The Talmud discusses the effect of taking a vow against someone else, comparing a vow from taking all benefit to a vow banning just food related benefit.

Our sages examine the case of a man who vowed against getting food related benefit from another man. Can he still borrow a horse or signet ring from the other?

Back then, if you rolled up to a banquet on a fine horse flashing a fancy signet ring, you would get the best service and food. So while a horse and ring seemingly have nothing to do with food, they can be used to signify personal status and thereby receive more or better food.

This is a reminder that your appearance changes how other people treat you. This should be obvious, but in the past few decades mainstream society has emphasized a casual look, and some wealthy people have even been known to present themselves as lazy or disheveled.

The Talmud discusses circumcision, Brit Milah in Hebrew, explaining the famous episode of Moses being attacked for delaying the circumcision of his son while traveling to Egypt (Exodus 4). Our sages bring other teachings regarding the critical importance of circumcision, including this:

Rami bar Abba said: Our father is called “Avram,” then after he was commanded to perform circumcision he is called “Abraham” (Genesis 17:5). This means that originally, the Holy One, Blessed be He, enthroned him as ruler over 243 limbs, (the Gematria or numerical equivalent of the letters in the word Avram). And in the end, He enthroned him as ruler over 248 limbs, (the Gematria of the letters in the word Abraham)

The Talmud explains how God upgraded Abraham’s rulership:

These five are the two eyes, and two ears, and the tip of the male organ.

True self control requires you to be the master over your eyes, ears, and sexual desire. Now obviously God commanded Abraham to circumcise his manhood, not to do anything to his eyes or ears. Abraham understood by himself that in order to retain self control over your sexual urges, you also need to actively direct your eyes and ears away from temptation.

A man cannot look at or even listen to explicit content, and then assume he will still be able to control the desires that are thereby aroused. A big part of keeping out of trouble is to avoid looking for (or at) the sources of temptation.

On a practical level, in modern America much of the media and advertising features images and voices of women. Sex is used to sell you goods and services. Avoiding this content helps keep you in control of yourself, and may also help you avoid extra expenses.

We are working to define the scope of a vow:

One who takes a vow forbidding benefit to himself from those who rest on Shabbat becomes prohibited from benefiting from a Jew, and he is also prohibited to benefit from Samaritans [Kutim]. One who takes a vow against those who eat garlic on Shabbat night is prohibited from deriving benefit from a Jew or from Samaritans. But one takes a vow against those who ascend to Jerusalem, becomes prohibited to benefit from a Jew, but is permitted to benefit from Samaritans.

These Samaritans or Kutim were a foreign people from Kutha, who were relocated to Samaria in northern Israel by Sennacherib, the Assyrian king who conquered the northern kingdom of Israel about 2700 years ago. His policy was ethnic cleansing through moving foreign peoples into conquered lands to forestall rebellion. Men don’t fight to free a land that is not their own.

The Kutim in Israel were attacked by Lions, and thought that they were being punished by the God of the Jews for squatting in the holy land. They asked Sennacherib to send them a Jewish priest to teach them Judaism so they would be protected.

They became quasi Jews, but kept some remnants of idolatry as well. They were later discovered by the rabbis to be worshipping an idol on Har Grizim. These Cutheans are commonly known as Samaritans. If you have heard of a good Samaritan, that is actually a phrase emphasizing that most of them were wicked pagans.

As we see, the Jews and the Samaritans were similar. Since the Samaritans accepted the commandments written in the Torah, they observed the Sabbath. We see that they also adopted the Rabbinical enactment to eat garlic on Friday nights. Ezra the scribe started that regulation to promote sexual health, as garlic was an aphrodisiac (Talmud, Bava Kama 82a).

So the Samaritans were externally very much alike the actual Jews. However, the Jews all over Israel would ascend the Jerusalem three times a year for the festivals. They were planning and looking forward to these pilgrimages, saving their tithes and designating animals for offerings.

The Cutheans didn’t go to Jerusalem. Part of this is because Jerusalem is not mentioned in the five books of Moses. It had not been designated yet as the place I will choose to set my name there (Deuteronomy 12:5). The Samaritans were planning to sneak off to pray to an idol on Har Grizim instead.

Even when people have identical behaviors right now, if their goals are divergent, they will end up in radically different life situations.

This wisdom is especially valuable regarding young adults. At that age many individuals are seeking to explore life and have fun. However, some already have developed goals or some idea of where they want to be. Their plans for the future begin to impact their current behaviors, perhaps leading them to seek out more than just fun.

When a younger person already has plans, he can start working towards his goals while his peers are still “finding themselves”. And for those who are already older, it pays to reexamine your plans and check your progress.

Our sages bring a series of teachings about how to interpret the language of vows, and conclude that for vowing we define the meaning of words based on how people commonly use them. For example, if someone who vowed against sailors or seafarers then the vow applies to those who travel out to sea, not just short hops from Acco to Jaffa.

We do not allow people to define language subjectively according to their own feelings. Human language is a rich tool with endless nuance, but at the end of the day, meaning is defined by common general usage.

This has a tremendous practical ramification: to communicate effectively you need to know how other people use words. Even if you tend to use a phrase in a certain way, if other people don’t understand it to mean what you think it should mean, you cannot get your desired message across.

However, our sages teach that vows and other statements “go after the language of the sons of Man”. This implies a more refined or intellectual level than simply saying “language of people”. Therefore, language is defined by how educated people use it.

Still, a man needs to know how to communicate effectively both with intellectuals and with any person he meets on the street. You must be able to adjust your vocabulary and expressions to meet the needs of your audience.

Our sages discuss a man who vowed that his saplings are an offering for the Temple until they are cut down. If he redeemed (bought back from the Temple) the trees, they automatically become holy as an offering again.

But what about after they are cut: Do these saplings need to be redeemed once more? Or does their status simply fly away?

The Talmud compares this case to a man who tells a woman they are married today, but not tomorrow. That stipulation simply doesn’t work. Her status as a married woman doesn’t just disappear.

By a marriage there is no way to end the relationship other than what the Bible states, through a written document of divorce (Get). A wife is “mekudeshet” meaning holy or exclusive. A specific action that creates written proof is required to undo that special status.

But items given financial sanctity can be redeemed by paying their value to the Temple, without special documentation. The same applies to your own possessions, you can simply sell them or give them away.

It is interesting that many people are more cautious and thoughtful about buying important possessions than they are about who they marry. No one would buy a house without an inspection, title search, and a calculation of what the payments will be. A man wouldn’t buy a sports car without a test drive, checking the VIN, and comparing prices on similar cars.

And yet people assume they can enter a marriage after just dating a while or “falling in love”. We assume that love will help us overcome any obstacles. How many of us write up the pros and cons, the assets and liabilities, or give serious analysis to a potential spouse?

This Gemara is a reminder that our human relationships are more important permanent than our possessions.

We should invest more thought into people than things. Yes, Jewish culture does consider wealth a blessing, and teaches that we must use what God gives us properly and without wasting. We do attach importance to taking care of your physical possessions.

However, human beings are much more significant. They way we relate to others, especially spouses, has a profound impact on our personalities.

The Talmud explains vows made under threat are not real vows, as they are intended only to save the vower from harm. For example, he could vow to violent extortionists or pirates that he doesn’t have any more money for ransom, so they leave him alone. Another example is vowing to a tax collector that certain produce is a tithe or already belongs to the king, so he won’t confiscate it.

The Gemara notes that we are forbidden to lie to a tax collector who is operating legally, with full backing of the government, assuming that the government itself is being fair and equal, not imposing an unjust tax based on race or religion (see the Ran for explanation).

The kind of tax collector you can lie to is one who is taking more than the government authorized, for his own use, or a self-appointed tax collector.

This distinction helps us to think about authority. When someone is exercising valid authority, like your superior officer or manager, then you follow their legal orders. Men naturally form hierarchies, usually based on competence and leadership ability. We also understand that if a man is imposing authority through threat of violence, people will comply. Such as a bank robber waving his gun and demanding money, or pirates holding captives for ransom.

However, when people overstep their proper authority, or try to set themselves up as superior to you, it is vital to question their actions. Certain people, because of their personality or simply since they are used to getting their way, will by default try to push other people around. This type seeks positions of power to provide official validity for their emotional needs. In a workplace this can lead to tension as the actual management now has to deal with someone who considers herself worthy of managing.

Often one partner in a relationship is more dominant. This may work when the leading partner puts the interest of the entire family first, like the captain of a ship, and works fairly with the other crew to reach their chosen destination. However, sometimes people assert control through coercion and authoritarian measures.

In such a situation you should question if this person deserves to have authority. It could be that they have no real power over you, but you gave up your own authority to them. You may need to reclaim it to salvage the relationship, or at least your own health.

We are studying when circumstances out of your control excuse or annul vows. For example, Jim made a vow that Bill should attend a feast Jim was making, but he became sick, or his son got sick, or Bill was unable to cross the river to get there.

Our sages compare this to an actual case of a certain man who said: If I do not return within thirty days, let this be a bill of divorce (he already wrote it). He came on the thirtieth day but was prevented from crossing the river by the ferry (which was then on the other side of the river). He yelled to the people across the river: See I have arrived, see I have arrived! Shmuel said: It is not considered to be an arrival (and his wife is divorced).

The Talmud asked why the circumstance out of his control did not excuse him. Our sages answer that it is common and foreseeable that the river ferry could be on the wrong side of the river when you arrive to cross.

We only excuse accidents or happenstance that is not normal and foreseeable.

This is an important factor in planning your life. If you know there could be some traffic, then you leave a few minutes early, instead of showing up late and blaming the traffic.

When someone is always blaming outside circumstances for their regular delays and problems, this could be a sign that they are not considering possibilities and planning to avoid issues. Such a person would not make a good business partner.

The Talmud is on the subject of mistaken vows. A man sees a number of men eating his figs, and makes a vow against all of them. Then it turns out that his father was among the eaters, and he wouldn’t mind his own father partaking.

If the vower releases the vow regarding his father, there is a debate if everyone else is also released. The Talmud concludes that annulment of part of a vow releases the entire vow. The logic is that a vow is a total commitment, when the commitment is not complete, the vow as a whole is flawed and collapses.

However, if he made an individual vow against each person, then releasing one keeps the rest forbidden.

When you are interacting with others, be conscious that typically you are dealing both with a group and individuals simultaneously. You may be on good terms with the group generally but have issues with some of the people in that group. On the other hand, you may enjoy the company of a few people in a social circle but you need to be able to impress the group as a whole to spend time with those people.

A wise man develops his abilities to relate both to groups and individuals.

The Talmud discusses if someone taking an oath is relying on his internal subjective understanding of the words he is saying, or how those words are understood by others.

Our sages bring an amazing case from almost 2000 years ago known as the cane of Rava:

One man claimed money from another. He came before the sage Rava to adjudicate the case. The creditor said to the borrower: Repay your debt. The borrower said: I already repaid you.
Rava said: If so, take an oath to him that you paid.

The borrower went and brought a hollow cane, and placed the money inside it, and was leaning upon as he went to the court. He said to the lender: Hold my cane in your hand (so that I can take an oath holding a Torah scroll). The borrower took the Torah scroll and swore that he had repaid the loan, that it was already in the lender’s hands.That creditor became angry and broke that cane, and all of the coins inside fell to the ground. And it turned out that the borrower had taken the oath in truth.

Practically all people desire to view themselves as good and honest. To do so they will, in their own head, change the meaning and implication of their words so they can maintain their self identification as honest.

The drive to maintain an honest self-identity is so strong that people engaged in this may not even realize that their reinterpretation of words is effectively lying.

When you are dealing with such situations it is important to refrain from accusing, even when you have evidence. With their core identity threatened, the other person will double down and insist they are always truthful and transparent. They will assert that your are actually lying and demand you apologize for fabricating accusations.

It is better to avoid being judgmental and build rapport with the other person. This may allow some portions of the actual truth to emerge.

Our sages examine a case in which a man vows to his friend: you are forbidden to have any benefit from me if you don’t accept this gift for your son.

The vower intends to honor his friend with a large gift for his son’s wedding. If the friend says that it is more befitting his family honor not to accept any gifts, most sages say this vow is void. After all, the vower’s real intent was to bestow respect on his friend and the vow was merely to encourage him to accept.

However, Rabbi Eliezer ben Yakov says that this could be a real vow, if the vower says: I am not a dog, benefiting from you while you do not benefit from me. This would show he wants the vow to be valid to insist that the friend will accept the gift, it was not just encouragement.

In ancient times there were many stray dogs around, and people would throw them food without expecting anything in return. So a stray dog represented someone who only takes without giving back.

One of the fundamentals of Jewish thought is to become like God, to become a giver. God bestows life itself and all of our blessings, we are commanded to walk in His ways (Deut. 28:9).

As you develop yourself and grow in wisdom you will find ways to give back. However, it is vital to know that you can’t always be a giver. Sometimes you will need help from others.

Often a man must first take assistance and guidance from others who are already established and experienced in order to build himself into someone who can give back to the next generation.