we had not yet crossed the Jordan River, and we were still outside of Eretz Yisrael. Therefore, the curse of a heart of anger was relevant.

Rabba bar Rav Huna said: Anyone who gets angry, at that moment even the Divine Presence is not important to him, as it is stated: “The wicked, in the height of his anger says: He will not require; all his thoughts are: There is no God” (Psalms 10:4). Rabbi Yirmeya of Difti said: Anyone who gets angry forgets his learning and increases foolishness, as it is stated: “For anger rests in the bosom of fools” (Ecclesiastes 7:9), and it is written: “But a fool unfolds folly” (Proverbs 13:16). Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: With regard to one who gets angry, it is acknowledged that his sins are more numerous than his merits, as it is stated: “And a wrathful man abounds in transgression” (Proverbs 29:22).

Rav Adda, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: Had Israel not sinned in earlier times they would have been given the five books of the Torah and the book of Joshua alone. They needed the book of Joshua because it includes the arrangement of Eretz Yisrael. Since it contains the division of Eretz Yisrael among the tribes, it was required for all generations, but the other books of the prophets primarily detail the history of how Israel angered God and He sent prophets to admonish them. What is the reason, i.e., what is the allusion to this idea? It is stated: “For in much wisdom is much vexation” (Ecclesiastes 1:18). All the wisdom that the Jews possess from the books of the Bible is the result of their angering God.

§ Rabbi Asi said: One does not attend to a request to dissolve a vow in which the name of the God of Israel is invoked because such a declaration is especially stringent, except for a case where one swears by the God of Israel and adds: Benefiting from me is konam for my wife because she stole my purse or she hit my son, and then it became known that she did not steal or did not hit his son. In such a case, the vow can be dissolved because the vow was made in error, but in other cases such a vow is not dissolved.

The Gemara relates: There was a certain woman who came before Rav Asi. He said to her: With what language did you vow? She said to him: By the God of Israel. He said to her: If you would have vowed and said: By mohi, which is merely a substitute name, I would have attended to your request and dissolved the vow, but now that you did not vow by mohi but rather, by the God of Israel, I will not attend to your request and dissolve the vow.

The Gemara relates another incident: Rav Kahana happened to come to the home of Rav Yosef. Rav Yosef said to him: Let the Master eat something. He said to him: No, by the Master of all I will not eat it. Rav Yosef said to him: No, by the Master of all you will not eat it. The Gemara comments: Rav Kahana’s statement: No, by the Master of all I will not eat it, is well understood. But for Rav Yosef, why did he say: No, by the Master of all you will not eat it? What was the purpose of his vow? The Gemara answers: This is what he said to him: No, by the Master of all you will not eat it is what you said; therefore, you may not eat it, since a vow taken in such solemn fashion may not be dissolved.

Rava said that Rav Naḥman said: The halakha is that it is permitted for a halakhic authority to broach dissolution based on regret, and that one also attends to a request to dissolve a vow in which the name of the God of Israel is invoked.

§ Rava praised his student Rav Seḥora to Rav Naḥman by saying that he is a great man. Rav Naḥman said to him: When Rav Seḥora comes to you, bring him to me. Rav Seḥora had a vow that he wanted to dissolve, so Rava sent Rav Seḥora to Rav Naḥman. He came before Rav Naḥman.

Rav Naḥman, who wanted to dissolve the vow, said to him: Did you vow with such a matter in mind? He said to him: Yes, so Rav Naḥman did not dissolve the vow. He then asked again: Did you vow with such a matter in mind, and suggested another possibility. He said to him: Yes. This happened several times, and every time Rav Naḥman attempted to broach an opening, Rav Seḥora replied that he had that in mind when he made the vow. Rav Naḥman became upset with him because it appeared that Rav Seḥora was making it unnecessarily difficult for him to dissolve the vow. Rav Naḥman said to him: Go to your tent [kilakh] because I do not want to talk to you.

Rav Seḥora went out and made the following opening for himself that would enable the dissolution of his vow, based on a mishna in tractate Avot (2:1): Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: What is the proper path that a person should choose? He should choose any path that is considered a glory to the one who does it and a glory from his fellow men. Rav Seḥora then reasoned that now that Rav Naḥman became upset at him, he would not have made the vow with knowledge of this fact, since he would not receive glory from his fellow men, and based on this he dissolved the vow for himself.

The Gemara relates a similar incident: Rabbi Shimon, son of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, had a vow to dissolve. He came before the Sages for dissolution. They said to him: Did you vow with the knowledge of this particular fact? He said: Yes. They proposed another possibility: Did you vow with the knowledge of this other particular fact? He said to them: Yes. This happened several times,