If a man makes a vow to the Lord or takes an oath imposing an obligation on himself, he shall not break his pledge; he must carry out all that has crossed his lips.  (Numbers 30:3)

In his book on the development of votive institutions, Professor Moshe Benovitz writes:

Biblical law makes no provision for the dissolution of vows and oaths. The Israelites honor their treaty with the Gibeonites, sanctioned by oath, even though the Gibeonites acted in bad faith, and the treaty was sworn to under false pretenses (Joshua 9:15-27). Jephthah is obligated to sacrifice the first living being he encounters upon his return from battle even when this proves to be his daughter (Judges 11:35). The Israelites carry out their sworn resolution no to intermarry with the Benjaminites even though they regret it (Judges 21:1-7). From these and others it is apparent (a) that misinformation, misunderstanding, and unforeseen events are not grounds for the dissolution of an oath or vow, and (b) that no one has the authority to absolve the votary of his vow or oath. (Moshe Benovitz, Kol Nidre: Studies in the Development of Rabbinic Votive Institutions, 149)

Professor Benovitz goes on to explain that despite the impossibility of annulling a vow or an oath, the Sages viewed certain vows as not binding, and deemed themselves empowered to absolve a votary of his vow and a swearer of his oath. Thus, Maimonides writes:

A: Compelled vows, mistaken vows, and absurd vows are dissolved as we explained in regard to oaths…

E: One who makes a vow and regrets it applies to a sage who dissolves it, and the law of dissolution of vows is like the law of dissolution of oaths, which can be dissolved only by a recognized sage or three commoners in a place where there is no sage, and a vow is dissolved by the same formula by which an oath is dissolved, and the other matters that I explained in regard to oaths are the same for vows as for oaths. (Mishneh Torah, Hilkot Nedarim, 4)

These laws developed even though the rabbis were aware that there was no biblical basis for the authority to annul vows and oaths, as we learn form the Mishnah (Hagigah 1:8):

The dissolution of vows flies in the air and has nothing to stand on.

Nevertheless, although the plain meaning of the biblical text requires that we fulfil our promises, and although there would seem to be no means for retracting vows and oaths, the dissolution of vows and oaths was permitted, became customary, was incorporated in the liturgy (“Kol Nidre”), and became a primary aspect of the law of vows and oaths. Thus, in explaining the mitzvoth found in parashat Mattot, Sefer Ha-Hinukh states:

When an expert sage or three commoners dissolve the oath as required by the Torah, and the matter is carried out properly and truly as prescribed by the Torah, they fulfil a positive commandment. And if they dissolve a vow other than as prescribed by the Torah, as by means of two commoners or one who is not an expert, although their act does not constitute dissolution, they are punishable for contravening this positive commandment.

1.     What is the importance of vows and oaths?

2.     Should a person be permitted to retract an oath or vow?

3.     Should we not prefer the interests of the party that relies upon the expectation that a person will fulfil his vows and live up to his promises?

4.     Should we relate differently to vows and oaths made to God, as opposed to promises made to other people? Which type of obligation is more important?

5.     Why did the rabbis find it necessary to create a fiction allowing for the annulment of obligations that the Torah demands that we fulfil?

6.     Under what circumstances do you believe that we may interpret the biblical intent and the spirit of the mitzvoth in accordance with out contemporary understanding, and adapt them to evolving developments in human society, and when is such an approach unacceptable?