וְאִם־הָי֤וֹ תִֽהְיֶה֙ לְאִ֔ישׁ וּנְדָרֶ֖יהָ עָלֶ֑יהָ א֚וֹ מִבְטָ֣א שְׂפָתֶ֔יהָ אֲשֶׁ֥ר אָסְרָ֖ה עַל־נַפְשָֽׁהּ׃
И если она выйдет замуж за мужа, когда ее клятвы на ней или ясное высказывание ее уст, которыми она связала свою душу;
Rabbeinu Bahya
This is also mentioned in Midrash Tehillim on Psalm 68,6 (on verse 11 in that Psalm) on the words א-ד-נ-י יתן אומר המבשרות צבא רב. “The Lord gives a command; the women who bring the news are a great host.” When G’d (attribute גבורה) spoke His words, the sound was split into seven voices which in turned were subdivided into seventy voices, i.e. the seventy languages of the seventy nations to enable all of them to hear part of G’d’s voice. The process may be compared to a person who strikes an anvil and sparks fly in all directions. This is the meaning of the words המבשרות צבא רב.
Having understood this it is possible to understand the mystical dimensions of שבועה and נדר, commonly translated as “oath” and “vow” respectively. The word שבועה is derived from the word שבע, “seven,” whereas the word נדר is related to the three emanations “above” the seven represented by the קולות ה' as we described previously. A נדר ranks higher in Jewish law than an oath, שבועה. Seeing that the Torah (in its aspect as a Book of laws) does not concern itself with matters beyond the seven lower emanations and the Torah itself is a product of those seven emanations, it makes sense that in Jewish law an oath would never be overriding one of the already existing Torah commandments, i.e. someone who swore an oath not to observe one or several of the Torah’s commandments would not thereby have obligated himself to keep his oath. Any such oath is as if the person who uttered it had not said anything.
Regarding a נדר the matter is quite different, seeing that basically the concept ofנדר emanates from a domain higher than the lower seven emanations. In principle, a נדר, a vow of a certain type, is able to override a מצוה. The very wording which our sages have assigned to the respective formulations of vows and oaths reflect their legal status in Jewish law. By definition, a נדר is unlimited, i.e. person says “I accept for myself a certain duty,“ such as when David said in Psalms 56,13 עלי אלו-הים נדרך אשלם “it is up to me to pay my vows to You G’d.” There was no time-limit to that obligation, nor was there any kind of contingency which might have rendered the vow as invalid. The word נדר is related to דירה dwelling, as I will explain in greater detail on Numbers 30,3. David understands that the obligation to fulfill his vow is not contingent on pre-existing contrary obligations which would invalidate it. The same is the case in Numbers 30,7 where the Torah describes the absolute duty of a woman, who has not had a husband or the authority of a father who could have objected to her vow at the time she made it, to make good on her vow. When we will discuss the third of the Ten Commandments, I will elaborate on the seriousness of the failure to keep an oath and how it is related to the seven emanations, while in Numbers 30,3 I will discuss the difference between that prohibition and the sin of not honoring a vow one has made. Seeing that I have explained some basic principles of the Torah here I will not need to elaborate on these principles again.
Having understood this it is possible to understand the mystical dimensions of שבועה and נדר, commonly translated as “oath” and “vow” respectively. The word שבועה is derived from the word שבע, “seven,” whereas the word נדר is related to the three emanations “above” the seven represented by the קולות ה' as we described previously. A נדר ranks higher in Jewish law than an oath, שבועה. Seeing that the Torah (in its aspect as a Book of laws) does not concern itself with matters beyond the seven lower emanations and the Torah itself is a product of those seven emanations, it makes sense that in Jewish law an oath would never be overriding one of the already existing Torah commandments, i.e. someone who swore an oath not to observe one or several of the Torah’s commandments would not thereby have obligated himself to keep his oath. Any such oath is as if the person who uttered it had not said anything.
Regarding a נדר the matter is quite different, seeing that basically the concept ofנדר emanates from a domain higher than the lower seven emanations. In principle, a נדר, a vow of a certain type, is able to override a מצוה. The very wording which our sages have assigned to the respective formulations of vows and oaths reflect their legal status in Jewish law. By definition, a נדר is unlimited, i.e. person says “I accept for myself a certain duty,“ such as when David said in Psalms 56,13 עלי אלו-הים נדרך אשלם “it is up to me to pay my vows to You G’d.” There was no time-limit to that obligation, nor was there any kind of contingency which might have rendered the vow as invalid. The word נדר is related to דירה dwelling, as I will explain in greater detail on Numbers 30,3. David understands that the obligation to fulfill his vow is not contingent on pre-existing contrary obligations which would invalidate it. The same is the case in Numbers 30,7 where the Torah describes the absolute duty of a woman, who has not had a husband or the authority of a father who could have objected to her vow at the time she made it, to make good on her vow. When we will discuss the third of the Ten Commandments, I will elaborate on the seriousness of the failure to keep an oath and how it is related to the seven emanations, while in Numbers 30,3 I will discuss the difference between that prohibition and the sin of not honoring a vow one has made. Seeing that I have explained some basic principles of the Torah here I will not need to elaborate on these principles again.
Rabbeinu Bahya
ואשה כי תדור, “and if a woman makes a vow, etc.” A female of twelve years and over is called אשה, “a woman.” Her vows and oaths are legally valid. If she is between 11 and 12 years of age she is presumed to be a minor though she is examined if she understands the implication of a vow or an oath. If she does, she is subject to the same rules as a male between the ages of 12 and thirteen. If she is less than eleven years old she is a minor in all respects of the law. Her pronouncements have no legal standing whatever. If a female is over 12 years of age or a male over 13 years of age their vows or oaths are legally binding even if they did not know to whom [i.e. that this involves an undertaking vis-a vis G’d. Ed.] they made such commitments (Maimonides Hilchot Nedarim 11,1-3).
This entire paragraph reveals many important laws concerning vows and oaths in very few words. The legal status of women concerning vows may be divided into four categories: 1) A נערה, girl between the age of 12-12 years and six months; 2) An ארוסה, a girl betrothed but not yet having moved in with her husband. 3) A married woman (after חופה); 4) A widow. When a נערה has a father she remains under his legal control and her father can invalidate her vows on the day he hears about them but not later. The logic behind this is that she would have attached a mental rider to her vow that her father would approve of it. If she finds that she was mistaken and her father objected upon hearing of it, her vow was never valid in the first place. The same logic does not apply to vows undertaken by a male of corresponding age. Just as the father is legally empowered to sell the services of his daughter to a stranger, an entitlement which does not extend to selling the services of his son, so the father is also legally entitled to countermand vows made by a daughter not yet fully of age.
When such a נערה has attained the age of 12 years and six months she is considered adult in all legal respects and no longer under her father’s legal control (Niddah 47). She is fully responsible for all her vows and oaths, the same as a widowed woman or a divorcee. The words of verse 10: כל אשר אסרה על נפשה יקום עליה, “everything she has prohibited upon herself- shall remain upon her,” apply to such a 12 and a half year old single girl. If, while under the age limit, she made a vow and her father annulled it on the day he heard of it, it is as invalid as if it had never been uttered. When the Torah adds the words וה' יסלח לה, that “the Lord will forgive her,” the sages reasoned that these words are applicable when the girl who had made the vow is in need of forgiveness, such as when she violated her vow being unaware that her father had already canceled it (Niddah 47). Obviously, if someone commits what he or she perceives to be a violation of G’d’s law they are in need of forgiveness even if technically, for reasons unknown to them they did not commit a sin.
As to the woman who has been betrothed. The Torah speaks here about a woman who prior to her betrothal made a vow or swore an oath and who enters the first stage of her marriage with such vows still valid. The Torah, by employing the words, ואם היו תהיה לאיש indicates that the girl (under 12 and a half years old) has not yet completely left her father’s domain and also has not yet come under the domain of her husband concerning his interest in the matter. Her father and husband-to-be must both annul her vows in order for such an annulment to be legally valid. This is what we learned in Nedarim 66 seeing that we presume that when she made the vow she mentally resolved that it would be with the approval of both her father and her husband-to-be. Both her father and her husband-to-be have to hear it on the same day in order for both of them together to be able to annul it. The Talmud adds, that if the fiance of the betrothed girl dies before she reaches the age of maturity and she had moved into her husband’s home (after חופה), she reverts to her father’s domain and he can cancel her vows as if she had made them before she was married. If her father died prior to her having become fully married, (חופה), her husband cannot annul her vows until after she is fully married to him (Maimonides Hilchot Nedarim 11,10).
This entire paragraph reveals many important laws concerning vows and oaths in very few words. The legal status of women concerning vows may be divided into four categories: 1) A נערה, girl between the age of 12-12 years and six months; 2) An ארוסה, a girl betrothed but not yet having moved in with her husband. 3) A married woman (after חופה); 4) A widow. When a נערה has a father she remains under his legal control and her father can invalidate her vows on the day he hears about them but not later. The logic behind this is that she would have attached a mental rider to her vow that her father would approve of it. If she finds that she was mistaken and her father objected upon hearing of it, her vow was never valid in the first place. The same logic does not apply to vows undertaken by a male of corresponding age. Just as the father is legally empowered to sell the services of his daughter to a stranger, an entitlement which does not extend to selling the services of his son, so the father is also legally entitled to countermand vows made by a daughter not yet fully of age.
When such a נערה has attained the age of 12 years and six months she is considered adult in all legal respects and no longer under her father’s legal control (Niddah 47). She is fully responsible for all her vows and oaths, the same as a widowed woman or a divorcee. The words of verse 10: כל אשר אסרה על נפשה יקום עליה, “everything she has prohibited upon herself- shall remain upon her,” apply to such a 12 and a half year old single girl. If, while under the age limit, she made a vow and her father annulled it on the day he heard of it, it is as invalid as if it had never been uttered. When the Torah adds the words וה' יסלח לה, that “the Lord will forgive her,” the sages reasoned that these words are applicable when the girl who had made the vow is in need of forgiveness, such as when she violated her vow being unaware that her father had already canceled it (Niddah 47). Obviously, if someone commits what he or she perceives to be a violation of G’d’s law they are in need of forgiveness even if technically, for reasons unknown to them they did not commit a sin.
As to the woman who has been betrothed. The Torah speaks here about a woman who prior to her betrothal made a vow or swore an oath and who enters the first stage of her marriage with such vows still valid. The Torah, by employing the words, ואם היו תהיה לאיש indicates that the girl (under 12 and a half years old) has not yet completely left her father’s domain and also has not yet come under the domain of her husband concerning his interest in the matter. Her father and husband-to-be must both annul her vows in order for such an annulment to be legally valid. This is what we learned in Nedarim 66 seeing that we presume that when she made the vow she mentally resolved that it would be with the approval of both her father and her husband-to-be. Both her father and her husband-to-be have to hear it on the same day in order for both of them together to be able to annul it. The Talmud adds, that if the fiance of the betrothed girl dies before she reaches the age of maturity and she had moved into her husband’s home (after חופה), she reverts to her father’s domain and he can cancel her vows as if she had made them before she was married. If her father died prior to her having become fully married, (חופה), her husband cannot annul her vows until after she is fully married to him (Maimonides Hilchot Nedarim 11,10).
Rabbeinu Bahya
לא תעלו עליו קטרת זרה, “You must not offer on it alien incense, etc.” There is a warning contained in this verse not to offer any other sacrifice on the altar before the incense has been offered. Not even other incense offerings by individuals or groups must be offered before the daily incense offerings prescribed by the Torah to be offered on behalf of the whole people by the High Priest. Most certainly no other sacrifices of any kind are to precede the incense offering. Anyone who contravenes this instruction is guilty of violating one of the 365 negative commandments of the Torah [although such offerings are offered on a different altar, the one in the courtyard. Ed.].
ועולה, “or a burnt-offering.” Even merely a libation of water as an offering is prohibited before the incense is offered. The precise time frame legislated by the Torah as the correct one for offering the incense is the time when the oil (of the Menorah) starts cooling. We know this from the words in verse 7 בבקר בבקר בהיטיבו את הנרות יקטירנו, “every morning when he cleans out the lamps he shall bring it up in smoke.” This verse is followed by similar instructions concerning the evening portion of the incense offering. This may be the reason that Solomon characterized the oil and the incense as things which cause the heart to rejoice (Proverbs 27,9).
ועולה, “or a burnt-offering.” Even merely a libation of water as an offering is prohibited before the incense is offered. The precise time frame legislated by the Torah as the correct one for offering the incense is the time when the oil (of the Menorah) starts cooling. We know this from the words in verse 7 בבקר בבקר בהיטיבו את הנרות יקטירנו, “every morning when he cleans out the lamps he shall bring it up in smoke.” This verse is followed by similar instructions concerning the evening portion of the incense offering. This may be the reason that Solomon characterized the oil and the incense as things which cause the heart to rejoice (Proverbs 27,9).