דין המתפיס בנדר. ובו ד׳ סעיפים:
עיקר נדר האמור בתורה הוא שיתפיס בדבר הנדור כגון שאומר ככר זה עלי כקרבן או שאמר יאסר עלי ככר זה או שאמר ככר זה עלי איסור וכן אם אסר עליו ככר אחד שתלאו בדבר הנדור ואמר על אחר יהא כזה אסור ואפילו עד מאה כולם אסורים או שנדר על יום אחד להתענות בו או שלא לאכול בו בשר ואמר על יום אחר יהא כזה אסור (יש חלוקי לשונות בענין הנדר והרב לא כתבם ועיין בפנים):
The foundation of the נדר stated in the Torah is that he attach (שיתפיס) to a דבר הנדור — for example: “this loaf is upon me like a קרבן”; or that he say: “let this loaf be forbidden to me”; or: “this loaf is upon me איסור”. And likewise, if he forbade upon himself a loaf attached to a דבר הנדור and says of another: “let it be forbidden like this one” — even up to a hundred, all are forbidden. Or if he vowed, concerning one day, to fast on it or not to eat meat on it, and says of another day: “let it be like this one”.
Shulchan Arukh, Yoreh De'ah 204:1 (ד׳ סעיפים)
LEVEL 01
רמת המתחיל
Base — Beginner & Intermediate
The four seifim read one by one, with the Hebrew text of the Shulchan Arukh, a fluent English translation and an explanation of the mechanism: attaching to a דבר הנדור, the three formulations that bind, the chain up to a hundred, the objects sanctified by the mouth, the כדי דיבור and the דבר שלא בא לעולם. The siman's twenty-one commentary entries — the 9 ס״ק of the Shach, the 5 of the Taz, the 6 of the Baer Hetev and the entry of the Pitchei Teshuva — are quoted one by one, each with its reference.
📖 Study
LEVEL 02
רמת הלמדן
Lamdan — Talmid Hakham
Pilpul: the chakira on the extent of דבר הנדור (the Taz against the Beit Yosef's difficulty on the Tur, and the reading of the Ran); the line קדושת הפה / קדושת מעי אמו and the exclusion of the בכור (נדרים י״ג, Rambam הלכות נדרים א׳:י״ג); why המתפיס בשבועה פטור ובנדרים חייב; the ma'hloket of the שלחן between the Rama, the Shach and the Taz; what travels along the chain of a hundred; and the דבר שלא בא לעולם, from כתובות נ״ט to the shochet controversy reported by the Pitchei Teshuva.
📖 Study
LEVEL 03
חזרה וסיכום
Synthesis — Revision
A recap for revision: the siman in one sentence, the four seifim in a table, the vocabulary to know by heart (נדר, שבועה, דבר הנדור, דבר האסור, המתפיס, קדושת הפה, איסר, קונם, סתם נדרים להחמיר, כדי דיבור, דבר שלא בא לעולם), the three golden rules, the six classic pitfalls, what remains under discussion and the checklist.
📖 Study
LEVEL 04
הלכה למעשה
Halakha lema'asse — the ruling
Halakha lema'asse: the ruling of the siman line by line according to the Mehaber, the Rama, the Shach, the Taz, the Baer Hetev, the Pitchei Teshuva and the Rambam — the formulations that bind, the admitted and excluded anchors, the controversy over the Temple table which one does not settle alone, the כדי דיבור and the דבר שלא בא לעולם. A thirteen-line ruling table; every conclusion refers to the Rav, for any התרה is done before a חכם.
📖 Study
Frequently asked questions — Siman 204
What is the נדר, according to Siman 204, and what distinguishes it from the שבועה?
The Shulchan Arukh defines the נדר by a gesture of language: to attach (שיתפיס) a permitted thing to a דבר הנדור — a thing already made forbidden by a man's word. “This loaf is upon me like a קרבן”: the loaf becomes forbidden as the קרבן is. The שבועה, by contrast, does not touch the object: it binds the person. The Rambam formulates it thus in his הלכות נדרים: one who swears forbids himself with respect to the thing, one who vows forbids the thing upon himself. From this distinction follows a central rule of the siman: one may attach to a נדר, one does not attach to a שבועה. These are rules for study; any vow actually pronounced is brought before a Rav.
To what may a vow be attached, and to what may it not?
At seif ב the Shulchan Arukh widens the field: not only to the קרבן, but to anything דבר הקדוש בקדושת הפה — כאימרא (the lamb of the offering), כדירים (the pens), כמזבח, כהיכל, כירושלים, or one of the vessels of the service. The criterion is not the intensity of the holiness but its origin: a human mouth must have consecrated it. That is why the firstborn animal (בכור), holy from its mother's womb, does not serve as an anchor — the Rambam writes so expressly. And it is the same line that, at siman 205, will exclude pork and נבלה: they are forbidden, but not by a word.
What do the Shach and the Taz hold against the Rama's gloss on the Temple table?
The Rama distinguishes: “like the table of the Temple” binds, “like a table” unqualified does not bind — but an עם הארץ must nonetheless seek release. The Shach (ס״ק ח) replies that this is not the source's distinction: the Hagahot Mordechai opposed התפסה (“this loaf is upon me like the table” — that binds) to vowing by the table (the language of an oath — that does not bind, since there is no Divine Name in a table). He attempts a defence of the Rama, judges it strained, and concludes with a צ״ע. The Taz (ס״ק ה) goes further: there is no difference between the two tables, and “כשלחן סתם” binds by סתם נדרים להחמיר. The Baer Hetev (ס״ק ה) reports both together. Yet the three readings meet in practice: a התרה is required, and it is done before a Rav.
May one forbid to oneself a thing that does not yet exist?
Yes, and that is seif ד: “a person may forbid upon himself a דבר שלא בא לעולם, for when it will come into the world”. The gemara gives the reason in tractate כתובות: the קונם takes nothing, it only forbids — and to forbid, it is enough that I exist. But the Shach (ס״ק ט) at once sets two limits: by full הקדש one may not, and upon another one may not either. The Pitchei Teshuva devotes his single entry in the siman to this last limit, around a real case — a shochet who had forbidden his shechita to all Israel — on which the Acharonim divided. An undertaking of צדקה or מעשר on future income belongs to this discussion: it is a question for a Rav, not for reading.