Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai still disagree TB Nedarim 71

Today’s daf marks the end of the third year of my journey through the Talmud. Only another 4 ½ years before I will finish this dafyomi cycle .I’ve learned a lot and am looking forward to continue learn as I make my way throughout Shas.

חֲזַק חֲזַק וְנִתְחַזֵּק

Although today’s daf TB Nedarim 71 is short, the Ron does a deep dive analyzing it. The Mishnah says: “If she took a vow as a betrothed woman and then was divorced on the same day, and she was again betrothed on the same day to another man, or even to one hundred men, one after the other, on a single day, her father and her last husband nullify her vows.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Shmuel teaches a new innovation. Whether the first arus (the husband who went through the first stage of marriage erusin, but not the second stage of nesuin-gg) knew about the vow or not, any subsequent arus may join the father and dissolve the vow. “: From where do we derive that her final betrothed can nullify her vows that were disclosed to the first betrothed? Shmuel said that the verse states: “And if she be to a husband and her vows are upon her…and he nullifies her vow” (Numbers 30:7–9), indicating that he can nullify vows that were upon her already. The Gemara asks: Perhaps this statement applies only to vows that were not discerned by the first betrothed, but vows that were discerned by the first betrothed, the final betrothed cannot nullify. “The phrase “upon her” is a superfluous part of the verse. One can derive from it that all her vows, including those of which an earlier betrothed had been aware, can be nullified by the final betrothed.” (Sefaria.org translation)

The Gemara then brings a baraita to support Shmuel and that triggers the Ron’s deep dive. The baraita brings two cases which the Ron extensively analyzes.

(Case #1) “It is taught in a baraita in accordance with the opinion of Shmuel: With regard to a betrothed young woman, her father and her husband (arus) together nullify her vows. How so? If her father heard and nullified the vow for her, and the husband (arus) did not manage to hear it before he died, and she was betrothed on the same day to another man, or even one hundred times on the same day, her father and her final husband (arus) nullify her vows.”

(Case #2) “If her husband (arus) heard and nullified the vow for her, and the father did not manage to hear it before the husband (arus) died, the father may go back and nullify the husband’s portion.”

Then Rabbi Natan comments “Rabbi Natan said: This is the statement of Beit Shammai, that each of them nullifies half of the betrothed young woman’s vow. However, Beit Hillel say that the father cannot nullify the vow on his own.” (Sefaria.org translation)

We learned previously that Beit Shammai understands that both the arus and the father each control 50% of the ability to annul the vow (מִיגָּז גָּיֵיז) and Beit Hillel holds that both the husband and the arus each control 100% of the ability to annul the vow. When one of them first dissolves the vow, the vow is weakened. To annul the vow clearly the other one must land a “knockout punch” by dissolving the vow as well (מִקְלָישׁ קָלֵישׁ). Beit Shammai’s position that the vow is severed into two (מִיגָּז גָּיֵיז), the father alone still can annul the vow when the arus is dead. Beit Hillel just holds that the vow is weakened (מִקְלָישׁ קָלֵישׁ) and the father alone now can no longer dissolve it.

The Ron ד"ה  אָבִיהָ וּבַעְלָהּ הָאַחֲרוֹן מְפִירִין נְדָרֶיהָ is puzzled why some Rishonim believe that Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai only disagree in case #2, but agree in case #1. Although Beit Hillel agrees with the outcome, he still holds onto the principle that the vow is weakened (מִקְלָישׁ קָלֵישׁ. The share of the dead arus cannot be inherited by the father because each own 100% of the ability to annul the vow. Since the vow is weakened it can’t be transferred back to the father. But in case #1 there is a brand new arus. Arus #2 replaces the dead arus #1. Even though the vows annulment was weakened, arus #2 and the father together can annul the vow. This is different than Beit Shammai’s approach who holds that the father inherits the deceased arus 50% share. Now he doesn’t need a second arus to join with him and annul the vow.