּוּ שֶׁאֵינִי טוֹעֶמֶת, קִיֵּם לַתְּאֵנִים, כֻּלּוֹ קַיָּם. הֵפֵר לַתְּאֵנִים, אֵינוֹ מוּפָר עַד שֶׁיָּפֵר אַף לָעֲנָבִים. אָמְרָה, קוֹנָם תְּאֵנִים שֶׁאֵינִי טוֹעֶמֶת וַעֲנָבִים שֶׁאֵינִי טוֹעֶמֶת, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ שְׁנֵי נְדָרִים:

**The Mishna with Obadiah Bartenura by Rabbi Shraga Silverstein:**
If she said: "Konam, that I shall not taste these figs and grapes," if he caused it (the vow) to stand for figs, all of it stands. If he annulled it for figs, it is not annulled until he also annuls it for grapes. [The reason: (Numbers 30:14): "Her husband yekimmenu" ("Her husband shall cause it to stand.") "Yakim mimenu" ("He shall cause part of it to stand.") When he causes part of it to stand, he causes all of it to stand. But "yeferenu" ("He shall annul it") cannot be expounded thus, so that there is no annulment until he annuls all of it. This is an individual opinion and is not the halachah, the halachah being in accordance with the sages, who say: Causing to stand is likened to annulment, viz.: Just as with annulment, what he annulled is annulled, and what he did not annul is not annulled (it not being possible to expound "yeferenu" as partial annulment), so with causing to stand. What he caused to stand, stands; and what he did not cause to stand, does not stand. (For "yekimmenu" is also not expounded as partial confirmation, it being the way of Scripture to write it thus.) And even though re the absolution (hatarah) of a sage, we say: "If one is absolved of part of a vow he is absolved of all of it," with the annulment of the husband and the father, it is not so.] If she said: "Konam, that I shall not taste figs and that I shall not taste grapes," these are two vows.


###### Mishnah Nedarim 11:7
[Mishnah Nedarim 11:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishnah%20Nedarim/r/11:7)

יוֹדֵעַ אֲנִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ נְדָרִים, אֲבָל אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ שֶׁיֵּשׁ מְפֵרִין, יָפֵר. יוֹדֵעַ אֲנִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ מְפֵרִין אֲבָל אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ שֶׁזֶּה נֶדֶר, רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר, לֹא יָפֵר, וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, יָפֵר:

**The Mishna with Obadiah Bartenura by Rabbi Shraga Silverstein:**
(If he said:) "I knew that there were vows, but I did not know that there were annulments" [i.e., that he had the authority to annul them], he may annul them [on the day he learns that he has the authority to do so, that day being like "the day he hears it."] But (if he said:) "I did not know that it was a vow," [and that it needed annulment], R. Meir says: He may not annul it. [For since he knew that he could annul it, even though he did not know it was a vow, he should have annulled it in any event. The halachah is not in accordance with R. Meir.] The sages say: He may annul it.


###### Mishnah Nedarim 11:8
[Mishnah Nedarim 11:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishnah%20Nedarim/r/11:8)

הַמֻּדָּר הֲנָאָה מֵחֲתָנוֹ וְהוּא רוֹצֶה לָתֵת לְבִתּוֹ מָעוֹת, אוֹמֵר לָהּ, הֲרֵי הַמָּעוֹת הָאֵלּוּ נְתוּנִים לָךְ בְּמַתָּנָה וּבִלְבַד שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא לְבַעְלֵךְ רְשׁוּת בָּהֶן, אֶלָּא מַה שֶּׁאַתְּ נוֹשֵׂאת וְנוֹתֶנֶת בְּפִיךְ:

**The Mishna with Obadiah Bartenura by Rabbi Shraga Silverstein:**
If one's son-in-law had bevowed benefit from him, and he (the father-in-law) wished to give money to his daughter, he says to her: "Take this money as a gift, on condition that your husband has no right to it, but only in what you buy and put in your mouth." [And his condition stands, and the husband does not acquire it. And even though, by means of this gift, he "rescues" him from exertion; for his wife is fed by this money, and feeding her was his obligation — "saving from exertion" is not considered "benefitting."]


###### Mishnah Nedarim 11:9
[Mishnah Nedarim 11:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishnah%20Nedarim/r/11:9)

וְנֵדֶר אַלְמָנָה וּגְרוּשָׁה יָקוּם עָלֶיהָ (במדבר ל). כֵּיצַד. אָמְרָה, הֲרֵינִי נְזִירָה לְאַחַר שְׁלשִׁים יוֹם, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנִּשֵּׂאת בְּתוֹךְ שְׁלשִׁים יוֹם, אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְהָפֵר. נָדְרָה וְהִיא בִרְשׁוּת הַבַּעַל, מֵפֵר לָהּ. כֵּיצַד. אָמְרָה, הֲרֵינִי נְזִירָה לְאַחַר שְׁלשִׁים, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנִּתְאַלְמְנָה אוֹ נִתְגָּרְשָׁה בְתוֹךְ שְׁלשִׁים, הֲרֵי זֶה מוּפָר. נָדְרָה בוֹ בַיּוֹם, נִתְגָּרְשָׁה בוֹ בַיּוֹם, הֶחֱזִירָהּ בּוֹ בַיּוֹם, אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְהָפֵר. זֶה הַכְּלָל, כֹּל שֶׁיָּצָאת לִרְשׁוּת עַצְמָהּ שָׁעָה אַחַת, אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְהָפֵר:

**The Mishna with Obadiah Bartenura by Rabbi Shraga Silverstein:**
(Numbers 30:10): "And the vow of a widow or of a divorced woman … shall stand with her." How so? If she said: "I shall be a Nazirite after thirty days," even though she were married within thirty days, he cannot annul it. [The verse is not needed for itself (i.e., for the common instance), for if she has no husband, who shall annul it? It must refer, then, to an instance where she had been widowed for some time and the time of the vow (i.e., of its taking effect) did not arrive until after she we married. ("He cannot annul it":) even though the vow takes effect when she is married to him; for the time of vowing is the criterion (for annulment).] If she vowed while she were in her husband's domain, he annuls it for her (even if it is to take effect afterwards.) How so? If she said: "I shall be a Nazirite after thirty days," even if she were widowed or divorced within thirty days, it is annulled. If she vowed on one day, and were divorced on that day, and taken back on that day, [after which he heard of her vow], he cannot annul it [since she entered her own domain between the vow and the annulment, the husband not being empowered to annul prior vows.] This is the rule: If a woman enters her own domain for (even) one moment, he (her husband) cannot annul it (a prior vow).


###### Mishnah Nedarim 11:10
[Mishnah Nedarim 11:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishnah%20Nedarim/r/11:10)

תֵּשַׁע נְעָרוֹת, נִדְרֵיהֶן קַיָּמִין. בּוֹגֶרֶת וְהִיא יְתוֹמָה, נַעֲרָה וּבָגְרָה וְהִיא יְתוֹמָה, נַעֲרָה שֶׁלֹּא בָגְרָה וְהִיא יְתוֹמָה, בּוֹגֶרֶת וּמֵת אָבִיהָ, נַעֲרָה בוֹגֶרֶת וּמֵת אָבִיהָ, נַעֲרָה שֶׁלֹּא בָגְרָה וּמֵת אָבִיהָ, נַעֲרָה שֶׁמֵּת אָבִיהָ וּמִשֶּׁמֵּת אָבִיהָ בָּגְרָה, בּוֹגֶרֶת וְאָבִיהָ קַיָּם, נַעֲרָה בוֹגֶרֶת וְאָבִיהָ קַיָּם. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אַף הַמַּשִּׂיא בִתּוֹ הַקְּטַנָּה, וְנִתְאַלְמְנָה אוֹ נִתְגָּרְשָׁה וְחָזְרָה אֶצְלוֹ, עֲדַיִן הִיא נַעֲרָה:

**The Mishna with Obadiah Bartenura by Rabbi Shraga Silverstein:**
There are nine na'aroth [not necessarily "na'aroth," (but maidens, in general)] whose vows stand: A bogereth who is an orphan [She married, and her husband died when she was a na'arah, making her "an orphan in her father's lifetime." For after she is married, her father no longer has any authority over her. And she became a bogereth after that, and vowed. Her vow stands because she is a bogereth, and also because she is "an orphan in her father's lifetime."]; a na'arah who became a bogereth, who is an orphan. [She married and her husband died. She vowed when she was a na'arah and became a bogereth afterward. And she is "an orphan in her father's lifetime," as I explained.]; a na'arah [at the time she vowed], who has not yet become a bogereth, who is an orphan ["in her father's lifetime." These three are (the category of): "an orphan in her father's lifetime."]; a bogereth whose father died. [When she vowed she was a bogereth, and her father died. She is an "orphan," literally.]; a na'arah who became a bogereth, whose father died; a na'arah, who did not become a bogereth, whose father died. [These three are (the category of) "her father died."]; a na'arah whose father died, and after her father died, she became a bogereth; a bogereth whose father is alive; a na'arah who became a bogereth, whose father is alive. [These three are (the category of) bogereth. The gemara explains that the sages taught of only three na'araoth: bogereth, an orphan, "an orphan in her father's lifetime."] R. Yehudah says: Also, if one married off his daughter as a minor, and she were widowed or divorced, and she returned to him while still a na'arah. [For upon entering the chuppah, she left the father's domain with this marriage.]


###### Mishnah Nedarim 11:11
[Mishnah Nedarim 11:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishnah%20Nedarim/r/11:11)

קוֹנָם שֶׁאֵינִי נֶהֱנֵית לְאַבָּא וּלְאָבִיךָ אִם עוֹשָׂה אֲנִי עַל פִּיךָ, שֶׁאֵינִי נֶהֱנֵית לְךָ אִם עוֹשָׂה אֲנִי עַל פִּי אַבָּא, וְעַל פִּי אָבִיךָ, הֲרֵי זֶה יָפֵר:

**The Mishna with Obadiah Bartenura by Rabbi Shraga Silverstein:**
(If she said:) "Konam, that I shall not benefit from my father or from your father if I make something for you" (or:) "that I shall not benefit from you if I make something for my father or for your father," he can annul it. [For it is disparaging to her husband that she is forbidden benefit from her father or his father because she makes something for him, so that her vow involves "things between him and her."]


###### Mishnah Nedarim 11:12
[Mishnah Nedarim 11:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishnah%20Nedarim/r/11:12)

בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה הָיוּ אוֹמְרִים, שָׁלשׁ נָשִׁים יוֹצְאוֹת וְנוֹטְלוֹת כְּתֻבָּה, הָאוֹמֶרֶת טְמֵאָה אֲנִי לְךָ, שָׁמַיִם בֵּינִי לְבֵינֶךָ, נְטוּלָה אֲנִי מִן הַיְּהוּדִים. חָזְרוּ לוֹמַר, שֶׁלֹּא תְהֵא אִשָּׁה נוֹתֶנֶת עֵינֶיהָ בְאַחֵר וּמְקַלְקֶלֶת עַל בַּעְלָהּ. אֶלָּא הָאוֹמֶרֶת טְמֵאָה אֲנִי לְךָ, תָּבִיא רְאָיָה לִדְבָרֶיהָ. שָׁמַיִם בֵּינִי לְבֵינֶךָ, יַעֲשׂוּ דֶרֶךְ בַּקָּשָׁה. נְטוּלָה אֲנִי מִן הַיְּהוּדִים, יָפֵר חֶלְקוֹ, וּתְהֵא מְשַׁמַּשְׁתּוֹ, וּתְהֵא נְטוּלָה מִן הַיְּהוּדִים:

**The Mishna with Obadiah Bartenura by Rabbi Shraga Silverstein:**
In the beginning they said: Three women go out and take their kethubah: One who says: "I am unclean to you" [The instance is that of the wife of a Cohein, who became forbidden to her husband by having been forced. She does not lose her kethubah. The sages believed her to forbid herself to her husband. And since she goes out with a get, she takes her kethubah, this being derived from what is written in the kethubah itself, viz.: "If you marry another, you shall take what is written to you."], "Heaven between me and you!" [The gemara explains: He does not "shoot like an arrow" (and cannot beget children); that is, things which are known to Heaven, and which she cannot state explicitly. The instance is one in which she comes with a (valid) claim, viz.: "I want a staff to lean on and a hoe to dig my grave" (i.e., a son to support me in my old age and to provide for my burial); for otherwise, she is told: "Go, you are not commanded to produce and multiply."], "I am taken from the Jews." [She forbids to herself cohabitation with all of Israel. And even though we say (Kethuvoth 71a) that if she vowed (not to cohabit) she goes out without a kethubah, for "she placed her finger between her teeth," Rashi explains (Yevamoth 112a) that since she forbids to herself cohabitation with all of Israel, she must certainly be doing so perforce, intercourse being painful for her. And the first Mishnah held that this does not even constitute "things between him and her," for he can divorce her.] But then they retracted, saying (in explanation): So that a woman not "set her eyes" on another and wrong her husband. ["The generations deteriorated," and they feared lest she lie to release herself from her husband.] But if she says: "I am unclean," she must bring proof for her words [and she is not believed without proof.] (If she says:) "Heaven between me and you," they "work by request." [They request of her not to speak thus. The Yerushalmi explains: They make a feast of reconciliation.] (If she says:) "I am taken from the Jews," he annuls what pertains to him, [her vow involving "things between him and her," which he can annul for himself], so that she cohabits with him, and she is "taken from the (other) Jews."