Resources and Review Test for Nedarim 73
The גמרא says that the explanation as to why רבי אליעזר says that after 12 months and the husband start paying for his wife’s food that the husband can be מפיר his ארוסה’s נדרים is because of the concept of כל הנודרת על דעת בעלה היא נודרת. There is a fundamental questions here: what if the woman is clearly not doing it על דעתו? For example, if she says explicitly that she is not making it על דעתו. Can the husband still be מפיר in that case? The ריטב"אin גיטין דף פּ"ג ע"ב asks this question and gives two profoundly different answers. His first answer is that even though she said she isn’t doing it על דעתו, we know deep inside she is. His second answer is that its really just a גזרת הכתוב that the father can be מפיר his wife’s נדרים and the general reason the torah gives him this right is because she is נודרת על דעתו but even if that isn’t the case we say לא פּלוג even though this is a דין דאורייתא.
There are many נפקא מינה’s between those two תירוצים. One is where she made a נדרdirectly against and anti the בעל. לכאורה there is no way to say that is על דעתו. Another נפקא מינה brought by the קובץ הערות in סימן כ"ו is if she thought she wasn’t married, like a case where her גירושין becomes invalidated for whatever reason. In that case she also cant be doing it על דעתו. The ר"ן here in ד"ה ואיכא דילפיseems to go like the second תירוץ of the ריטב"א that at the core its really a גזרת הכתוב.
The question on this מהלך is the fact that the גמרא in נדה דף מ"ו ע"בsays that a husband can be מפיר the נדרים of his wife even is his wife is a קטנה married off by her mother and brothers (meaning a קידושין דרבנן). If they aren’t married מדאורייתא, then if it’s a גזרת הכתובthat a husband can be מפיר his wife’s נדרים then it shouldn’t apply in this case since it isn’t his wife מדאורייתא! The קובץ הערות answers that the ר"ן said the words כל שנודרת על דעתו, חיילא הך גזרת הכתוב. That should mean that if in her head this is her husband, she will be נודר על דעתו and the גזרת הכתוב will apply since the גזרת הכתוב is just saying any women are תולה their נדרים in their husbands more than anyone else so in that case he can be מפיר. The קובץ הערות also points out that even if you say like the ריטב"א’s first answer that it is truly 100% נודרת על דעתו, how would you understand why a בעל is only מיגז גייז? Why wouldn’t it uproot the נדרfrom the beginning? He answers that her intention is that it should only be a נדר till her husband finds out and at that point it’s up to him. So it’s like נדר לזמן.
There is a fascinating כלי יקר in פּרשת מטות that says something similar to the first פּשט in the ריטב"א: he says that since a woman is generally speaking in the רשות of her husband and father, its as if she is מתנה that all נדרים should be על דעתם. He explains that this is also why regular התרת נדרים אצל חכם works! Since a person must follow what בית דין says, it is as if when he makes a נדר its על תנאי that בית דין agrees and if they don’t then he doesn’t want the נדר. This sounds very similar to the concept of the חכמים being able to be עוקר קידושין that they don’t like because כל המקדש אדעתא דרבנן מקדש.
New Daf Hashavua newsletter - Shavua Matters
Daf HaShavua Choveres - compiled by Rabbi Pinchas Englander
Rabbi Ari Keilson - Maarei Mekomos