LEVEL 01
רמת המתחיל
Base — Beginner & Intermediate
The 74 seifim translated clause by clause, and the 242 entries of the Shakh, the Taz, the Ba’er Hetev, the Pit’hei Teshuva and the Nekudot HaKesef cited one by one.
📖 Studyהאב מפר נדרי בתו כל זמן שהיא קטנה או נערה
The father annuls his daughter’s vows as long as she is a minor or a נערה. The siman opens with the first of the two who annul and at once sets its bounds: this power depends on age and status, and lapses of itself — at adulthood or at marriage. Which vows are reached the siman will say only at seifim 55 and 58.
Shulchan Arukh, Yoreh De'ah 234:1The 4 study levels
LEVEL 02
רמת הלמדן
Lamdan — Talmid Hakham
Eight disputes: מיגז גייז or מקליש קליש, the emptying of a domain, partial annulment, and places where the apparatus stops at a צריך עיון.
📖 StudyLEVEL 03
חזרה וסיכום
Synthesis — Revision
The 74 seifim arranged by mechanism — who annuls, when, at what stage of the vow, by what words, which vows — and the master table that keeps the book’s order.
📖 StudyLEVEL 04
הלכה למעשה
Halakha lema'asse — Psak
The line of practice, each time anchored to a cited apparatus entry — and what the siman expressly leaves to a Rav.
📖 StudyFrequently asked questions — Siman 234
What is the difference between annulling a vow and releasing it?
They are two distinct acts. Release (התרה) is done before a sage or three men: it uproots the vow from its origin. Annulment (הפרה) is the right of the father or husband: it has no such reach, and the Shulchan Arukh says so in terms at seif 51:
« שאין הבעל והאב עוקרין הנדר מעיקרו כמו החכם: » (שו״ע יו״ד רל״ד:נא)From this come the one-day window, the two categories of vow reached, and the fact that the sage’s formulas do not annul. Siman 228 treats of the first; this one treats of the second.
Until when may the husband or father annul?
The day he heard, and that day only. Seif 21 specifies that this is the calendar day and not twenty-four hours:
« אין האב מפר נדרי בתו ולא הבעל נדרי אשתו אלא ביום שמעם ודוקא כל היום ולא מעת לעת » (שו״ע יו״ד רל״ד:כא)Heard at the start of the night, he annuls all night and the next day; heard near evening, he annuls only until evening. This page authorises no one to annul a vow: it describes what the Shulchan Arukh requires.
Does silence have an effect?
Yes, and it is a point that weighs heavily in the siman. Silence kept until evening counts as upholding, even if it was meant only to distress her:
« ואם עבר היום ושתק אפילו לא כוון בשתיקתו אלא לצערה אינו יכול להפר » (שו״ע יו״ד רל״ד:כא)The Ba’er Hetev, at ס״ק כ״ו, adds in the Ran’s name that silence kept with intent to uphold closes the door at once:
« ואם שותק ע״מ לקיים לאלתר שוב אינו יכול להפר אפילו בו ביום. » (באר היטב יו״ד רל״ד ס״ק כ״ו)Seif 21 nonetheless reserves one case: one who did not know he could annul still has a day from the moment he learns.
Which vows may the husband annul?
Two categories only, and seif 55 names them:
« אלו נדרים שהבעל מפר נדרים שיש בהם עינוי נפש ודברים שבינו לבינה » (שו״ע יו״ד רל״ד:נה)Vows carrying self-affliction are lifted forever; matters between him and her only while the husband has a benefit in it — while she is under him, and, after divorce, as long as she has not remarried. All the rest — seif 72 gives the example — is not annullable at all.
May the father and the betrothed each annul on his own?
No, for a betrothed נערה. Seif 5 lays down that annulment is then an act of two:
« ולא האב לבדו מפר אלא שניהם מפירים בשותפות » (שו״ע יו״ד רל״ד:ה)If one annuls without the other it is not annulled — the seif adds only that the second’s share remains weakened. And on whether both must hear on the same day the Shulchan Arukh reports two views; the Shakh, at his ס״ק י״ג, reports from the Bach that the stringency is taken.
Can an upholding given in error be undone?
Seif 49 sets out the siman’s remedy, already stated at seif 22:
« המקיים נדרי בתו או אשתו וניחם הרי זה נשאל לחכם ומתיר לו הקמתו וחוזר ומפר לה בו ביום » (שו״ע יו״ד רל״ד:מט)One asks a sage to release the upholding, then annuls that same day. The reverse does not exist: an annulment once given is not taken back. On the time allowed the seif carries two views: the Shakh, at ס״ק ס״ג, holds that the request avails even several days later; a second view, which the Mechaber reports in the same seif, allows it only on the day of hearing, and the closing parenthesis — the Rama’s gloss in the printed editions — asks that one be stringent like this last view. The question is not settled here: this remedy is conducted before a Rav.