✦ ❖ ✦ Level 3 — Synthesis / Revision ✦ ❖ ✦
Siman 231 — synthesis and revision (יורה דעה רל״א)
הנודר על תנאי או מי שתולה נדרו בדעת אחרים
A single-seif siman, laid out for revision
שולחן ערוך יורה דעה סימן רל״א (1 seif)
ש״ך (ב) · ט״ז (ג) · באר היטב (ב)
DAAT · הרב יוסף חיים סממה
1. The rule, in one sentence
From the moment a vow takes effect it has only one exit: a מומחה, or three ordinary men. No clause inserted in advance creates a second — but so long as the vow has not taken effect, the man on whose agreement it hung can still prevent it.
The dividing line to remember. Everything in this siman is decided on one word: חל. Before: ביטול possible, התרה impossible. After: ביטול impossible, התרה possible.
2. The mechanism
A man utters a vow, with or without an escape clause
▼
So long as it has not taken effect: the man whose agreement conditioned it may prevent it — immediately, and in any words
▼
The vow takes effect: מיד כשחל הנדר
▼
From then on, one way only: מומחה or three הדיוטות. The escape clause — אינו כלום
▼
Unless it was bounded in time: then it expires by itself at the term
3. Where it comes from
The body of the seif — the Tur, whom the Shulḥan Arukh copies almost word for word, adding “והשבועה”. The foundation — the Rambam, הלכות שבועות פרק ו׳: no man releases his own oath. The Rama’s gloss — the Rosh, כלל י׳ סי׳ ג׳, and the Rivash. The practical counterpart — seifim 37 and 38 of siman 228, to which the Rama himself refers.
4. The seven apparatus entries
| Entry | On | What it contributes |
|---|
| ש״ך ס״ק א | או שתלה באחר שיבטלנו | Two senses of שיבטלנו: “release” (refused) and “prevent the vow from taking effect” (permitted, and in any words). Refers to his own ס״ק צ״ח on siman 228. |
| ש״ך ס״ק ב | וכ״ש אם התנה | Two distinct mechanisms of annulment: annulling on the instant, or having framed the vow so that it takes effect only once heard. |
| ט״ז ס״ק א | ושוב נשאל על הקיום | The third party confirmed, then had his own confirmation released: the vow stands. |
| ט״ז ס״ק ב | אבל אם לא קיימו | A difficulty with the Rama’s gloss: the vower must state that such was his intention from the start. |
| ט״ז ס״ק ג | וכ״ש אם התנה בפירוש | The power to annul operates from the hearing and no later. Second paragraph of the same ס״ק: the case of the spouses and the mutual תקיעת כף. |
| באר היטב ס״ק א | שיבטלנו | Reports the Shakh, referring to seif 37 of siman 228. |
| באר היטב ס״ק ב | זמן | Reports the Shakh and then the Taz, the second paragraph included. |
The Pitḥei Teshuva and the Nekudot HaKesef have no entry on this siman. Nothing about the halakha follows. The Pitḥei Teshuva has six entries at siman 229 and twenty at siman 232; the Nekudot HaKesef four in each. Nothing has been manufactured here to fill a column.
5. The seif, clause by clause
| Author | Text | Reach |
|---|
| Meḥaber | “ אין הנדר והשבועה ניתרים אלא על פי מומחה או בג׳ הדיוטות ” (שו״ע יו״ד רל״א:א) | Two ways, no third. |
| Meḥaber | “ או שתלה (באחר) שיבטלנו אימתי שירצה אינו כלום ” (שו״ע יו״ד רל״א:א) | The escape clause produces nothing. |
| Meḥaber | “ דמיד כשחל הנדר אין לו התרה אלא על ידי מומחה או ג׳ הדיוטות ” (שו״ע יו״ד רל״א:א) | The reason: חלות. |
| Rama | “ אבל אם לא קיימו ומיד ששמעו אמר שלא יהיה נדר הנדר בטל ” (רמ״א יו״ד רל״א:א) | Immediate refusal prevents חלות. |
| Meḥaber | “ ומיהו אם נדר לזמן אין צריך התרה אלא לכשיגיע הזמן בטל ממילא ” (שו״ע יו״ד רל״א:א) | A vow for a term expires by itself. |
6. What remains open
Is an express statement required? The Taz writes “ וצריך לומר דגם הכא מיירי שאומר שהיתה דעתו תחלה לכך ” (ט״ז יו״ד רל״א ס״ק ב) — the vower must say that such was his intention. The Shakh, at ס״ק ב, rather describes two mechanisms in which the question does not arise in the same terms. Siman 228:37 leans the Taz’s way.
Until when may one annul? “ פירוש תיכף שישמע יוכל לבטלו אבל לא אחר כך ” (ט״ז יו״ד רל״א ס״ק ג) — from the hearing and not after. The Rama’s word מיד points the same way. Whether the facts of a given case fall within it is a question of fact. It is put to a Rav.
A mutual תקיעת כף between spouses. In the second paragraph of ס״ק ג the Taz concludes that neither vow takes effect — and that the wife is nonetheless released לרווחא דמילתא. The gap between the demonstration and the practice is the important thing here. Do not paper over it: bring it to a Rav.
7. Vocabulary
מומחה — a recognised sage who releases alone. · ג׳ הדיוטות — three untitled men who know how to open a פתח. · ביטול — annulment before the vow takes effect, in any language and without a sage. · התרה — release after it takes effect, by the sage or the three. · חלות — the taking effect, which separates the two regimes. · נדר לזמן — a vow for a term, which expires by itself.
8. Recapitulation
ח for חל: everything is decided before or after that word. — ל for לזמן: the limit that works is the one inside the vow. — Two letters, and the whole siman.
Golden rules. (1) Never advise a self-annulment clause: it produces nothing. (2) Advise instead bounding the vow in time: that works. (3) The Rama’s word “immediately” is not a manner of speaking: it is the condition.
The line of psak
A vow that has taken effect is undone only by a מומחה or three ordinary men; a reservation taken in advance changes nothing. Before it takes effect, the man on whose agreement the vow hung may prevent it — provided he does so immediately, and his wording hardly matters. A vow for a term requires nothing at all. And where an undertaking has been made between two people, especially between spouses, the question of what took effect and what did not is too fine to be settled alone. It is put to a Rav.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
DAAT · הרב יוסף חיים סממה
תלמיד חכם · מעביר שיעורים בהלכה ובחסידות
סימן רל״א · Level 3 — Synthesis · הנודר על תנאי או מי שתולה נדרו בדעת אחרים
daattorah.com