Study Nedarim folio 26A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
ורבא אמר: דכולי עלמא, כל היכא דאמר: אילו הייתי יודע שאבא ביניכם הייתי אומר: ״פלוני ופלוני אסורין ואבא מותר״ — כולם מותרין. לא נחלקו אלא באומר: אילו הייתי יודע שאבא ביניכם, הייתי אומר: ״כולכם אסורין חוץ מאבא״.
And Rava said: Everyone holds that anywhere that one says: Had I known that father was among you I would have said: So-and-so and so-and-so are prohibited to partake and father is permitted to do so, then all are permitted to partake. They disagree only in a case where one says: Had I known that father was among you I would have said: All of you are prohibited from partaking except for father.
בית שמאי סברי לה כרבי מאיר, דאמר: תפוס לשון ראשון.
The rationale of the dispute is the following: Beit Shammai hold in accordance with the opinion of R' Meir, who said: If one initially makes one declaration and immediately afterward makes a conflicting declaration, hold him accountable for the first expression. Since he initially said: All of you are prohibited from partaking, this expression is the effective one and they are all prohibited from doing so. The addition of the words: Except for father, is viewed as a clarification of the previous expression, simply indicating that his father is not included in the prohibition.
ובית הלל סברי לה כרבי יוסי, דאמר: בגמר דבריו אדם נתפס.
And by contrast, Beit Hillel hold in accordance with the opinion of R' Yosei, who said: A person is held accountable even for the conclusion of his statement, and the second formulation is the primary one. Therefore, the fact that one altered his formulation to exclude his father from the prohibition means that the vow is partially canceled, and a vow that is partially dissolved is dissolved completely.
איתיביה רב פפא לרבא: כיצד אמר רבי עקיבא נדר שהותר מקצתו הותר כולו? ״קונם שאיני נהנה לכולכם״, הותר אחד מהן — הותרו כולם. ״שאיני נהנה לא לזה ולזה״, הותר הראשון — הותרו כולם, הותר האחרון — האחרון מותר וכולן אסורין.
Rav Pappa raised an objection to Rava from the following Mishnah (66a): In what case did R' Akiva say that a vow which was partially dissolved is dissolved completely? For example: if one said: The property of all of you is konam for me, and for that reason I will not benefit from it, if benefit from one of them was permitted for whatever reason, benefit from all of them is permitted. However, if one said: The property of this one and of that one is konam for me, and for that reason I will not benefit from it, then if benefit from the first one was permitted for whatever reason, benefit from all of them is permitted, but if benefit from the last one was permitted, benefit from the last one alone is permitted and benefit from all the others is forbidden.