Study Nedarim folio 29A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
אמר ליה רב המנונא: קדושה שבהן להיכן הלכה? ומה אילו אמר לאשה ״היום את אשתי ולמחר אי את אשתי״, מי נפקא בלא גט?!
Rav Hamnuna said to Ulla: Where did their sanctity go? How can the consecrated saplings become non-sacred without being redeemed? And what would happen if one said to a woman while performing betrothal: Today you are my wife and tomorrow you are not my wife? Would she exit the marriage the next day without a bill of divorce? Likewise, in the Mishnah, once one consecrated the saplings, how is their sanctity withdrawn without redemption?
אמר ליה רבא: מי קא מדמית קדושת דמים לקדושת הגוף? קדושת דמים פקעה בכדי, קדושת הגוף לא פקעה בכדי.
Rava said to him: How do you compare sanctity inherent in its value to inherent sanctity? Sanctity inherent in its value departs with nothing being done, since it is conditional. When the condition is fulfilled and the saplings are cut, the sanctity is removed. However, inherent sanctity, which relates to an entity that itself is consecrated, e.g., a betrothed woman, does not depart with nothing being done. An action must be performed in order to remove it.
אמר ליה אביי: קדושת הגוף לא פקעה בכדי? והתניא: ״שור זה עולה כל שלשים יום, ולאחר שלשים יום שלמים״ — כל שלשים יום עולה, לאחר שלשים יום שלמים. אמאי? קדושת הגוף נינהו, ופקעה בכדי!
Abaye said to him: And does inherent sanctity not depart with nothing being done? But isn’t it taught in a baraita that if one said: This ox is a burnt-offering for all of 30 days and after 30 days it is a peace-offering, for all of 30 days it is a burnt-offering and after 30 days it is a peace-offering. One can ask: Why is this so? These offerings are examples of inherent sanctity, and it departs with nothing being done. After 30 days, it is transformed into a peace-offering without any action being taken.
הכא במאי עסקינן, דאמר לדמי.
The Talmud answers: With what are we dealing here? It is a case where one did not consecrate the animal as a burnt-offering or peace-offering but rather he said that he was consecrating it for its monetary value, with which to purchase a burnt-offering or peace-offering. Therefore, there was no inherent sanctity.