A predictable unforeseen circumstance is not a good excuse. TB Nedarim 27

Today’s daf TB Nedarim 27 discusses vows impeded by unforeseen circumstances (Nidrei onsin- נִדְרֵי אוֹנָסִין), the fourth and the last type of vow that does not need a sage to absolve or nullify it even though a correct vow formula was said. The Mishnah gives several examples of these type of vows. “What are examples of vows impeded by circumstances beyond one’s control? If one’s friend took a vow with regard to him that he should eat with him, and he became sick, or his son became sick, or a river that he was unable to cross barred him from coming, these are examples of vows whose fulfillment are impeded by circumstances beyond one’s control. They are not binding and do not require dissolution.” (Sefaria.org translation)

 The Gemara brings a different case where Rava questions Rav Huna decision in a case against a man who made a vow to return to the court within 30 days.

“The Gemara relates that there was a certain man who had a dispute in court with another individual and wanted to postpone the trial to a later time in order to search for more evidence. Meanwhile, he deposited his documents for a favorable verdict, i.e., that supported his claim, in court, and since the other litigant did not believe that he would return, the man said: If I do not come back within thirty days, these documents for a favorable verdict will be void. He was impeded by circumstances beyond his control and did not come back. Rav Huna said: His documents for a favorable verdict are void since he did not return by the specified time.

“Rava said to him: He is a victim of circumstances beyond his control and the halakha is that the Merciful One exempted a victim of circumstances beyond his control from responsibility for his actions, as it is written concerning a young woman who was raped: “But unto the damsel you shall do nothing; there is in the damsel no sin worthy of death” (Deuteronomy 22:26). (This is the case where a married woman is raped and is not culpable for any punishment because she is the victim-gg)

“And if you would say that with regard to the penalty of death, which is extremely severe, the halakha is different, and she is treated leniently and not executed, but with regard to other transgressions one’s actions are treated as deliberate, but didn’t we learn in the mishna here: What are examples of vows whose fulfillment are impeded by circumstances beyond one’s control? If one’s friend took a vow with regard to him that he should eat with him, and he became sick, or his son became sick, or a river that he was unable to cross barred him from coming, these are examples of vows whose fulfillment are impeded by circumstances beyond one’s control; they are not binding and do not require dissolution. This demonstrates that even here the exemption due to circumstances beyond one’s control should apply.” (Sefaria.org translation)

One of the questions the Gemara poses to Rava where at first glance unforeseen circumstances are not taken into account in the final decision concerns a decision by Shmuel. “The Gemara continues to question Rava: In what way is it different from the following case: There was a certain man who said to the agents with whom he entrusted a bill of divorce: If I do not return from now until thirty days have passed, let this be a bill of divorce. He came on the thirtieth day but was prevented from crossing the river by the ferry that was located on the other side of the river, so he did not arrive within the designated time. He said to the people across the river: See that I have arrived, see that I have arrived. And Shmuel said: It is not considered to be an arrival, and the condition is considered to have been fulfilled. The Gemara asks: Why is it not considered an arrival; but he was impeded by circumstances beyond his control?”

Rava has a good answer why this is not really a great example of unforeseen circumstances. “The Gemara responds: Perhaps the case of circumstances beyond one’s control that are apparent to everyone and could have been anticipated ahead of time is different, and a ferry is considered an apparent type of circumstance beyond one’s control (מִיגַּלֵּי אוּנְסֵיהּ), which he should have considered and stipulated explicitly. Since he did not do so, it is not considered a circumstance beyond one’s control.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Let me give you a modern example of anticipated unforeseeable circumstances. We all know that airlines often delay flights or cancel them at the last minute. Once Judy and I went on a cruise leaving from Florida on a Sunday afternoon. We booked a Friday morning flight to Florida to make sure that we would arrive in plenty of time to board the ship. If we waited to the last minute there was a chance we would miss the connection and the ship would leave without us. If one absolutely has to fly somewhere at a certain date and time to make a connection, one would be wise to book an earlier flight because a missed connection would be a predictable unforeseen circumstance.

A predictable unforeseen circumstance is not a good excuse.