2

The Mishna says (Arachin 1:1):

חרש שוטה וקטן נידרין ונערכין אבל לא נודרין ולא מעריכין מפני שאין בהם דעת

A deaf-mute, an imbecile, and a minor are the object of a vow and are valuated, but neither vow to donate the assessment of a person nor take a vow of valuation, because they lack the presumed mental competence to make a commitment.

That second part (bolding mine) is obvious from logical reasoning.

Maybe "לא נודרין ולא מעריכין" is necessary to complete the list: if I'm told they can be the objects of vows of valuation/assessment, I should also be told they can't be the subject.

But why say "מפני שאין בהם דעת"? The only reason anything is different about a shoteh is because he lacks da'at. For the deaf person and katan, I might think of other problems, but here it's clear da'at is the reason, since they are listed with the shoteh.

Why does the Mishna need to mention this explicitly?

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .