https://pixabay.com/photos/pinky-swear-friendship-gesture-329329/
Translated by Rabbi Émile Ackermann
To read this post in English, click here
This week, Parashat Matot-Masse presents us with the figure of a woman who makes vows and specifies the patriarchal restrictions that apply to these vows.
It is immediately apparent that these restrictions are themselves limited. They are the prerogative of the woman’s father when she is a minor and of her husband after her betrothal. They can only annul her vow on the day they hear about it ( vv. 4-6 ), which, as the Gemara in TB Nedarim will clarify, refers to the rest of the day (it may not be more than a few hours!). Furthermore, if a woman’s vow has been accepted by her father (silence here counts as acceptance, see v. 15 ), and she subsequently marries a man, the husband can only annul the vow when he first hears about it ( vv. 7-9 ). The vows of a widowed or divorced woman are, so to speak, invulnerable ( v. 10 ). In the following verses, it is made clear that Hashem is merciful to a woman who made a vow that was later annulled by her husband. Based on v. 14 , the Sages (see Mishna Nedarim 11:1 ) specify that the husband can only annul vows that “afflict the soul,” i.e., those that involve innui nefesh . The Gemara ( Nedarim 79b ) adds another category: vows that are beino leveina , “between him and her.” Even then, he can only annul the aspect that directly affects him. The Sifrei Bamidbar 155 states that the same conditions apply to a father (if his daughter is still a minor).
A careful reading of BT Nedarim reveals that the use of hafarat nedarim by a father or husband was increasingly restricted, based on the Hakhamim’s understanding of Parshat Matot. The Sages found a more comprehensive – better, I believe – solution to freeing men and women from their vows – the institution of hatarat nedarim , which linguistically refers to the possibility of freeing people from their vows rather than aggressively destroying them (the mechanism of hafara ). The main difference is that in hatarat nedarim, the Sages essentially help people free themselves from their vows through rational means, by helping them find a petikha, literally an “exit,” which can be translated as “escape” in this context. For example, in TB Nedarim 21b-22a, there is a case recorded of a mother who disinherited her daughter through a neder. She then consulted the Sages in an attempt to have this extreme commitment annulled. Trying to find a petikha , they asked the mother, “When you made this vow, did you think about what the neighbors would say about your daughter?” Would it not be clear to them that the child had committed very shameful acts to be thus ostracized by her mother? The mother admitted that, no, she had not realized the deleterious consequences of this hasty commitment and she was released from her vows.
But why did the Sages facilitate the use of hatarat nedarim , while limiting the parameters of the only option clearly stated in the Torah, hafarat nedarim ?
Let us take a step back to explore the meaning of vows. Vows are commitments made through a ritual formula. One may vow to deprive oneself of all benefit from a person or object by equating the entity concerned by the vow with a sacrificial offering ( konam or korban ), a kadosh object , “sacred” or “holy.” The best translation of kadosh in this context would be “separate, distant from oneself.” However, while a sacrifice generally refers to an object from which we distance ourselves in order to “draw closer” ( qorban ) to Hashem, the vow creates a separation between oneself and others (people and objects alike) that can only lead to tension, conflict, and frustration. It drives a wedge between husbands and wives, fathers and daughters, and so on. Because of the extreme legal and social consequences of neder , and its symbolic violence (since it involves depriving oneself or others of contact or pleasure in a way that is not at all justified by the Torah), the Sages have generalized, to the extent of their means, the use of annulling vows, especially when it comes to saving human relationships. While hafarat nedarim seemed purely arbitrary on the part of the father or husband, and was based on the paternalistic assumption that they knew best what their wives and daughters should or should not do, without needing any justification before annulling the vow, hatarat nedarim introduces rationality and introspection into the process of annulling a vow. It assumes that women and men will make mistakes and decisions on the spur of the moment that will negatively impact them, their friends, and their family, and that both sexes will need to have some of their vows annulled. There is something about hatarat nedarim that reminds me of therapy, since the Chachamim simply guide the vow-bearer toward a better understanding of what was wrong with the vow in the first place, considering all of its ramifications and unintended consequences. Only a system that values self-understanding over outside intervention can transform us from children in need of reprimand (as the Children of Israel often did in the desert) into a more mature and responsible am qadosh , a people holy in word and deed.
Daf of the Day
