Oaths, Vows and The Traveller's Prayer

 

In this short chapter, Rav Ganzfried touches on the vast subject of oaths and vows.  Our Sages distinguished two main kinds of vow: shevua and neder. 

 

In a shevua one swears to perform (or renounce) an ACTION. A person may swear to eat a particular food, to go to a particular place, or to avoid a particular person, and so on.

 

A neder applies to a particular OBJECT. One may vow to prohibit a particular kind of food, designating it as sacred property.  Just as we have the ability to sanctify (and thus forbid) something by designating it a sacrifice or dedicating it to the Temple, so, too, we have the ability to make our property forbidden directly through a neder (Nedarim 2b).

 

Although we encounter them only seldom, oaths and vows are an important part of our religion.  The prohibition of taking God's name in vain, which forbids vain oaths, is the third of the ten commandments.  The only commandments which precede it, affirm faith in Hashem and utterly reject and deny other gods.  Our Sages tell us that when this command was given on Mount Sinai, the entire world shuddered with awe (Shavuot 39a).  Indeed, as Rav Ganzfried points out (se'if 4), our entire commitment to upholding the Torah is considered an oath - we are "sworn from Mount Sinai" (Yoma 73b, Nedarim 8a et al).

 

The power of oaths and vows derives from the fact that they invoke God's name.

 

In many places in Judaism we attach importance to God's  name.  Upon hearing a blessing we bless Hashem as well as His name (see chapter 6); acting in an un-Godly way is called "desecrating His name"; swearing falsely or vainly is considered disrespect to His name.  We explained in chapter 17 that the ability to call something a name corresponds with the ability to distinguish it and, to some extent, to know it.  Our entire ability to worship and serve Hashem bases itself on the fact that He has a Name - a revealed and expressed will relevant to us.

 

Vows and oaths predicate the integrity of our own words upon faith in Hashem.  Therefore, swearing to the truth of something is expected to make others believe us.  This equation obviously involves an awesome responsibility: Our faith in Hashem is the basis of our existence, but human beings are by nature unreliable. 

 

Hashem enables us to assume this frightening responsibility, but not without warning to use it with extreme care.  Equating faith in human intentions with faith in God's name may have the effect of INCREASING our credibility, but it is just as likely to have opposite effect - DECREASING faith in Hashem's name, God forbid.  This is why Rashi (Devarim 6:13, citing Midrash Rabba), explains that only people of exceptional piety ought to swear.

 

 

BUILDING AN ALTAR

 

In se'if 1, Rav Ganzfried (based on Yevamot 109b) likens taking an oath with building a private altar.  Although there were periods when private altars were permitted outside the Tabernacle, the Torah strictly forbids offering on such a private altar once the Temple reaches its permanent home  (Megilla 10a).

 

An analogy is as follows: A pious person longs to demonstrate his devotion to God by making offerings and by foregoing worldly pleasures.  When there is no unique, permanent convention for offerings and prohibitions, then each person must decide for himself the manner and extent of his own devotions.  Now that Hashem has given us the Sanctuary and the Torah to govern our devotion, private initiative is no longer appreciated.  God knows best how He is to be served! The only vows encouraged are those which stimulate us to perform devotions which are ALREADY obligatory (se'ifim 4 and 5).

 

A person who has made a neder but has not yet fulfilled it is like someone who has built an altar but has not yet offered on it.  He has designated his own private way of serving Hashem, outside the boundaries established by the Sages, but he has yet to actually perform this service.  Therefore, there is still time to annul the neder.

 

ANNULLING A VOW

 

Given the immense responsibility a person takes upon himself by making a neder or shevua, it is remarkable that it is not only permissible but also praiseworthy to evade this responsibility by annulling the vow, as explained in se'if 8.  Indeed, the Mishna (Chagiga 10a) remarks that this practice is "suspended in air."  Were it not for the tradition that oaths can be annulled, we would find it difficult to reconcile this practice with the Scriptures.

 

Here is one way of understanding this enigmatic practice:

 

A person who makes a vow in effect creates a new obligation or prohibition with the full force of a Torah commandment, since the Torah commands us not to desecrate our oaths (Bamidbar 30:3).  This ability parallels in many ways the power granted to the Sages of each time and place to institute Rabbinical commandments in response to contemporary situations.  This authority also has Scriptural backing, as the Torah commands us not to deviate from the rulings of the Sages (Devarim 17:11).

 

In other words, just as the leaders of each community may legislate as demanded by the special COMMUNAL needs, so too, the individual may create private decrees or vows as dictated by PERSONAL needs.

 

However, the Torah rulings accepted in a particular community may sometimes be reconsidered by a greater scholar or tribunal (beit din).  The great Torah leaders and tribunals often reassess the propriety of various customs. In this case, the authority consulted will weigh the propriety of the ruling for the community itself, as well as its reconciliation to the customs of the Jewish community at large.  Up until the time a greater authority is consulted, the rulings of appropriate appointed local Torah authorities are certainly binding, but after a ruling is given, the local authorities invariably defer to the authority of world-renowned Rabbis or tribunals (such as the "Committee of the Four Lands" in sixteenth-century Europe).

 

While the authority given by the Torah to the local Rabbi is an awesome one, he has an awesome responsibility not to exceed or misuse this authority as well.  To the extent that he suspects that his ruling is at odds with his goal of upholding the Torah and its values within his congregation, it is praiseworthy for him to turn to a higher authority for reexamination.

 

This parallels the ability and responsibility given to the individual to discuss his vow with a Beit Din or a renowned Torah scholar, to see if changing circumstances undermine his original private "ruling" inappropriate.  This approach explains why the rules of annulling vows parallel in many respects the rules of judgment in a Rabbinical court.

 

 

WHICH VOWS SHOULD BE RELEASED?

 

The Rabbi or Beit Din consulted must decide if it is proper to annul the vow in question.  They may decide, on the contrary, to uphold the vow.  The early commentators frequently explain that interference with a person's service of G-d stands as the best reason for releasing a vow.  Fasting may harm a person's Torah study; avoiding certain foods may detract from the joy of Shabbat and festivals; et al.  We pointed out that vows are approved if they aid us in God's service.  Thus, logically we are especially willing to release them if they interfere with this service.

 

VOWS OF A MINOR

 

Throughout the Torah, a boy is considered an adult only when he turns thirteen and a girl when she reaches twelve.  Before this age, youngsters are treated as though they have insufficient judgement to be fully obligated in commandments or to bear responsibility for their own affairs.  In se'if 9 Rav Ganzfried explains that vows are an exception to this rule.  The vows of a twelve-year-old boy or an eleven-year-old girl are valid if we verify that they understand their commitment.

 

With regard to other mitzvot, our ability to assume obligation depends on our ability to conform our private, INTERNAL needs and desires to those obligations. Examples include the commitment to keep the Torah or the responsibility attendant on making a purchase or sale, both of which apply only to adults according to Torah law.

 

In the case of vows, however, we have suggested that the ability to assume the obligation of the vow stems primarily from an evaluation of the personal situation ALONE.  It is an application of "to thine own self be true."  It makes sense that our ability to evaluate our own situation precedes our ability to conform to external demands.

 

 

CHAPTER 68 - THE WAYFARER'S PRAYER

 

In the beginning of this chapter, Rav Ganzfried explains the rules of the "tefillat haderekh" - the special wayfarer's prayer said when travelling.  The wording of the prayer basically asks Hashem to protect us from the dangers of travelling and bring us safely to our destination.

 

Part of the motivation for this prayer is the actual risk of travelling.  Even today, travelling is one of the more dangerous things we do routinely, mostly due to the risk of auto accidents.  In the time of the Sages the risks from ambush, highwaymen, beasts, hunger etc. were greater.  This aspect is emphasized by the Yerushalmi (Berakhot 4:4).

 

Yet, many things we do are more dangerous than crossing an unsettled area in a car or plane, but do not merit a special blessing.  For instance, there is no special benediction before undergoing surgery, even though dangerous medical procedures were certainly common in the time of the Sages.

 

Indeed, our Talmud does not mention danger at all in the context of the traveler's prayer.  The obligation is introduced by the following story:

 

"Eliyahu [the Prophet] said to Rav Yehuda brother of Rav Sala Chasida, 'Don't come to anger and you won't come to sin; don't become drunk and you won't come to sin; and when you go on a trip, consult with your Maker and then go.'" (Berakhot 29b)

 

Eliyahu mentions three things: anger, drunkenness, and travel.  All of these things make a person forget himself, and do things he would normally avoid.  Anger and drunkenness are always improper, and Eliyahu warns against them unequivocally.  Travel, on the other hand, sometimes becomes necessary.  Thus, in this case the proper course is to consult with Hashem, i.e. recite the travelers' prayer, and thereby to remember Who accompanies us on our journey.

 

This reminds us that one of the most important dangers of travel is the SPIRITUAL danger.  When we travel, we tend to be tired, and therefore less vigilant in performing God's will; we are in unfamiliar surroundings and may find it difficult to keep mitzvot; we are anonymous, and so our usual sense of shame when deviating from the commandments may be lessened.

 

In response, Rav Ganzfried urges us to study on the way, to keep God's service in mind (se'if 6), to bring necessary mitzva objects with us (se'if 6), to be careful about kosher food on the way (se'if 7), to have someone accompany us on the beginning of our journey, to lessen our sense of isolation (se'if 6).  If we are careful to say the tefillat ha-derekh, we will be sure to recall Who is sending us on our journey, and Who is responsible for our success and safe return.