[46a - 47 lines; 46b - 49 lines]

1)[line 3]"... איש [או אשה] כי יפליא לנדור נדר [נזיר להזיר לה']""… ISH [O ISHAH] KI YAFLI LI'NDOR NEDER [NAZIR L'HAZIR LA'SH-M.]"- "[Speak to the people of Yisrael, and say to them,] 'When either man [or woman] shall separate themselves to vow a vow [of Nezirus, to separate themselves for HaSh-m.']" (Bamidbar 6:2)

2)[line 10]שומאSHUMA- [hairs that grow as a result of] a wart (O.F. verrue) or mole

3)[line 12]הא גופא קשיאHA GUFA KASHYA- this is implicitly contradictory. That is, although it is explicit in the Beraisa that Rebbi Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah and the Rabanan argue if "Lifnei ha'Zeman" is like "l'Achar ha'Zeman," the Gemara wants to assert that there is a Machlokes Tana'im among Rabanan themselves, since the Halachah follows the Rabanan.

4)[line 32]ממאנתMEMA'ENES (MI'UN)

(a)The Torah gives a father the right to marry off his daughter at any age before she is twelve years old.

(b)If she was divorced or widowed or her father died without marrying her off, the Chachamim gave the girl's mother and/or oldest brother the right to marry her off. In these cases the marriage is only mid'Rabanan and she must be at least ten years old, or at least six years old if she has an understanding of the concept of marriage.

(c)According to the RAMBAM and the RA'AVAD, in the above circumstances, the Chachamim also gave her the right to get married by herself. This marriage is also mid'Rabanan. According to the Rambam, she must be at least ten years old, or at least six years old if she has an understanding of the concept of marriage. According to the Ra'avad, however, her Kidushin is valid even if she has enough sense to guard the object given to her for her Kidushin (and she realizes that it was given to her for Kidushin).

(d)In the instances of marriage mid'Rabanan, before she reaches Halachic puberty and becomes a Na'arah (through the growth of two pubic hairs), she has the option of annulling the marriage through a procedure known as Mi'un (refusal). She says before two witnesses, "I do not want him," and the marriage is annulled retroactively. There is no need for her to receive a Get (a bill of divorce). A girl who is married off by her father cannot annul the marriage through Mi'un. (RAMBAM Hilchos Ishus 4:7-8)

5)[line 33]חולצתCHOLETZES (CHALITZAH)

See Background to Nidah 43:26.

6)[line 37]שמא נשרוSHEMA NASHRU- perhaps they fell out

7)[line 41]וכי קאמר רבא חזקה, למיאוןV'CHI KA'AMAR RAVA CHAZAKAH, L'MI'UN- and when Rava ruled that there is a Chazakah that a twelve-year-old girl has Simanim, he was only referring to Mi'un. That is, it is not a complete Chazakah; it only makes it into a Safek, and we are Machmir that she may not do Mi'un.

8)[line 45]הקדיש ואכל, לוקהHIKDISH V'ACHAL, LOKEH- [a twelve-year-old boy] who consecrated [a loaf of bread] and ate [it], receives the punishment of Malkus. The Amora'im argue if "Mufla ha'Samuch l'Ish" is mid'Oraisa or mid'Rabanan. If it is mid'Rabanan, a person does not receive Malkus for violating the vow of an eleven-year-old girl or a twelve-year-old boy. If it is mid'Oraisa, a person receives Malkus for violating the vow. Rav Huna maintains that "Mufla ha'Samuch l'Ish" is mid'Oraisa, and, moreover, that even the minors themselves receive Malkus for transgressing their own vows, even though minors are not liable for punishment elsewhere.

9)[line 45]"ולא יחל דברו""V'LO YACHEL DEVARO"- "and he shall not break (lit. profane) his word" (Bamidbar 30:3)

10)[line 46]הפלאהHAFLA'AH- expression [of a Neder (vow), with the knowledge that the laws of Nedarim were dictated by Hash-m]


(a)The Torah empowers a person to create a prohibition or obligation upon himself through the means of his speech, as the verse states, "If a man makes a "Neder" (vow) to Hash-m, or swears a "Shevu'ah" (oath) to create a prohibition upon himself, he may not violate his word. As he spoke, he shall do" (Bamidbar 30:3). By pronouncing a Shevu'ah one can either prohibit an act that was formerly permitted, or make obligatory an act that was formerly voluntary. By pronouncing a Neder, in contrast, one can only prohibit and not obligate, with the exception of Nidrei Hekdesh (vows to consecrate a sacrifice) which can also obligate a person (to bring the sacrifice he vowed).

(b)Bal Yachel Devaro is the Mitzvas Lo Sa'aseh that prohibits a person who makes a vow or oath from breaking his word. If, for example, a person takes a vow not to eat a certain food, as soon as he eats the smallest amount of that food, after being warned by two witnesses not to, he is liable to the punishment of Malkus.


12)[line 2]זדון שבועהZADON SHEVU'AH

(a)A person can take an oath, or a "Shevu'as Bituy," by swearing to do something or not to do something or by swearing that he did or did not do something in the past. If he does not keep his word, or if his oath regarding an action of the past is false, he transgresses the Torah's prohibition not to swear falsely (Vayikra 19:12; RAMBAM Hilchos Shevu'os 1:3). If his oath was made regarding an action that he will or will not perform in the future, he transgresses the Torah's prohibition not to violate one's word as well (Bamidbar 30:3, see previous entry and KESEF MISHNEH to the Rambam ibid.). It is prohibited to take an unnecessary or ridiculous oath. Such a Shevu'ah is known as a "Shevu'as Shav," which the Torah prohibits in the Ten Commandments, Shemos 20:7. (See Rambam, Hilchos Shevu'os 1:4, for a description of the various categories of Shevu'as Shav and Background to Temurah 3:4, 7.)

(b)Shevu'os in which a person prohibits certain acts upon himself are similar to Nedarim (vows). However, as opposed to Nidrei Isur and Charamim, in which a person places a prohibition on a specific object (e.g. "this loaf of bread is prohibited"), when making Shevu'os a person places a prohibition upon himself which prohibits him from performing a certain action (e.g. "It is prohibited for me to eat this loaf of bread"), as the Gemara states in Nedarim 2b (see Background to Nedarim 2:1a:b, and Insights to Nedarim 2:3).

(c)Some Rishonim maintain that when expressing a Shevu'ah, one must mention a name of or a reference to Hash-m in order for the Shevu'ah to take effect (see RAN and Rishonim to Nedarim 2a).

(d)If one unintentionally transgresses his oath (Shevu'as Bituy), he is required to bring a Korban Shevu'ah. The Korban Shevu'ah is a Korban Oleh v'Yored, which varies based on the means of the penitent. If he is wealthy, he brings a female sheep or goat as a Chatas (Korban Ashir). If he cannot afford this, he brings two Torim (turtledoves) or two Bnei Yonah (common doves), one as an Olah and one as a Chatas (Korban Oleh v'Yored b'Dalus). If he cannot even afford the birds, he brings one tenth of an Eifah of fine flour as a Minchas Chatas (Korban Oleh v'Yored b'Dalei Dalus) (Vayikra 5:6-13). The Minchas Chatas is not mixed with oil, and Levonah (frankincense) is not sprinkled on top of it (Vayikra 5:11). When a non-Kohen brings a Minchas Chatas, a Kometz of the flour alone is burned on the Mizbe'ach and the Kohanim receive the Shirayim (the rest of the flour, which they must eat before the following sunrise - RAMBAM Hilchos Ma'aseh ha'Korbanos 10:7).

(e)If a person takes an oath prohibiting himself to do a certain act and he knowingly transgresses his oath, or if he knowingly takes a false oath that he did or did not do a certain act, he is punished with Malkus. However, if he swears to do something and does not do it, he does not receive Malkus, since no action is involved (RAMBAM Hilchos Shevu'os 4:20). If one unintentionally makes a Shevu'as Shav, he is not punished. If he intentionally makes such a Shevu'ah, he is punished with Malkus (RAMBAM Hilchos Shevu'os 1:7).

13)[line 3]"זה הדבר [אשר ציוה ה']""ZEH HA'DAVAR [ASHER TZIVAH HASH-M]"- "this is the matter that HaSh-m commanded" (Bamidbar 30:2)

14)[line 7]מופלא סמוך לאישMUFLA SAMUCH L'ISH

(a)The Mishnah (Nidah 45b) discusses the case of a girl who makes a Neder during her twelfth year or a boy who makes a Neder during his thirteenth year (when they are termed "Samuch l'Ish," or "near" the age of normal physical maturity). In such a case, we are required to "further investigate" in order to determine whether or not the girl's or boy's vow is Halachically binding. The investigation involves determining whether the child in question knows the significance of Nedarim and that their laws were dictated by HaSh-m. Even though, according to Halachah, the actions of a minor normally have no legal ramifications, if the child in question passes the investigation he is called a "Mufla ha'Samuch l'Ish" and has reached "Onas Nedarim," the age at which his vows are binding.

(b)There is a disagreement among the Tana'im as to whether the vows of such a child are binding mid'Oraisa (and if an adult transgresses them he is punishable with Malkus), or only mid'Rabanan. In either case, the child himself is not punished with Malkus if he transgresses his own vow, since he is still a minor and is exempt from all punishments.

15)[line 9]קטן אוכל נבלותKATAN OCHEL NEVEILOS

"Katan Ochel Neveilos Beis Din Metzuvin Alav Lehafrisho" means that Beis Din is obligated to prevent (lit. "separate") a child from eating Neveilos. The Torah exempts a Jewish minor (boy under the age of thirteen; girl under the age of twelve) from the performance of Mitzvos. The Gemara (Yevamos 114a et al.) addresses the question as to whether or not Beis Din is obligated to make sure that minors do not transgress any Torah prohibition, in order that the child not become accustomed to transgressing and continue when he becomes an adult.

16)[line 32]כל הנודרת על דעת בעלה היא נודרתKOL HA'NODERES AL DA'AS BA'ALAH HI NODERES (NEDARIM: ISHAH AL DA'AS BA'ALAH)

A married woman who makes a Neder (vow) does so (implicitly) on the condition that her husband agrees to it afterwards.

17)[line 44]סדר עולםSEDER OLAM- Seder Olam, the earliest comprehensive chronicle of Jewish history, written by Rebbi Yosi Ben Chalafta (circa 130 CE)

18)[line 44]"אשר ירשו אבותיך וירשתה""ASHER YARSHU AVOSECHA VI'YERISHTAH"- "[And HaSh-m, your G-d, will bring you to the land] that your forefathers have inherited and you will inherit it" (Devarim 30:5)


(a)"Kedushah Rishonah Kidshah l'Sha'atah v'Kidshah l'Asid Lavo" means "the first Sanctification brought about sanctity at that time, as well as for the future (after the destruction of the first Beis ha'Mikdash)."

(b)The Chachamim refer to three distinct sanctities when they discuss whether or not Kedushah Rishonah Kidshah l'Sha'atah v'Kidshah l'Asid Lavo: the sanctity of the Beis ha'Mikdash; the sanctity of Yerushalayim; and the sanctity of Eretz Yisrael.

(c)The Beis ha'Mikdash had to be sanctified in order for the sacrifices to be offered there. Similarly, Yerushalayim had to be sanctified in order for Kodshim Kalim and Ma'aser Sheni to be eaten there. Shlomo ha'Melech sanctified the Beis ha'Mikdash and Yerushalayim. According to one opinion, their Kedushah remained even after the Beis ha'Mikdash and Yerushalayim were destroyed by the Babylonians and Romans. There is a Tana who argues and maintains that when the Babylonians conquered Eretz Yisrael, this Kedushah ceased, and when Ezra returned to Eretz Yisrael, he sanctified it once again.

(d)Eretz Yisrael had to be sanctified in order for the Mitzvos ha'Teluyos ba'Aretz, such as Terumos and Ma'asros, to be practiced. Yehoshua sanctified Eretz Yisrael through conquest. According to one opinion, the Kedushah of the land remained even after the Babylonians conquered Eretz Yisrael and laid waste to the land. Another Tana (and Rebbi Eliezer - Chagigah 3b) argues and maintains that when the Babylonians conquered Eretz Yisrael, this Kedushah ceased and the Mitzvos ha'Teluyos ba'Aretz no longer applied. When Ezra returned to Eretz Yisrael, he sanctified it once again (see Insights to Megilah 10a, Zevachim 60b, and Temurah 21a).

(e)Our Gemara cites the Seder Olam that states that the first two times that Bnei Yisrael conquered Eretz Yisrael were called "Yerushah" (inheritance) and they needed to sanctify the land; the third time is a continuation of the second inheritance and does not need a special sanctification.

20)[last line]נדמעהNIDME'AH (MEDUMA)

(a)Terumah only becomes Batel (canceled, annulled) if one part of Terumah falls into at least one hundred parts of Chulin. Even if the Terumah is Batel, it is forbidden for non-Kohanim to eat the entire mixture; the equivalent of the amount of Terumah that fell in must first be removed.

(b)If the percentage of Terumah that fell into the Chulin was greater than one in one hundred, the mixture is known as Meduma (lit. mixed) and is forbidden to be eaten by non-Kohanim.

(c)According to TOSFOS to Chulin DH Ein, this law applies only if the Terumah was the same type of food as the Chulin; otherwise Terumah is Batel just like any other Isur.

21)[last line]נתחמצה בשאור של תרומהNISCHAMTZAH B'SE'OR SHEL TERUMAH- that was leavened with sourdough made of flour of Terumah (a permitted dough which is leavened with Se'or of Terumah becomes prohibited to non-Kohanim)