A VOW AGAINST WASHING (cont.)
Answer #1: Rather, she said 'the pleasure of washing is forbidden to me if I bathe.'
He can annul this, for it will cause affliction;
If she washes (once), she cannot wash again. If she does not wash, she will become repulsive!
R. Yosi holds that she can refrain from washing. We are not concerned if she becomes repulsive.
Objection: If so, R. Yosi should say 'this is not a stipulation of affliction!' (Ran - 'these are not vows of affliction' connotes that if the vow was affliction, e.g. I will not eat, even if it was conditional on washing, he would be able to annul it.)
Answer #2: Rather, she said 'the pleasure of washing is permanently forbidden to me if I bathe today'.
R. Yosi says, not washing for one day is not considered becoming so repulsive. It is not grounds to allow annulment.
Question: What is the case of the other vow in the Mishnah, 'if I will not wash'?
Suggestion: She said 'the pleasure of washing is forbidden to me if I do not bathe today.'
Rejection: If so, why can he annul? Let her bathe today!
Answer #1 (Rav Yehudah): She said 'the pleasure of washing is forbidden to me if I do not bathe today in (stinking) water in which flax was soaked.'
Objection: If so, we must explain the case of 'if I will not adorn myself' to mean 'I will not adorn myself in kerosene';
That is filth, not adornment!
Answer #2 (Rav Yehudah): The case of 'if I will wash' is, she said 'the pleasure of washing is permanently forbidden to me if I bathe today.' 'If I will not wash' is when she swore not to bathe;
'If I will adorn myself' is when she said 'the pleasure of adornment is permanently forbidden to me if I adorn myself today.' 'If I will not adorn myself' is when she swore not to adorn herself.
Question (Ravina): If so, the Mishnah should say 'these are vows and oaths'!
Answer #1 (Rav Ashi): Indeed, that is the correct text!
Answer #2 (Rav Ashi): Oaths are also called vows;
(Mishnah): If one vowed, accepted Nezirus, or swore 'like vows of the wicked', it takes effect.
IS NOT BATHING CONSIDERED AFFLICTION?
Question: Do Chachamim really hold that not bathing (for one day) is affliction?
Contradiction (Beraisa): Even though one must observe all the afflictions of Yom Kipur, one is Chayav Kares only for eating, drinking, or doing labor.
If not bathing is affliction, one should be Chayav Kares for bathing! (It says "whoever will not afflict himself will get Kares"!)
Answer (Rava): Not bathing is sometimes considered affliction, depending on the context.
Regarding Yom Kipur, it says "You will afflict your souls" - an affliction which is felt now (the same day);
One who does not bathe does not feel affliction until later.
Regarding vows, it says "every vow... to afflict the soul." This refers to something that will come to afflict. This includes not bathing.
Question: R. Yosi contradicts himself!
(Beraisa): We use water from a spring of the city first to sustain the life of the inhabitants of the city, before using it to sustain others;
The animals of the inhabitants of the city have precedence (to take water) over others' animals;
The laundry of the inhabitants of the city takes precedence over that of others;
The life of others takes precedence over the laundry of the inhabitants of the city;
R. Yosi says, the laundry of the inhabitants of the city takes precedence over the life of others.
(Summation of contradiction): R. Yosi holds that there is pain even in refraining from laundering. All the more so, not bathing is affliction!