## Nedarim Daf 13a

###### Nedarim 13a:1
[Nedarim 13a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nedarim/r/13a:1)

דְּמַחֵית בְּשַׂר בְּכוֹר וּמַחֵית בָּשָׂר דְּהַאיְךְ גַּבֵּיהּ, וְאָמַר ״זֶה כָּזֶה״. וְתַנָּאֵי הִיא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**that he places the meat of a firstborn** animal in one place **and he places another** piece of **meat next to it, and he said: This** second piece of meat is hereby **like that** meat of the firstborn animal, **and it is** a dispute between ***tanna’im*** about whether he is referring to the original forbidden status of the firstborn animal or its current permitted status?


###### Nedarim 13a:2
[Nedarim 13a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nedarim/r/13a:2)

לָא, דְּכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא לִפְנֵי זְרִיקַת דָּמִים, וּמַאי טַעְמָא דְמַאן דְּשָׁרֵי — אָמַר קְרָא: ״כִּי יִדֹּר״, עַד שֶׁיִּדּוֹר בְּדָבָר הַנָּדוּר, לְאַפּוֹקֵי בְּכוֹר, דְּדָבָר הָאָסוּר הוּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: **No, everyone** agrees that he is referring to the status of the animal **before the sprinkling of the blood, and what is the reason of the one who renders** it **permitted? The verse states: “When** a man **takes a vow”** (Numbers 30:3), which indicates that he has not done so **until he takes a vow with an item forbidden by means of a vow,** i.e., by extending the status of an item that itself was forbidden by a means of a vow. This comes **to exclude a firstborn, which is an item that is forbidden** by the Torah rather than by means of a vow; a firstborn animal is sacred simply because it is born first.


###### Nedarim 13a:3
[Nedarim 13a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nedarim/r/13a:3)

וּמַאן דְּאָסַר, אָמַר קְרָא: ״לַה׳״, לְרַבּוֹת דָּבָר הָאָסוּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And the one who renders** it **forbidden** holds that it is because **the verse states: “To the Lord”** (Numbers 30:3), which comes **to include** one who takes a vow by associating an object with an **item that is forbidden** by the Torah.


###### Nedarim 13a:4
[Nedarim 13a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nedarim/r/13a:4)

וּמַאן דְּשָׁרֵי, ״לַה׳״ מַאי עָבֵיד לֵיהּ? מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ לְמַתְפִּיס בְּחַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And the one who renders** it **permitted** based on the principle that one cannot take a vow by associating the item with an item that is forbidden by the Torah, **what does he do with** the expression **“to the Lord”?** The Gemara answers: **He requires** this expression **to** include the case of **one who associates** the object of his vow with **a sin-offering and a guilt-offering.** Although these offerings are obligatory rather than voluntary, and in that regard they are dissimilar to items forbidden by means of a vow, one can render another item forbidden by associating it with these offerings.


###### Nedarim 13a:5
[Nedarim 13a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nedarim/r/13a:5)

וּמָה רָאִיתָ לְרַבּוֹת חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם וּלְהוֹצִיא אֶת הַבְּכוֹר? מְרַבֶּה אֲנִי חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם שֶׁהוּא מַתְפִּיס בְּנֶדֶר, וּמוֹצִיא אֲנִי אֶת הַבְּכוֹר שֶׁהוּא קָדוֹשׁ מִמְּעֵי אִמּוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And what did you see** that led you **to include a sin-offering and a guilt-offering and to exclude the firstborn?** The Gemara answers: **I include the sin-offering and guilt-offering** due to the fact **that he associates** the object of his vow with an animal forbidden **by means of a vow,** as it is the individual who designates a particular animal for one of these offerings. **And I remove the firstborn, because it is sacred from its mother’s womb.**


###### Nedarim 13a:6
[Nedarim 13a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nedarim/r/13a:6)

וּמַאן דְּאָסַר, בְּכוֹר נָמֵי מַתְפִּיסוֹ בְּנֶדֶר הוּא. דְּתַנְיָא, מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי אָמְרוּ: מִנַּיִן לְנוֹלַד בְּכוֹר בְּתוֹךְ בֵּיתוֹ, שֶׁמִּצְוָה לְהַקְדִּישׁוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״הַזָּכָר תַּקְדִּישׁ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And the one who renders** it **forbidden** is of the opinion that one who says that a piece of meat shall be considered for him like the meat of a **firstborn also associates** the object of his vow with an item forbidden **by a vow, as it is taught** in a *baraita*: **They said in the name of Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi: **From where** is it derived **that** if **one has a firstborn** animal **born in his home** it is still **a mitzva to consecrate it? As it is stated: “The males you shall consecrate”** (Deuteronomy 15:19). Although a firstborn animal is considered consecrated from birth, its owner is still commanded to declare it consecrated, and it is therefore considered an item forbidden by means of a vow.


###### Nedarim 13a:7
[Nedarim 13a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nedarim/r/13a:7)

וּמַאן דְּשָׁרֵי, כִּי לָא מַקְדֵּישׁ לֵיהּ מִי לָא מִיקַּדֵּישׁ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And the one who renders** it **permitted** in this case argues that although the owner is required to declare it consecrated, **if he does not consecrate it, is it not consecrated?** Since it is consecrated in any event, it is considered to have been rendered forbidden by the Torah rather than through a vow.


###### Nedarim 13a:8
[Nedarim 13a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nedarim/r/13a:8)

״כְּאִימְּרָא״, ״כַּדִּירִים״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ It is taught in the mishna that if one says that food shall be considered **like the lamb [*imra*]** of the daily offering, or **like the** animals designated as offerings and kept in special **enclosures,** the vow takes effect.


###### Nedarim 13a:9
[Nedarim 13a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nedarim/r/13a:9)

תָּנָא: ״אִימְּרָא״, ״לְאִימְּרָא״, ״כְּאִימְּרָא״, ״דִּירִים״, ״לַדִּירִים״ ״כַּדִּירִים״, ״עֵצִים״, ״לָעֵצִים״, ״כָּעֵצִים״, ״אִישִּׁים״, ״לָאִישִּׁים״, ״כָּאִישִּׁים״, ״מִזְבֵּחַ״, ״לַמִּזְבֵּחַ״, ״כַּמִּזְבֵּחַ״, ״הֵיכָל״, ״לַהֵיכָל״, ״כַּהֵיכָל״, ״יְרוּשָׁלַיִם״, ״לִירוּשָׁלַיִם״, ״כִּירוּשָׁלַיִם״, כּוּלָּן: ״שֶׁאוֹכַל לָךְ״ — אָסוּר. ״לֹא אוֹכַל לָךְ״ — מוּתָּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
It was **taught** in a *baraita*: If one says that food shall be considered **a lamb, for a lamb, like a lamb; enclosures, for enclosures, like enclosures; wood, for wood, like wood; fires, for fires, like fires; the altar, for the altar, like the altar; the Sanctuary, for the Sanctuary, like the Sanctuary; Jerusalem, for Jerusalem, like Jerusalem;** with regard to **all of them,** if he adds: **That which I will eat of yours, it is forbidden.** This is because his intent is that whatever he eats that belongs to the other individual should be forbidden to him like one of these consecrated items. However, if he adds: That which **I will not eat of yours,** the food is **permitted,** since the only implication of his statement is that whatever he does not eat shall be forbidden.


###### Nedarim 13a:10
[Nedarim 13a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nedarim/r/13a:10)

מַאן שָׁמְעִינַן לֵיהּ דְּלָא שָׁנֵי לֵיהּ ״אִימְּרָא״ ״לְאִימְּרָא״ ״כְּאִימְּרָא״ — רַבִּי מֵאִיר הִיא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Who is** the Sage of whom **we have heard, for whom there is no difference** whether one said **a lamb, for a lamb,** or **like a lamb,** that I eat of yours? **It is Rabbi Meir.** Conversely, Rabbi Yehuda holds that the vow takes effect only if one says: Like a lamb.


###### Nedarim 13a:11
[Nedarim 13a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nedarim/r/13a:11)

אֵימָא סֵיפָא: וְכוּלָּן ״לֹא אוֹכַל לָךְ״ — מוּתָּר. וְהָתְנַן: ״לַקָּרְבָּן לֹא אוֹכַל לָךְ״ — רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹסֵר, וְאָמַר רַבִּי אַבָּא: נַעֲשָׂה כְּאוֹמֵר ״לְקָרְבָּן יְהֵא, לְפִיכָךְ לֹא אוֹכַל לָךְ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
However, **say the latter clause** of the *baraita*: With regard to **all of them,** if he adds: That which **I will not eat of yours,** the food remains **permitted. But didn’t we learn** in the next mishna that if one says: That which **I will not eat of yours** shall be **for an offering [*lekorban*], Rabbi Meir prohibits** him from eating food belonging to the other individual? **And Rabbi Abba said** in explanation of this ruling that **it is as though he said: It shall be for an offering [*lekorban*],** and **therefore I will not eat** that which is **yours.** Apparently, according to Rabbi Meir the food is forbidden even if he said: That which I will not eat of yours.


###### Nedarim 13a:12
[Nedarim 13a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nedarim/r/13a:12)

לָא קַשְׁיָא: הָא דְּאָמַר ״לָא לְאִימְּרָא״, הָא דְּאָמַר ״לְאִימְּרָא״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: **This** is **not difficult: This** *baraita* is referring to a case **where one said:** That which I do not eat from you shall **not [*la*]** be **for a lamb [*le’imra*].** Although this statement implies that what he does eat shall be considered like the lamb of the daily offering, Rabbi Meir holds that one cannot infer a positive statement from a negative statement. Conversely, **that** mishna is referring to a case **where he said: For a lamb [*le’imra*].** In that case, his statement is interpreted as though he said: It shall be considered the lamb used for the daily offering, and therefore I will not eat it.


###### Nedarim 13a:13
[Nedarim 13a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nedarim/r/13a:13)

**מַתְנִי׳** הָאוֹמֵר ״קׇרְבָּן״, ״עוֹלָה״, ״מִנְחָה״, ״חַטָּאת״, ״תּוֹדָה״, ״שְׁלָמִים״, ״שֶׁאֲנִי אוֹכֵל לָךְ״ — אָסוּר. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה מַתִּיר. ״הַקׇּרְבָּן״, ״כַּקׇּרְבָּן״, ״קׇרְבָּן שֶׁאוֹכַל לָךְ״ — אָסוּר. ״לַקׇּרְבָּן לֹא אוֹכַל לָךְ״ — רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹסֵר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** With regard to **one who says: An offering, a burnt-offering, a meal-offering, a sin-offering, a thanks-offering,** or **a peace-offering,** and adds: **That which I eat of yours,** the vow takes effect and the food **is forbidden. Rabbi Yehuda renders** the food **permitted** in all these cases. If one says: **The offering, like an offering,** or **an offering,** and adds: **That which I will eat of yours,** the food **is forbidden.** If he says: That which **I will not eat of yours** shall be **for an offering, Rabbi Meir renders** the food **forbidden.**


###### Nedarim 13a:14
[Nedarim 13a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nedarim/r/13a:14)

**גְּמָ׳** קָתָנֵי ״קׇרְבָּן״, ״הַקׇּרְבָּן״, ״כַּקׇּרְבָּן שֶׁאוֹכַל לָךְ״ — אָסוּר. סְתָמָא תְּנָא כְּרַבִּי מֵאִיר, דְּלָא שָׁנֵי לֵיהּ בֵּין ״אִימְּרָא״ ״לְאִימְּרָא״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** **It teaches** in the mishna that if one says: **An offering, the offering,** or **like an offering,** and then adds: **That which I will eat of yours, it is forbidden.** This indicates that **this unattributed** opinion in the **mishna** was **taught in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Meir, for whom there is no difference whether** one says **a lamb [*imra*]** or **as a lamb [*le’imra*].**


###### Nedarim 13a:15
[Nedarim 13a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nedarim/r/13a:15)

[אִי רַבִּי מֵאִיר — הָא] דְּקָתָנֵי: ״הַקׇּרְבָּן שֶׁאוֹכַל לָךְ״ — אָסוּר, וְהָתַנְיָא: מוֹדִים חֲכָמִים לְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה בְּאוֹמֵר ״הָא קׇרְבָּן״, וְ״הָא עוֹלָה״ וְ״הָא מִנְחָה״ וְ״הָא חַטָּאת שֶׁאוֹכַל לָךְ״ — שֶׁמּוּתָּר? שֶׁלֹּא נָדַר זֶה אֶלָּא בְּחַיֵּי קׇרְבָּן!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: However, **if it is** in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Meir, that which it teaches** is difficult. It teaches that if one says: **The offering [*hakorban*],** and adds: **That which I will eat of yours,** the food **is forbidden.** But **isn’t it taught** in a *baraita* that **the Rabbis concede to Rabbi Yehuda** that **with** regard to **one who says: This offering [*ha korban*], or this burnt-offering [*ha ola*], or this meal-offering [*ha minḥa*], or this sin-offering [*ha ḥatat*],** and then adds: **That I will eat of yours,** the vow does not take effect and the food **is permitted?** The reason for this is **that** the individual **did not take a vow** that the item should be associated with an offering; **rather,** he took a vow **by the life of the offering,** which is not a valid expression of a vow.