daf bit: Nedarim 69

[cellio]

The torah (in parshat Matot) gives laws of vows, including anullment of a girl's vow by her father or a woman's vow by her husband. The mishna discusses the case of a betrothed (but not yet wed) woman, and says that in this case the vow stands unless both her father and her future husband anul it. The gemara then discusses the case where the father anuls the vow and the future husband dies before he can anul it. Beit Shammai says the father can stand in for the husband and anul it, but Beit Hillel says he cannot and her vow stands. (67a mishna, 69a gemara)

In all cases save one, it is understood that Shammai's view is stricter than Hillel's. As this argument is presented Hillel seems to be stricter (more requirements to break the vow). If instead we look at the proposition not as "her vow can be broken" but "her vow stands", then it's easier for me to see Hillel as lenient (yup, she gets to keep it) and Shammai as placing obstacles. I have no idea if this is the reading the rabbis intended.

Comments

[cellio]

Oh? Ok, I'm going to have to look this up in Eduyot; thanks for the pointer. I thought the only one where Hillel was more strict was on the question of whether it would have been better had we not been created.

[zevabe.livejournal.com]

There's another towards the beginning of Chullin, chapter 8. I'm forgetting what exactly though.