1)

(a)The Tana rules that someone who undertakes to pay his weight to Hekdesh in silver or in gold - must do whatever he said.

(b)He mentions silver or gold - from which we can extrapolate that, if the Noder did not specify any commodity in particular, he can give the weight of anything that is generally weighed ...

(c)... even of pitch or onions.

2)

(a)When, undertaking to pay her daughter's weight, the mother of Yirmatyah came to Yerushalayim - they made her pay her weight in gold ...

(b)... according to her financial status.

(c)For the story to comply with the Mishnah, we need to add - 'If the Noder is an important person, then we assess him accordingly'.

3)

(a)Rebbi Yehudah explains the procedure of a person who undertakes to pay Hekdesh the weight of his 'Yad'. The Noder cannot simply place his arm on a scale - because he can press hard or softly at will and the weight shown will not be genuine.

(b)The first thing he must therefore do is - to place his arm up to the elbow into a barrel of water that is full to the brim ...

(c)... not just the hand - because that is how people used to define a Yad (and Nedarim always go after the way people speak).

4)

(a)He then places into the barrel of water - flesh and sinews and bones of a donkey (See Tosfos Yom Tov) until the barrel is once again filled.

(b)Specifically of a donkey - whose weight corresponds to that of a human (See Tosfos Yom Tov) ...

(c)... and he finally pays - the value of that flesh, bones and sinews to Hekdesh.

5)

(a)Rebbi Yossi objects to Rebbi Yehudah's ruling - inasmuch as it is impossible to assess the proportion of flesh, sinews and bones that is equivalent to the Noder's arm (See Tosfos Yom Tov).

(b)According to him therefore, one assesses the Noder's obligation - by speculation.

(c)The Halachah is - like Rebbi Yossi.

6)

(a)The Mishnah assesses how much a person who declares 'D'mei Yadi alai!' has to pay Hekdesh - by working out how much he is worth with his hand and how much he is worth without it.

(b)This cannot mean that we evaluate him with a hand severed and with the hand intact, and he pays the difference - because when one sees a person with his hand cut-off, one assesses him cheaply (for less than his real value) on account of his looks.

(c)What 'minus a hand' therefore means is - assuming that his first master sold all of him but for one hand to a second master.

7)

(a)When the Tana says that this is a Chumra that Nedarim has over Erchin, he means that if somebody says 'Erech Yadi alai!' - he is Patur ...

(b)... because Erchin does not apply to part of a person without which he can live.

(c)The Chumra he presents that Erchin has over Nedarim is that - if someone declares 'Erki alai' and dies, the heirs remain obligated to pay Hekdesh their deceased father's Erech (provided Beis-Din already obligated him to pay before he died), bearing in mind that 'Erchin' is a fixed amount and requires no further assessment.

(d)We learn from the Pasuk "ve'He'emido lifnei ha'Kohen" that - the Ma'arich is only Chayav to pay after the Ne'erach has stood before the Kohen ([See Tosfos Yom Tov]).

(e)They are not obligated to pay their father's Damim under the same circumstances - because a dead person has no intrinsic value.

8)

(a)We learned earlier that someone who declares 'Erech Yadi' or 'Erech Ragli alai' is Patur from paying anything. In the event that he declares 'Erech Roshi' or 'Erech Keveidi alai!' - he is obligated to pay his full Erech ...

(b)... based on the principle that - Erchin takes effect on any part of the body without which one cannot live.

9)

(a)The Mishnah rules that if someone declares 'Chatzi Erki alai' - he must pay half his Erech to Hekdesh; 'Erech Chetzyi alai' - he must pay his full Erech ...

(b)... because it is like 'Erech Roshi or Keveidi alai' (since he cannot live without half of himself), as we learned in the previous Mishnah.

(c)The Tana issues the identical dual ruling - where he declares 'Chatzi Dami' and D'mei Chetzyi' ...

(d)... and he learn this from the Pasuk "Neder be'Erkcha Nefashos" - which compares Damim to Erchin (See Tosfos Yom Tov).

(e)When the Tana concludes with the principle 'Davar she'ha'Neshamah Teluyah bo, Nosein Erech Kulo', he is coming to include - a case where the Noder declares the Damim of half a limb without which one cannot live (such as 'D'mei Chatzi Libi alai' [See Tosfos Yom Tov]).

10)

(a)The Mishnah now rules that if Reuven declares 'Erko shel P'loni alai, and Reuven or the Ne'erach dies - his heirs are Chayav to pay Hekdesh ...

(b)They are Chayav in the latter case - on condition that the Ne'erach was assessed before his death (as we learned above).

(c)In the event that he declares 'Damav shel P'loni alai!' however - they are Chayav if their father dies, but Patur if the Nidar dies ...

(d)... since a dead person has no intrinsic value (as we already learned).

11)

(a)In a case where someone declares 'Shor Zeh Olah' or 'Bayis Zeh Korban' and the former dies or the latter collapses, the Mishnah rules that - the owner is not obligated to fulfill his Neder.

(b)In the latter case ...

1. ... when the Tana mentions 'Korban' he means - 'Kodshei Bedek ha'Bayis'.

2. ... he must be talking where the house collapsed before the Gizbar acquired it (See Tosfos Yom Tov DH 've'Nafal ha'Bayis ...') - because if it collapsed afterwards, it is obvious.

(c)In the same case, only where he declared 'D'mei Shor Zeh alai Olah' (See Tosfos Yom Tov DH 'D'mei Shor ... ') or 'D'mei Bayis Zeh Korban', the Tana rules that - he is Chayav to pay Hekdesh.

(d)In the case of the ox we do not apply the principle 'Ein Damim le'Meisim' - because it is confined to Adam exclusively.

12)

(a)When the Mishnah says 'Chayvei Arachim Memashk'nin osam', it means that - if the Ma'arich (See Tosfos Yom Tov) does not pay immediately, the Gizbar comes to his house and takes a security from him.

(b)On the other hand, the Tana rules that 'Chayvei Chata'os va'Ashamos Ein Memashk'nin osam' - because, since they come to atone, they will not delay bringing them, in which case a Mashkon is not necessary.

(c)The only Chatas that does warrant a Mashkon is - a Chatas Nazir ...

(d)... because it does not come to atone.

(e)Nor do we assume that he is bound to bring it straightaway in order to drink wine (or to become Tamei Meis [See Tosfos Yom Tov]) - because any of the three Korbanos that he brings will achieve the same thing.

13)

(a)The Tana says that - one does take a Mashkon from Chayvei Olos and Shelamim.

(b)Olos atone for - Chayvei Asei and for Chayvei La'avin she'Nitak la'Asei' ...

(c)... and the reason that they take a Mashkon from them is - because, due to the fact that they are not obligatory, the owner does not consider it a Kaparah and might well delay bringing them.

(d)On the other hand, one does not take a Mashkon for Olas Metzora - because, although it does not come to atone, it is crucial to the Metzora's Taharah.

14)

(a)In connection with Beis-Din taking a Mashkon, the Tana learns from the word "li'Retzono" (in Vayikra, in connection with giving an Olah) - that the owner must declare 'Rotzehy Ani!' for the Mashkon to be valid ...

(b)... and when he concludes 've'Chein Atah Omer be'Gitei Nashim ... ' - he is referring to cases where Beis-Din force a husband to give a Get, where the Get is only valid once he declares 'Rotzeh Ani!' (as the Mishnah writes specifically).