Nolad

Nedarim (9:6) | Yisrael Bankier | 8 months ago

How can one undo a neder? The Mishnah explains that a person must go to a Chacham who can matir the neder based on a petach. In other words, the Chacham needs to find some detail, that had it been considered at the time of the neder, it would have stopped the person from making the neder. On that basis, the neder may be undone.

The Mishnah (9:2) however records a debate regarding whether nolad can be a basis for a petach. This refers to a consideration that only arose after the time of the neder. Had the person known that the circumstance would have changed, he would have never made the neder. One example is if one made a neder against deriving any benefit from an individual. That person then trained as a sofer and the person that made the neder now requires his services. R' Eliezer maintains that that even such cases can form the basis of a petach whereas the Chachamim disagree.

The Rosh explains that the reason the Chachamim disagree is because when one is matir a neder it is based on a regret, which uproots the neder from its beginning. It can do so because the regret defines the neder as a mistaken neder. Considering that it goes back to that point in time when the neder was made, nolad, this unlikely development, would not have been a consideration that would have stopped him from making the neder. Consequently it cannot act as a petach.

The Rambam (Shevuot 6:12) however explains the issue of nolad differently. He explains that in the case of nolad, the person does not regret making the neder. The person would be very happy for the neder to continue and the subject of the neder not having become a sofer. In other words, a matir must be based on regretting the neder. In this case the person is upset about the development and not the neder. The Rambam however adds that if he regretted the neder itself (without the probing of a Chacham) as a result of the development then we would be able to matir the neder.

The Kesef Mishnah explain that the last statement of the Rambam was motivated by the Gemara in Ketubat (63a). There the Gemara explains that the Kalba Savua made a neder forbidding R' Akiva from deriving any benefit from him, after R' Akiva married his daughter. At the time R' Akiva was a simple shepherd. After R' Akiva returned having become the giant of the generation, R' Akiva asked Kalba Savua whether he would have made the neder had he know who R' Akiva would become. Based on his confirming that he would have never made the neder, R' Akiva was matir the neder. The difficulty with this Gemara is that it appears to be a classic case of nolad, upon which one cannot matir a neder.

The Kesef Mishnah explains that the Rambam's distinction above answers this question. In this case, the development made Kalba Savua regret the neder itself. He did not regret the development that R' Akiva became a great sage. Quite the opposite. Kalba Savua would have been very happy for his son-in-law to became this great person and would preferred to give to him.

The Ritva however brings two different answers. The first is that Kalba Savua had responded that even if R' Akiva knew one perek or one halacha he never would have made the neder. At the time of the neder R' Akiva already knew that minimal amount, so the heter was not relying on nolad. The second answer is that Rachel was only willing to marry R' Akiva on condition that he would become a talmid chacham. Had Kalba Savua knew that that was the sincere condition he never would have made the neder.

The Tosfot however explain that this case is not nolad because he was committed to going to learn Torah and someone who goes will become great in Torah. Since the results was certain at the time of the neder it is not defined as nolad.

Download