(Mishnah - R. Eliezer): We are Pose'ach (suggest that a vow was mistaken, which is grounds to permit it) with the honor of his father and mother (it is disgraceful for them that their son vowed);

Chachamim forbid;

R. Tzadok: Rather than being Pose'ach with the honor of his father and mother, we should be Pose'ach with the honor of Hash-m!

Chachamim: If so, there are no vows! (Kevod Hash-m is a Pesach to permit every vow.)

Chachamim agree with R. Eliezer about a matter (vow) between a person and his father and mother, that we are Pose'ach with the honor of his father and mother.

(Gemara): Rabanan hold that there is a Chazakah that a person is not Ma'amid (will never say that he would have vowed in spite of the disgrace to his parents, even if he would have). R. Eliezer says that sometimes a person is Ma'amid, and sometimes he is not Ma'amid (he would not lie).

R. Eliezer agrees that after death [of a parent], he is not Ma'amid (for the parent cannot forgive him - MESHECH CHACHMAH Devarim 27:17. Therefore, we may not be Pose'ach with honor of the parent.)

All agree that one is not Ma'amid regarding the honor of his Rebbi, for a Mishnah teaches that the awe of your Rebbi should be like the awe of Shamayim.

(Mishnah): If so, there are no vows!

Question: Let it be that there are no vows! (What is Chachamim's objection?)

Answer: It says "Va'Ydaber Moshe El Roshei ha'Matos" - Parshas [Nedarim] was made dependent on Roshei ha'Matos (Chachamim), that they will permit vows. If you say so (we are Pose'ach with Kevod Hash-m), it turns out that you uproot Parshas Nedarim (i.e. that only a Chacham can permit them) from the Torah. (We explained this like PNEI MOSHE.)

Question (R. Yirmeyah): You say that we are not Pose'ach with the honor of his father and mother, but matters between a person and his father and mother, we are Pose'ach with the honor of his father and mother. If so, we are not Pose'ach with Kevod Hash-m - and similarly, matters between a person and Hash-m, we should be Pose'ach with Kevod Hash-m!

What are [matters between a person and Hash-m, for which we should be Pose'ach with] Kevod Hash-m? E.g. I will not make a Sukah, I will not take a Lulav, I will not put Tefilin [on my arm and head].

Answer: [Is doing Mitzvos] Kevod Hash-m?! [A verse] connotes that [Mitzvos] help [only] the person himself! (I.e. Kevod Hash-m is not a reason to permit matters between a person and Hash-m.)

"Im Tzadakta Mah Titen Lo...; Im Chatasa Mah Tif'al Bo."

(R. Yanai): Anyone who heeds his Yetzer [ha'Ra], it is as if he serves idolatry. (He would be Pose'ach - 'had you known that one who heeds his Yetzer ha'Ra and vows amidst anger, it is as if... would you have vowed?' - PNEI MOSHE)

What is the source? "Lo Yihyeh Vecha El Zar v'Lo Sishtachaveh l'El Nechar" - the stranger inside you, do not coronate it over you. (If you do, in the end you will bow to idolatry.)

Reish Lakish would be Pose'ach 'had you known that one who vows puts a noose on his neck (he cannot remove it by himself), would you have vowed?'

[A parable for this] is a jail warden's wife who was passing, and saw an empty noose, and put her head in it. (She pains herself for no reason.)

"Le'esor Isar Al Nafsho" - this is like you say "v'Hu Asur ba'Zikim" (one who vows, he fetters himself).

R. Yochanan would be Pose'ach 'had you known that one who vows is like one who builds a Bamah (to offer to idolatry), and one who [does not ask a Chachamim to permit it, rather, he] fulfills it, is like one who offers on it, would you have vowed?'

Question: Idolatry is [punished with] stoning, and Nedarim (even if he transgresses, is only) a Lo Sa'aseh, and you say so?

Retraction: We are not Pose'ach with this,] rather, like R. Yanai said - anyone who heeds his Yetzer, it is as if he serves idolatry.

R. Yitzchak would be Pose'ach 'had you known that one who vows is like one who takes a sword and stabs it in his heart, would you have vowed? "Yesh Boteh k'Madkeros Charev."

(R. Chanina of Tziporin citing R. Pinchas): It is not written k'Madker, rather, "k'Madkeros Charev" - after he vowed from [eating] a loaf (two matters prick him) - woe if he will eat, and woe if he will not eat;

If he will eat, he transgresses his vow. If he will not eat, he sinned against his soul (by denying himself, like it says about a Nazir);

How should he do? He goes to a Chacham, and he permits his vow - "u'Leshon Chachamim Marpei" (this is the end of the above verse).

(Rav Dimi citing R. Yitzchak): Is it not enough what the Torah forbade to you, rather, you seek to forbid to yourself other matters?! [About this it says] "Le'esor Isar."

R. Yochanan would be Pose'ach 'do you regret [your vow? If so, this suffices to permit it.] If not that this [person] regrets, would he come [to permit it]?!

Question: Is regret not like Nolad (an unexpected development that caused him to regret it?! We are not Pose'ach with Nolad!)

Answer (R. Heila): It is common to [be appeased - RITVA 21b DH Amar R. Ila, and] regret [the vow].

This is like the case of R. Shimon. He did not find a Pesach for his vow, until one of the Chachamim of Galil came. Some say that it was R. Shimon ben Elazar;

He took [R. Shimon] from here and positioned him here (elsewhere). He took him from here and positioned him here, until he positioned him in the sun;

They said [to R. Shimon] - had you known that this Chacham would do so to you, would you have vowed? He said 'no'. [R. Shimon ben Elazar] permitted him.

They asked [R. Shimon ben Elazar] what is your source [to do so]? He said, I served R. Meir the second time he fled.

Some say, [he said] 'R. Meir's staff was in my hand, and it teaches me Da'as.

R. Yirmeyah [asked a Chacham and] permitted [his] vow and fulfilled it;

If it was because he suspected the one who permitted it (was not qualified to permit by himself), we do not know, or if it is because the Yetzer desires only something forbidden to it (and R. Yirmeyah wanted to fulfill it, just it was too difficult when it was forbidden), we do not know.

When R. Yirmeyah did not want to judge (because a litigant was powerful, or he would need to reveal a secret), he said 'my eye hurts';

"V'Al Pihem Yihyeh Kol Riv v'Chol Naga" equates Rivim (Dinim) to Nega'im (Tzara'as). Just like Tzara'as must be "l'Chol Mar'e Einei ha'Kohen" (the Kohen can see properly), also Rivim must be "l'Chol Mar'e Einei ha'Kohen."

R. Mana vowed from his father's wine. His father descended to him, and said 'had you know that I would be pained, would you have vowed?' He said no, and he permitted him.

Question: What is the case?

If he said 'benefit from me is forbidden to father [if I drink his wine', the vow does not take effect, for] R. Yakov bar Acha cited R. Shmuel bar Nachman citing R. Yochanan to say that we force a son to feed his father!

Answer: Rather, the case is, he said 'benefit from father is forbidden to me.'

R. Mana vowed and went to R. Shamai. He said to him, 'had you know that people will distance from you, for you vow habitually, would you have vowed?' He said no, and he permitted him.

(Mishnah): R. Eliezer said further, we are Pose'ach with Nolad (subsequent unexpected developments);

Chachamim forbid.

How is [Nolad]? If one vowed not to benefit from Ploni, and [Ploni] became the scribe [of the town], or [Ploni] was about to marry off his son (and the Noder wants to attend, and) he says, had I known that he would become the scribe, or would marry off his son soon (the vow was for a short time), I would not have vowed;

If one said 'Konam this house that I will not enter it', and it became a Beis ha'Keneses. He said 'had I known that it would become a Beis ha'Keneses, I would not have vowed' - [in such cases] R. Eliezer permits, and Chachamim forbid.

(Gemara - R. Simon citing R. Yehoshua ben Levi): R. Eliezer learned from Moshe. Hash-m was Pose'ach for him with Nolad;

Hash-m said to him 'had you known that "Ki Mesu Kol ha'Anashim ha'Mevakshim Es Nafshecha", would you have vowed?

Question: Had Dasan and Aviram [who informed on Moshe to Paro] died?! They were alive!

Answer: Rather, they lost their wealth (and influence. An Oni is considered as if he is dead.)

(R. Yirmeyah): This (Chachamim are not Pose'ach with Nolad) is if they did not deliberate the matter; it is like Nolad;

(R. Yosi): Even if they deliberated the matter; it is like Nolad;

Source (for R. Yosi - Mishnah): Nachum the Mede erred about this [when Nezirim ascended from Bavel and heard that the second Mikdash had been destroyed]. Why [was it a mistake]? He was Pose'ach for them with Nolad.

Nachum the Mede: Had you known that the Mikdash will be destroyed, would you have vowed?

(R. Ze'ira): He should have told them 'did you not know that early prophets already prophesized for you while the Beis ha'Mikdash stood, that it will be destroyed?' Then, it would not be like Nolad.

Rebuttal (R. Heila): It would still be like Nolad. They could say, we knew, but we thought that it will be much later - "he'Chazon Asher Hu Chozeh l'Yamim Rabim ul'Itim Rechokos Hu Niba."

R. Yirmeyah holds like R. Ze'ira (if he deliberated the matter, it is not Nolad), and R. Yosi holds like R. Ila (even if he deliberated the matter, it is Nolad).

(Mishnah): We may sell a Beis ha'Keneses only with a stipulation [that when they want, they may buy it back].

Question: This is when he built it to be a Beis ha'Keneses. If he built it to be a Chatzer (i.e. for Chulin), and afterwards was Makdish it [to be a Beis ha'Keneses], what is the law?

Answer: We learn from [our Mishnah]. 'Konam this house that I will not enter it', and it became a Beis ha'Keneses.

[PNEI MOSHE - since it is called a Beis ha'Keneses, this shows that] if he built it for a Chatzer, and [afterwards] was Makdish it, it is Kadosh.

Question: When is it Kadosh - immediately (once he was Makdish it), or when they use (pray in) it?

Answer: We learn from the following If one made a box to be [an Aron Kodesh] for a Sefer, or a cloth for a Sefer - until they were used for a Sefer, a person may use them. Once they were used for a Sefer, a person may not use them.

These were made for a Sefer, and they are not Kadosh until they are used. This that was built for a Chatzer, all the more so!

If [a box or a cloth] was made for Chulin, and he was Makdish them, they are Kadosh (just like a house built for a Chatzer, and afterwards he was Makdish it).