As per DanF's comment and the commentary of the Stone Chumash:
Ramban cites Radak that Jacob surely loved Leah, but that his greater
love for Rachel made her seem unloved -- or even hated -- by
Rav Hirsch explains that
Not "Ki Leah Senuah", that Leah was hated, but כִּי שְׂנוּאָה לֵאָה
that the hated one of the two, i.e. the less beloved, was Leah. ... It
is significant that the real pith of the Jewish nation has not the one
for its mother whom Jacob - as far as the text itself relates - chose
primarily more for the impression her ...
The Tur indicates that a number of these apply to the woman (EH 25):
Nidah - The woman would at least share responsibility.
Shichrus - This applies if either spouse is intoxicated.
Chatzufa - This applies specifically to a woman who verbally propositions her husband in an explicit manner.
The Aruch HaShulchan (EH 25:9) mentions that m'riva refers to a ...
The practice of Talmidei Chachamim is to tell their daughters prior to
Kiddushin that all Nedarim they have taken are hereby revoked. In
fact, Rav Moshe Shternbuch advises even nowadays this should be
practiced prior to one's daughter becoming a bogeret and that she should be
informed, because a father who compliments his ...
It would seem that the description of such a child as “rebellious” and “transgressor” is not in reference to the parents' wrongful conduct at the time of intercourse, but rather to the child's own predisposition to future sin as a result of this. The Zohar (See Zohar II, 204b; III, 80-82, explained in the end of the 2nd chapter of Tanya) writes that during ...
In the Torah it says the word bris 13 times (in the chapter commanding it to Abraham)
See halacha 9 in chapter 3 in the Rambam's laws of circumcision
thirteen covenants were established with Abraham, our Patriarch, with regard to circumcision:
"I will place My covenant between Me and you" [Genesis 17:2],
"And I, behold, My covenant is with ...
I think that the Bartenura follows the Pshat of the Rosh (here 4th line from the end).
The Rosh words are below.
דלא תימא כי היכי דנודר מן המקפה אסור בשום משום שדרך ליתן שום במקפה, הוא הדין נמי כי נדר מן המקפה יהא אסור בגריסין משום שדרך לעשות הגריסין מקפה קא משמע לן דלא דמי משום דשום דרך ליתן בכל מיני מקפה כי נותן טעם והשום הוא המקפה אבל אין עושין ...
The Leviim are just as much owners of the land as any other tribe. The cities of the Leviim were apportioned to them by lottery in the same way as the rest of the land (see Malbim Yehoshua 21:2) and they were complete owners. However, you may be right in thinking that their ownership might be different in this regard. The Gemara tells us that ארץ ישראל ...
I would suggest a different understanding of the word 'partnership'. The Chochmas Shlomo writes in his gloss on Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat siman 369 "a king who rules the entire world is not applicable the laws of dinei dimalchusa, for how can he say that he doesn't want to live in his land, all the lands are his! Should he fly in the air?"
We find that ...
In this 19th century Nusach Sefarad Machzor with Yidish instruction, the commentary at the bottom indicates that the word קנוסי is actually reffering to a קנס - Monetory fine, that one imposes upon oneself which he is not legally obligated to pay. Accordingly it is not referring to a Kinnui (Variation) of "קונם" which is a vow rendering an object forbidden, ...
I don't understand what Rav is saying, but here are a couple of other approaches:
Ran on Nedarim 53a:
משום דמקפה כולל כל דבר קפוי ועבה ושום נמי קרוי מקפה על שם שממחין אותו במעט מים ונאכל בכך:
Because mikpa refers to anything congealed and thick, and garlic is also called mikpa because they make it into a paste with a little water and eat it ...
Mei HaShiloach interprets the passage a bit differently than the commentaries on the page, seeing תועבה as referring to its usage by forbidden foods (Devarim 14:3) rather than its usage by intimacy with another male (Vayikra 18:22 and 20:13).
לא תאכל כל תועבה. זה האזהרה נאמרה קודם כל מאכלות אסורות כדאיתא בגמ' (נדרים נ"א.) תועבה תועה אתה בה, משל למלך שבנה ...
The first line of Nedarim 4:6 states:
המודר הנאה מחבירו לא ישאילנו
Reuven who takes a vow to forbid benefit from Shimon shouldn't lend [items] to him
The Tiferet Yisrael's explains this to mean:
גזירה שמא ישאל ממנו
this is a decree to prevent Reuven from borrowing from Shimon
It seems the scenario subsequently detailed in the mishnah is a ...
I think that this is similar to nidre zeruzin according to the Rashba. But the Gemara says that there is a gzera derabanan because ignoramus to validate this kind of vows in some conditions. Even for other rishonim, there is a great similarity with nidre zeruzin and this place in the order of the mishna is the place to make the discernment.
ובלבד שיהא ...
The text of Hataras Nedarim says just the opposite; after listing various types of Nedarim from which the asker seeks exemption, he adds:
הֵן אוֹתָם הַיְדוּעִים לִי, הֵן אוֹתָם שֶׁכְּבָר נִשְׁכְּחוּ מִמֶּנִּי, בְּכֻלְּהוֹן אִתְחֲרַטְנָא בְהוֹן מֵעִקָּרָא, וְשׁוֹאֵל וּמְבַקֵּשׁ אֲנִי מִמַּעֲלַתְכֶם הַתָּרָה עֲלֵיהֶם
...whether those which are known to ...
In the case of Yom Kippur, since the prooftexts are from divrei kabbalah as opposed to divrei Torah, many consider the four which are in addition to eating to to be asmachta rather than a true derasha. (See here.) They are then either derabbanan, or else the Torah left it up to the Sages to define what the inuyim were.
As @DoubleAA writes, the quote from ...
It seems that the dispute between the sages and Rebbi Eliezer is not surrounding whether one can be release from a vow based on nolad, but rather surrounds the specific cases listed in the Mishna, which occur infrequently (see Ran 64b).
The sages would allow the release of a vow based on nolad so long as the case was one which occurs frequently, but will ...