## Nedarim Daf 83b

###### Nedarim 83b:1
[Nedarim 83b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nedarim/r/83b:1)

דִּלְמָא מִיַּיִן דְּאִית לַהּ צַעֲרָא — הֵפֵר לָהּ, מִטּוּמְאַת מֵת, דְּלֵית לַהּ צַעֲרָא — לֹא הֵפֵר לָהּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Perhaps** the husband **nullified for her** the vow that rendered **wine** forbidden **to** her, **as she suffers pain** when she refrains from drinking it. But as for her vow that **impurity** imparted **by the dead** is forbidden to her, **he did not nullify** it **for her, as she suffers no pain** by not becoming impure through contact with the dead. Why, then, does she not bring the offerings that must be brought by a nazirite who became ritually impure through contact with the dead? This implies that since the husband can nullify a vow with regard to a matter that would cause her to deprive herself, he can also nullify a vow with regard to a matter that would not cause her to deprive herself.


###### Nedarim 83b:2
[Nedarim 83b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nedarim/r/83b:2)

אָמְרִי: מִטּוּמְאַת מֵת נָמֵי אִית לַהּ צַעֲרָא — דִּכְתִיב: ״וְהַחַי יִתֵּן אֶל לִבּוֹ״, וְתַנְיָא, הָיָה רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: מַאי דִּכְתִיב ״וְהַחַי יִתֵּן אֶל לִבּוֹ״, דְּיִסְפּוֹד — יִסְפְּדוּן לֵיהּ, דְּיִבְכּוּן — יִבְכּוּן לֵיהּ, דְּיִקְבַּר — יִקְבְּרוּנֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this argument: The Sages **say** in response that a woman who vows that **impurity** imparted **by the dead** is forbidden **to** her **also suffers pain** as a result. How so? **As it is written: “And the living shall lay it to his heart”** (Ecclesiastes 7:2), **and it is taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Meir would say: What** is the meaning of that **which is written: “And the living shall lay it to his heart”?** This means that one **who eulogizes** others when they die **will** in turn **be eulogized** when he himself dies; one **who weeps** for others **will be wept for** when he himself passes away; and one **who buries** others **will** himself **be buried** upon his passing. A woman who cannot participate in the funerals of others because she is barred from contracting impurity through contact with a corpse is distressed by the thought that she will receive similar treatment when she dies. Therefore, her vow involves affliction and can be nullified by her husband. The conclusion is that this case does not present a difficulty for Rabbi Yoḥanan.


###### Nedarim 83b:3
[Nedarim 83b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nedarim/r/83b:3)

**מַתְנִי׳** ״קֻוֽנָּם שֶׁאֲנִי נֶהֱנֶה לַבְּרִיּוֹת״ — אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְהָפֵר, וִיכוֹלָה הִיא לֵיהָנוֹת בְּלֶקֶט, שִׁכְחָה, וּבְפֵאָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** If a woman vowed: The property **of** other **people is *konam*** for me, and for **that** reason **I will** not **benefit** from it, her husband **cannot nullify** her vow, **but** nevertheless, if she is poor, **she may benefit from** the agricultural gifts that must be left for the poor: **Gleanings,** i.e., isolated stalks that fell during the harvest; **forgotten** sheaves; **and produce of the corners [*pe’a*]** of the field that the owner is obligated to leave for the poor. Enjoyment of these gifts is not considered as benefit derived from people, as these gifts are not given voluntarily out of the kindness of the donors, but in the performance of a mitzva.


###### Nedarim 83b:4
[Nedarim 83b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nedarim/r/83b:4)

״קֻוֽנָּם כֹּהֲנִים לְוִיִּם נֶהֱנִים לִי״ — יִטְּלוּ עַל כׇּרְחוֹ. ״כֹּהֲנִים אֵלּוּ וּלְוִיִּם אֵלּוּ נֶהֱנִים לִי״ — יִטְּלוּ אֲחֵרִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If one said: I will not let **priests** and **Levites benefit from me,** as that is ***konam*** for me, **they can take** the priestly and Levitical gifts from him **against his will.** If, however, he said: I will not let **these** specific **priests and these** specific **Levites benefit from me,** as that is *konam* for me, they are **taken by others.**


###### Nedarim 83b:5
[Nedarim 83b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nedarim/r/83b:5)

**גְּמָ׳** אַלְמָא אֶפְשָׁר דְּמִתַּזְנָה מִדִּילֵיהּ, מִכְּלָל דְּבַעַל לָאו בִּכְלַל ״בְּרִיּוֹת״ הוּא. אֵימָא סֵיפָא: יְכוֹלָה לֵיהָנוֹת בְּלֶקֶט שִׁכְחָה וּפֵאָה, אֲבָל מִדְּבַעַל לָא אָכְלָה, אַלְמָא בַּעַל בִּכְלַל ״בְּרִיּוֹת״ הוּא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The mishna teaches that if a woman vowed not to derive benefit from people, her husband cannot nullify her vow. The Gemara infers from this *halakha*: **Apparently,** this is because the woman **can be sustained from his,** i.e., her husband’s, property, without having to take from others. This proves **by inference that** in this context **a husband is not included in** her reference to **people,** as, although she mentioned people in her vow, she did not mean to prohibit herself from deriving benefit from her husband. The Gemara asks: But **say the latter clause** of that same part of the mishna, which states: But **she may benefit from gleanings, forgotten** sheaves, **and *pe’a*.** This implies that she may derive benefit from the gifts given to the poor, **but she may not eat** from property belonging **to** her **husband. Apparently, a husband is** in fact **included in** her reference to **people,** and she may not benefit from him either.


###### Nedarim 83b:6
[Nedarim 83b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nedarim/r/83b:6)

אָמַר עוּלָּא: לְעוֹלָם לָאו בִּכְלַל ״בְּרִיּוֹת״ הוּא, וְעוֹד: אֵין יָכוֹל לְהָפֵר — מִפְּנֵי שֶׁיְּכוֹלָה לֵיהָנוֹת בְּלֶקֶט שִׁכְחָה וּפֵאָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Ulla said: Actually,** a husband **is not included in** her reference to **people,** and there is no contradiction. Rather, the mishna provides two reasons why he cannot nullify his wife’s vow. The first reason, which is merely implied by the mishna, is that she can be sustained by her husband. **And furthermore** there is the stated reason, that **he cannot nullify** the vow **because she may benefit from gleanings, forgotten** sheaves, **and *pe’a*.**


###### Nedarim 83b:7
[Nedarim 83b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nedarim/r/83b:7)

רָבָא אָמַר: לְעוֹלָם בַּעַל בִּכְלַל ״בְּרִיּוֹת״ הוּא, וּ״מָה טַעַם״ קָאָמַר: מָה טַעַם אֵין יָכוֹל לְהָפֵר? מִפְּנֵי שֶׁיְּכוֹלָה לֵיהָנוֹת בְּלֶקֶט שִׁכְחָה וּפֵאָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said** the opposite: **Actually, a husband is included in** her reference to **people,** and therefore his wife may not benefit from him. **And** when the mishna **states** the *halakha*, it employs the style known as: **What is the reason,** and it should be understood as follows: **What is the reason** that the husband **cannot nullify** his wife’s vow? **Because she may benefit from gleanings, forgotten** sheaves, **and *pe’a*.**


###### Nedarim 83b:8
[Nedarim 83b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nedarim/r/83b:8)

רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר: לְעוֹלָם בַּעַל לָאו בִּכְלַל ״בְּרִיּוֹת״ הוּא. וְהָכִי קָתָנֵי: נִתְגָּרְשָׁה, יְכוֹלָה לֵיהָנוֹת בְּלֶקֶט שִׁכְחָה וּפֵאָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Naḥman said: Actually,** a husband **is not included in** her reference to **people,** and her vow not to derive benefit from all people does not include him, which is why he cannot nullify it. **And this is what** the mishna **is teaching:** The husband cannot nullify his wife’s vow, because even if **she becomes divorced** and can no longer derive benefit from her husband, as he is now included in her reference to people, **she may** still **benefit from gleanings, forgotten** sheaves, **and *pe’a*.**