Our Gemara on 18b and 19a discusses the idea that when a person makes a vow about something that is impossible to clarify, does he have in mind to take it upon himself regardless? Or, did he only mean to include the items that surely fell under his statement? To use a simple example, if somebody says, “I make a vow to no longer to eat fruit”, but there is a particular food product that we are unsure of whether to classify it as a fruit or a vegetable. Does he have to observe that vow in doubt, or perhaps when he made the vow to begin with, we assume he only had in mind things that surely could be identified with clarity as being in his intent.
During the deliberations, the Gemara discusses two subcategories. (1) When it has to do with an obligation that is financial; and (2) an obligation that is personal, such as to not eat something. The Gemara seems to take it for granted that if there was an opinion that held one would not want to take on a financial commitment that is not clearly stated in the vow, then certainly one would not want to take upon himself a physical abstention that was not clearly stated. The judgment is that a person is more willing to make financial sacrifices than personal, physical sacrifices.
However, there is well known Gemara (Berachos 61b) that seems to contradict this standing assumption:
״וְאָהַבְתָּ אֵת ה׳ אֱלֹהֶיךָ״. תַּנְיָא, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: אִם נֶאֱמַר ״בְּכָל נַפְשְׁךָ״, לָמָּה נֶאֱמַר ״בְּכָל מְאֹדֶךָ״?, וְאִם נֶאֱמַר ״בְּכָל מְאֹדֶךָ״, לָמָּה נֶאֱמַר ״בְּכָל נַפְשְׁךָ״? אֶלָּא אִם יֵשׁ לְךָ אָדָם שֶׁגּוּפוֹ חָבִיב עָלָיו מִמָּמוֹנוֹ — לְכָךְ נֶאֱמַר ״בְּכָל נַפְשְׁךָ״. וְאִם יֵשׁ לָךְ אָדָם שֶׁמָּמוֹנוֹ חָבִיב עָלָיו מִגּוּפוֹ — לְכָךְ נֶאֱמַר ״בְּכָל מְאֹדֶךָ״. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר: ״בְּכָל נַפְשְׁךָ״ אֲפִילּוּ נוֹטֵל אֶת נַפְשְׁךָ.
We learned in our mishna the explanation of the verse: “And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and all your soul and all your might” (Deuteronomy 6:5). This was elaborated upon when it was taught in a baraita: Rabbi Eliezer says: If it is stated: “With all your soul,” why does it state: “With all your might”? Conversely, if it stated: “With all your might,” why does it state: “With all your soul”? Rather, this means that if one’s body is dearer to him than his property, therefore it is stated: “With all your soul”; one must give his soul in sanctification of God. And if one’s money is dearer to him than his body, therefore it is stated: “With all your might”; with all your assets. Rabbi Akiva says: “With all your soul” means: Even if God takes your soul.
(I also heard later that Rabbi Rosner in his Daf Yomi Shiur made mention of this too, though he does not attempt to resolve the contradiction.)
I believe the answer is that our particular Gemara represents the norm. That is, there is a standing assumption for the majority of people that they value their physical well-being over their money. The Gemara in Berachos and the intention of the derasha was to address even the person who has a pathological attachment to money, to the point where he would value his money over his life. And, in speaking to that person, there is still a reminder to make sacrifices in devotion to God.
The important and significant idea that comes out from this is that one should not make the mistake that the Gemara in Berachos is relating to the two approaches toward money and physical safety with equanimity. Actually, one is pathological and the other is not, as we see from our Gemara.
Translations Courtesy of Sefaria, except when, sometimes, I disagree with the translation 
Do you like what you see? Please subscribe and also forward any articles you enjoy to your friends, (enemies too, why not?)