(Mishnah): Heter of vows floats in the air. [Chachamim] do not have [explicit verses] to support it;

Laws of Shabbos, Chagigos and Me'ilos are like mountains hanging from hairs. There are few verses and many laws;

Monetary laws, Avodos [in the Mikdash], Taharos and Tum'os and Arayos have many [verses] to support them. They are essentials of Torah.

(Gemara - Beraisa - R. Eliezer): [Chachamim] have what to rely on [for Heter of vows] - "Nishbati va'Akayimah'' - sometimes he does not fulfill (rather, he permits his vow or oath).

R. Yehoshua says, they have what to rely on - "Asher Nishbati v'Api'' - in My anger I swore, and I retract.

Question: A Mishnah teaches "four kinds of vows, Chachamim permitted them'' - is it not Chachamim who permit all vows?!

It says "va'Ydaber Moshe El Roshei ha'Matos li'Vnei Yisrael'' - the Parshah [of vows] is attributed to the heads of the Shevatim, [to teach that] they permit [Yisrael's] vows. (The Bavli answers that for the four kinds of vows, one need not ask a Chacham.)

(Rav Yehudah citing Shmuel): It says "Lo Yachel Devaro'' - he [the one who vowed] does not profane his word. Someone else makes his word Chulin. Who is this? It is a Chacham, who permits his vow for him.

(R. Ze'irah citing Rav Yehudah citing Yirmeyah bar Acha citing Shmuel): Three [commoners] who know how to Pose'ach (find a reason to consider a vow mistaken), they can permit like a Chacham.

Assumption: This is only in a place where there is no Chacham.

Rebuttal (Rabanan of Kisarin): It is even in a place where there is a Chacham.

Question (to R. Yosa): Is R. Chunah considered Roshei ha'Matos [to permit vows alone, even though he was not authorized by the Nasi or Reish Galusa]?

Answer (R. Yosa): If R. Chunah is not Roshei ha'Matos, who is Roshei ha'Matos?! R. Chunah is the head of Roshei ha'Matos!

Question: May we appoint Chachamim for isolated matters (e.g. only to rule that a Bechor has a blemish to permit Shechitah nowadays, or only for monetary cases)?

Answer: We learn from the following. Rebbi appointed Rav to permit vows and to inspect stains [of Dam Nidah]. After [Rebbi] died, he asked [Rebbi's] son [to authorize him to inspect] blemishes of Bechoros. His son said "I do not add to what my father gave to you [authorization].''

(R. Yosi bei R. Bun): [Rebbi] gave to him [authorization] for everything - to judge alone, to permit vows and to inspect overt Mumim. After he died, [Rav] asked his son [to authorize him for] obscure Mumim. His son said "I do not add to what my father gave to you.'' (Rav was a great expert, and Rebbi feared lest others extrapolate and permit based on similar Mumim.)

Even though you say that we may appoint a Chacham for isolated matters, he must be proper for all matters;

This is like the case of R. Yehoshua ben Levi. He appointed all his Talmidim, and he was pained about one [Talmid] who was stricken in one eye (his vision was impaired, so he could not inspect stains - ALEI TAMAR and HA'GAON RAV C. KANIEVSKY, SHLITA), and he could not appoint him;

He should have appointed him for specific matters! Rather, this shows that one who is proper for all matters, he is proper for one matter. One who is not proper for all matters, even for one matter he is not proper.

Question: May we appoint Chachamim temporarily?

Answer: We learn from the following. R. Chiya bar Ba came to R. Lazar, and said "appease R. Yudan the Nasi to write one letter for me [that I am worthy] of honor, and I will to go Chutz la'Aretz for income'';

He appeased him, and he wrote "behold, we sent to you a great man, our Shali'ach, and he is [proper to rule] like us, until he comes [back] to us. (This shows that one may appoint temporarily.)

(R. Chizkiyah citing R. Dostai citing R. Aba bar Zemina, and some say that in the name of R. Dostai the elder): He wrote "behold, we sent to you a great man. What is his greatness? He is not ashamed to say "I did not hear.''

Question: May one permit vows with Palanim (a head covering, or must he wear specifically a Talis)?

Answer (R. Avahu citing R. Yochanan): We permit with Palanim. Rebbi permitted with Planim. R. Yehoshua ben Levi permits with Palanim.

(R. Chunah citing R. Yirmeyah): This is [only] where there is no Talis.

(R. Yosi bei R. Bun): This is [only] for simple vows [that are permitted through mere regret of the vow itself].

Laws of Shabbos [are like mountains hanging from hairs. There are few verses and many laws.]

Question (R. Yonah citing R. Chama bar Ukva): It says only "Ach Mayan u'Vor Mikveh Mayim Yihyeh Tahor'', and you learn from this many Halachos! (Why does our Mishnah say that Taharos have much to support them?)

(R. Ze'irah citing R. Yochanan): If a Halachah comes to you, and you do not know its source, do not distance it (reject it, or make difficult Drashos to justify it). Many Halachos were said to Moshe on Sinai, and all of them are embedded in the Mishnah!

Support (R. Avun): [If one sowed his field with] two kinds of wheat [if he made one granary, he leaves one Pe'ah. If he made two granaries, he must leave Pe'ah from each.] Had Nachum [ha'Lavler] not come and explained [this tradition from Sinai] would we know it?!

R. Ze'irah's teaching is like R. Lazar taught - "Echtov Lo Rubei Torasi'' - is the majority of Torah written?! (The oral Torah is bigger!)

Rather, more matters are expounded from what is written than from what is expounded from [traditions from Sinai, which were transmitted through] the mouth.

Objection: Is this true?!

Note: What is difficult? We say below that we do not expound from traditions from Sinai! And even if we did, surely the majority is expounded from verses! Maharsha (Gitin 60b) suggests that all Chidushim of Chachamim are included in "ha'Nidrashin Min ha'Peh.'' Or, since a Kabalah was needed for Drashos such as Gezeirah Shavah, these are called "ha'Nidrashin Min ha'Peh.'' According to Har Tzvi (Menachos 82b), who brings from Rashi (Pesachim Reish 24a, and Sukah 31a) that all the Midos used to expound are traditions from Sinai, the Gemara's astonishment is understood well!

Correction: Rather, the matters supported from what is written are dearer than the matters supported from oral traditions.

(R. Yudah bar Pazi): "Echtov Lo Rubei Torasi'' are the rebukes. Even so, they are considered like a stranger! (Perhaps "rebukes'' refers to Nevi'im, which exceed the Torah. The Bavli (Nedarim 22b) says that had Yisrael not sinned, we would have received only the Chumash and Sefer Yehoshua - PF.)

(R. Yudah bar Pazi): [Hash-m says,] had I written for you the majority of My Torah (i.e. also oral Torah), would [Yisrael] not be considered like a stranger (other nations, who copied the written Torah)?! These would take out their Seforim, and these would take out their Seforim parchments [and there would not be an evident difference between them].

(R. Chagai citing R. Shmuel bar Nachman): Matters were said orally, and matters were said in writing. We do not know which are dearer!

Since it says "Ki Al Pi ha'Devarim ha'Eleh Karati Itecha Bris v'Es Yisrael'', this teaches that the oral matters are dearer.

R. Yochanan and R. Yudan bei R. Shimon - one of them said "if you will guard what [was given] orally and what [was given] in writing, I (Hash-m) make a Bris with you. If not, I do not make a Bris with you.''

The other said "if you will guard what [was given] orally and what [was given] in writing, you will receive reward. If not, you will not receive reward.

(R. Yehoshua ben Levi): [It does not say] Aleihem, [rather,] va'Aleihem. [It does not say] Kol, [rather,] 'Chol. [It does not say] Devarim, [rather,] ha'Devarim (Devarim 9:10. The simple meaning is) Mikra, [and the three inclusions add] Mishnah, Talmud (i.e.) Halachos, and Agados;

Even what an elder Talmid will teach in front of his Rebbi was already said to Moshe on Sinai.

What is the source? "Yesh Davar she'Yomar Re'eh Zeh Chadash Hu.'' His friend answers him, and says "Kevar Hayah l'Olamim Asher Hayah mi'Lefaneinu.''