Mattos: Bli Neder

What is Judaism's view about nedarim (vows)? Are they good or bad? This article features the explanation of the Ran, and my own take on the phrase "bli neder."

Jul 18, 2014

Click here for a printer-friendly version of this article.

Artwork: *Carnage Altar*, by James Paick

Parashas Mattos: Bli Neder

Pasrashas Mattos opens with the laws of nedarim (vows) and shevuos (oaths). It begins with a single pasuk which is the source of the institution of nedarim: "If a man takes a vow to Hashem, or swears an oath to establish a prohibition upon himself, he shall not desecrate his word; according to whatever comes from his mouth shall he do" (Bamidbar 30:3). The parashah continues with a far more extensive discussion about the laws of revoking nedarim.

The sequence and treatment of this topic in the pesukim reflects the Torah's wary stance when it comes to nedarim. The Torah's position is summed up by the Rambam at the conclusion of Hilchos Nedarim. He begins by identifying the proper use of nedarim:

13:23 - If a person makes nedarim in order to fine-tune his character traits and correct his behavior – this is beautiful and praiseworthy. How so? If a person was a glutton and [took a neder] forbidding himself to eat meat for a year or two; or if a person who was addicted to wine [took a neder] forbidding himself to drink wine for an extended period of time, or [forbidding] himself to ever become intoxicated; likewise, if a person who chased after bribes and was overexcited about wealth [took a neder] forbidding himself to accept gifts or to benefit from people in a certain region; similarly, if a person who was haughty on account of his own beauty took a neder nazir (a nazirite vow); and the same for all similar cases – all of these are paths of avodah la’Shem (divine service). Regarding these nedarim and those like them, the Sages said: “nedarim are a safeguard for prishus detachment from physicality” (Avos 3:13).

While nedarim can be useful if used for the purposes described above, the Torah recognizes the danger they pose. For this reason, the Torah regards nedarim as an extreme measure - a tool to be used only when absolutely necessary. The Rambam continues:

13:24 - Even though these [vows] constitute avodas Hashem, a person should not be excessive in taking prohibitory vows, and he should not get into the habit of making them. Instead, he should he should abstain from those things from which one should abstain without taking a vow.

Rambam concludes these cautionary remarks about nedarim by citing a strongly worded Gemara:

13:25 - The Sages said: "Anyone who makes a vow is considered as though he built a bamah (a private altar)" (Nedarim 22a). And if he transgressed and made a neder, it is a mitzvah to ask a chacham (wise man) to absolve it, so that he will not be faced with a stumbling block.

Building a bamah a serious offense. The question is: How is making a neder comparable to building a bamah? Moreover, the statement cited by the Rambam concludes by saying: "and one who fulfills his neder is considered as though he offered a korban (sacrifice) on [his bamah]." This is even more difficult to understand: even if making a neder is regarded as "bad," isn't failing to fulfill it worse? If so, how can the Gemara imply that making a neder and fulfilling it is worse than making a neder and not fulfilling it?

The Ran addresses both of these questions in his commentary on our Gemara. Here is his explanation:

It seems to me that we compare [one who makes a neder] to one who builds a bamah because the one who makes a neder thinks he is doing a mitzvah. [His reasoning is that] since the Torah prohibited certain things, he is also [following the path of Torah by] prohibiting [additional] things for himself. For this reason, [we tell him] that he is making an error. To the contrary - he is comparable to one who builds a bamah, for even though the Torah commanded us to bring korbanos inside [the Beis ha'Mikdash], it prohibited us from adding to this by building a bamah and bringing korbanos outside [of the Beis ha'Mikdash]. Here, too, even though the Torah prohibited what it prohibited, [nevertheless,] when this person adds to what the Torah prohibited, he is committing an offense. Similarly, [the Sages] said in Talmud Yerushalmi: "Isn't it enough what the Torah prohibited you, that you must go and prohibit additional things for yourself?" This is the same reason why it uses the expression of "[bringing] a korban [on a bamah]": since his korban is not favorable [in God's eyes], it is tantamount to him building a bamah and sacrificing a korban outside [of the Beis ha'Mikdash].

The Ran learns that this Gemara is only talking about someone who makes a neder which is not designed "in order to fine-tune his character traits and correct his behavior" or "as a safeguard for restraint." This individual believes that there is an inherent value in obeying the Torah's prohibitions - that restricting oneself is valuable in and of itself, not as a means of perfecting oneself. Consequently, to his mind, the more prohibitions there are to follow, the more opportunities for avodas Hashem. And since the Torah offers a mechanism by which he can create extra prohibitions, he will be able to increase his reward even more. All he has to do is make and follow more nedarim.

According to the Ran, the Gemara's comparison to building a bamah is intended to highlight the mistake made by such an individual. Just as korbanos, per se, do not constitute avodas Hashem - or else He would have permitted them to be offered outside of the Beis ha'Mikdash - so too, keeping prohibitions, per se, is not avodas Hashem. And just as the only korbanos which find favor in God's eyes are those which are brought within the framework and parameters the Torah system, so too, the only nedarim which find favor in God's eyes are those which facilitate the Torah's objectives.

Now we can understand why fulfilling such a neder is like offering a korban on a bamah. If a person builds a bamah, he has definitely acted improperly, but at least he hasn't violated the major Torah prohibition of offering korbanos outside of the Beis ha'Mikdash - an act which is not only punishable by kareis (spiritual excision), but also diminishes the sanctity of the Beis ha'Mikdash as the exclusive location for avodas ha'korbanos (the sacrificial service). Likewise, a person who makes an unnecessary neder is certainly acting improperly, but if he fails to fulfill it, then even though he violates a Torah prohibition, at least he hasn't actually augmented his avodas Hashem by creating and keeping his own prohibitions. In contrast, someone who makes unnecessary nedarim and religiously adheres to them in the same way he adheres to the laws of the Torah - such a person has diminished the sanctity of Hashem's perfect Torah by diluting the avodah-system commanded therein with his own, personal expressions of religiosity. From a halachic standpoint, a person who keeps his unnecessary nedarim is better off, but from a philosophical standpoint, he has caused more harm to his soul that a person who violated his nedarim.

There is a widespread practice of saying "bli neder" when making statements of commitment. Some people do this as a precaution against unintentionally obligating themselves nedarim, while others just do it out of habit. This is not the place to conduct an analysis of this practice. However, I have a suggestion to make. Whenever you say or hear the phrase "bli neder," think of it as an opportunity to review this idea about nedarim. Regardless of the intent of the speaker, the words "bli neder" express the Torah's philosophy of vow-making, namely, that we should strive to keep Torah without feeling the need to invent our own stringencies. "The Torah of Hashem is perfect" (Tehilim 19:8).

What do you think of the Ran’s explanation, or my elucidation of the Ran’s explanation? Do you have another approach you’d like to share? Let me know in the comments!

The Rabbi Schneeweiss Substack

Discussion about this post