A man has forbidden himself all Israel. He therefore cannot do what one bound ordinarily does: go elsewhere. The Shulḥan Arukh does not forbid him to live — it teaches him to trade without benefiting. And for that it puts an economic question before the halakhic one: in this sale, who benefits? Three kinds of goods, three answers, six branches. Then a whole seif on lending, where the siman expressly refuses the decree siman 221 had made; and a last seif where the vow stops of itself, because what he would withhold from the kohanim is worth nothing in any hands but theirs. (Shulḥan Arukh, Yoreh De’ah 227 — 3 seifim)
מי שאסר עצמו מכל ישראל אסור לקנות מהם ולמכור להם
One who forbade himself from all Israel — he may not buy from them or sell to them. The siman opens on a practical impossibility, and all that follows is the way to live with it.
Shulchan Arukh, Yoreh De'ah 227:1LEVEL 01
The three seifim in Hebrew, with a fluent translation and a clause-by-clause breakdown: the two directions of the vow, the three kinds of goods, the six branches of trade, lending and borrowing, the kohanim and the gifts of the poor. The twenty-one apparatus entries — Shakh, Taz, Ba’er Hetev, Pitḥei Teshuva — cited one by one.
📖 StudyLEVEL 02
Pilpul: Shmuel’s sugya, where the gemara borrows its criterion of benefit from economics; why a vow of benefit reaches property the vower does not yet hold, though no one forbids what is not in the world — the Ran’s distinction between a vow bearing on a thing and one bearing on a man; why the decree of siman 221 is not made here, and how far the Shakh extends that reasoning; finally the mishna’s contradiction over טובת הנאה, Rava’s answer, and the limit the Maharshal sets against the Ran.
📖 StudyLEVEL 03
A synthesis arranged by mechanism: the two directions of the vow, the three kinds of goods and where the benefit sits, the six branches of seif 1, lending and the decree not made, the kohanim and the value of the choice. Then a master table restoring the three seifim to the order of the book, clause by clause, the points that require a Rav, the vocabulary, the golden rules and the classic pitfalls.
📖 StudyLEVEL 04
The practical halakha according to the ש״ך, the ט״ז, the באר היטב and the פתחי תשובה, in four steps: the direction of the vow, the goods, the price and its negative check, consent where required. Then lending, what the vow does not reach, and the four points that require a Rav — among them buying on credit. Note: the Admur HaZaken did not write a Shulḥan Arukh on Yoreh De’ah — a level of psak, not “Daat HaRav”.
📖 StudyThe siman treats exactly this case, and does not dismiss it as idle speech:
« מי שאסר עצמו מכל ישראל אסור לקנות מהם ולמכור להם » (שו״ע יו״ד רכ״ז:א)The Shakh at once specifies the reach of the prohibition:
« לעולם בכל ענין ואפי׳ שוה בשוה » (ש״ך יו״ד רכ״ז ס״ק א)But the siman immediately teaches him how to go on: buy at more and sell at less. Ask your Rav, and bring him the exact words.
Because he must not benefit — not because he ought to be punished:
« אלא לוקח ביותר ומוכר בפחות » (שו״ע יו״ד רכ״ז:א)The whole mechanism of the siman is here: identify who benefits from a sale, then load the loss on the one who must not have it. And where it is the other who must lose, his consent is needed:
« ואם אסר הנאתו עליהם לוקח מהם בפחות ומוכר ביותר אם ישמעו לו » (שו״ע יו״ד רכ״ז:א)
No, and this is the commonest pitfall. The Shakh says it twice, in both directions of the vow:
« אבל שוה בשוה אסור בכל ענין » (ש״ך יו״ד רכ״ז ס״ק ב)
« דוקא ולא שוה בשוה וכ״ש בפחות דאסור » (ש״ך יו״ד רכ״ז ס״ק ד)An even price is permitted only where the bound party does not benefit from that kind of sale — which depends on the goods.
Here, yes — and this is the opposite of siman 221:
« אסר הנייתם עליו הרי זה משאילן ומלוה אותם » (שו״ע יו״ד רכ״ז:ב)
« אבל הוא לא ישאל ולא ילוה מהם » (שו״ע יו״ד רכ״ז:ב)The Taz gives the reason in a line:
« דהתם אם לא ישא ויתן עם זה ישא ויתן עם אחר אבל הכא א״א לו » (ט״ז יו״ד רכ״ז ס״ק ב)But if the vow runs both ways, nothing remains possible between them. Ask your Rav.
Yes, and the reason is a fine one:
« מי שאסר הנאתו על הכהנים ועל הלוים באים ונוטלין תרומותיו ומעשרותיו בעל כרחו » (שו״ע יו״ד רכ״ז:ג)The gemara explains it — terumah is worth something only in their hands:
« רָבָא אָמַר: שָׁאנֵי תְּרוּמָה, דְּהַיְינוּ טַעְמָא דְּיִטְּלוּ עַל כׇּרְחוֹ — מִשּׁוּם דִּתְרוּמָה לָא חַזְיָא אֶלָּא לְכֹהֲנִים, וְכֵיוָן דְּקָא אָתֵי לְמֵיסְרָא עֲלַיְיהוּ, שַׁוְּיָא עַפְרָא בְּעָלְמָא » (נדרים פ״ה ע״א)But if he named particular kohanim, the vow holds and he gives to others:
« ואם אמר כהנים אלו ולוים אלו יתן לכהנים ולוים אחרים » (שו״ע יו״ד רכ״ז:ג)Ask your Rav.