[Avodah] bli neder?

[Joshua Meisner]

On 6/14/2018 3:19 PM, Rich, Joel via Avodah wrote:
> We know as a general rule that the advice is given not to take on a
> stringency without saying bli neder. The reason usually given is that
> if one does not say it, it becomes a requirement to continue keeping
> that stringency.

> Question -- is the reward that one receives for doing the stringency
> greater if one takes it on as a requirement vs. saying bli neder?

On Jun 14, 2018, at 2:36 PM, Ben Waxman wrote:
> I recall a Gemara that says that taking on a vow is like building a
> bamah. Keeping the vow is like bringing a korban on the bamah.

The implication of this sugya is that given that one has made a neder,
it is better not to keep it than to keep it. Clearly, it is not
suggesting that one violate the neder but rather that one be matir it
before a chacham. The meforshim provide different reasons why this
is the case -- e.g., because the neder was made out of anger that would
hopefully subside or because the neder is characteristic of ga'avah --
but a chumra taken on because a person perceives a need for a s'yag or
similar reasons (or, for that matter, a neder bish'as tzarah) may not
be what the gemara is referring to.

Going back to RJR's question, to provide a few data points, while on the
one hand offering a korban without making a neder is assur, one tanna
used to be makdish his korban only after he brought it to the mikdash
to avoid the possibility of stumbling. Not sure if these cases can
be translated into nidrei issur.

Josh