Nedarim 24B

דאפילו בקמייתא, ושמע מינה פליגי רבנן עליה. שמע מינה.

mean that even in the earlier cases, where he did not become irritated, they disagree with regard to vows of exhortation and hold that these vows are indeed valid, and can one conclude from here that the Rabbis disagree with him? The Talmud concludes: Conclude from here that this is so.

מאי הוי עלה? תא שמע, דאמר רב הונא: הלכה כרבי אליעזר בן יעקב, וכן אמר רב אדא בר אהבה: הלכה כרבי אליעזר בן יעקב.

With regard to the practical conclusion of this dispute, the Talmud asks: What halakhic conclusion was reached about this matter? Does the halakha follow the opinion of the Rabbis or that of R' Eliezer ben Ya’akov? The Talmud answers: Come and hear that which Rav Huna said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of R' Eliezer ben Ya’akov. And so said Rav Adda bar Ahava: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of R' Eliezer ben Ya’akov.

מתני׳ נדרי הבאי, אמר: ״קונם אם לא ראיתי בדרך הזה כעולי מצרים״, ״אם לא ראיתי נחש כקורת בית הבד״.

Mishnah: Vows of exaggeration that the rabbis dissolved without a request to a halakhic authority, as described in the first Mishnah in the chapter, include the following examples. If one said concerning a certain item: It is konam for me if I did not see on this road as many people as those who ascended from Egypt, or if he said: It is konam for me if I did not see a snake as large as the beam of an olive press, in these cases the speaker did not intend to vow but used hyperbole to demonstrate a point, and it is understood by others that the expression is not to be taken literally.

גמ׳ תנא: נדרי הבאי ⁠— מותרין, שבועות הבאי ⁠— אסורין.

Talmud: A Sage taught: Items rendered forbidden through vows of exaggeration [havai] are permitted; items rendered forbidden through oaths of exaggeration are forbidden. Since oaths are very severe, one does not take an oath unless he intends it seriously. Therefore, it is not viewed as an oath of exaggeration.