Related%20passage for Nedarim 101:12

הנודר מן היורד לתנור אין אסור אלא בפת ואם אמר כל מעשה תנור עלי אסור בכל הנעשים בתנור:

It was taught: [That means] in the Lulian fashion.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lulianus was a popular corruption of Julianus. V. Sanh. (Sonc. ed.) p. 128 n. 2. ');">¹⁰</span> What was the Lulian style? — Rab Judah said: A unique style of hairdressing. How is that? — Raba said: The end [of one row of hair] reaching the roots of the other, and such was the hairdressing fashion of the High Priest.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Eleasa expended huge sums to have his hair so dressed. Presumably it was a costly process known only to a few experts. ');">¹¹</span> AND REMUZIAN CUCUMBERS [DELA'ATH HA-REMUZAH]. What is DELA'ATH HA-REMUZAH? — Samuel said, Karkuz pumpkins.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That do not improve in cooking [H]. Obermeyer. op. cit. pp. 35f., identifies it with Circesium on the Euphrates. some 73 parasangs from Pumbeditha on the way to Palestine. ');">¹²</span> R. Ashi said, cucumbers baked in ashes. Rabina objected to R. Ashi: R. Nehemiah said: Syrian cucumbers, i.e., Egyptian cucumbers, are kil'ayim<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Glos. ');">¹³</span> in respect of Greek and Remuzian [cucumbers!]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And mayest be sown together with them, v. Deut. XXII, 9, which applies to all diverse species, cf Kil. I, 5. — This Baraitha proves that remuzah indicates the place of origin, not the manner of its preparation. Obermeyer a.l. regards [H] as a form of [H] the river Hirmas which rises by Nisibis. ');">¹⁴</span> This refutation is unanswerable. <b><i>MISHNAH</i></b>. HE WHO VOWS [ABSTINENCE] FROM FOOD PREPARED IN A POT IS FORBIDDEN ONLY BOILED DISHES. BUT IF ONE SAYS, 'KONAM, IF I TASTE AUGHT THAT DESCENDS INTO A POT', HE IS FORBIDDEN EVERYTHING PREPARED IN A POT.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is repeated exactly in VI, 1. From Ran it would appear that it was absent in VI, 1, in his edition its correct place being here. Rashi, on the other hand, comments upon it in both places. It is possible that the words MISHNAH and GEMARA should be deleted, the whole being a quotation from the first Mishnah serving as a caption for the discussion in the Gemara (Marginal Gloss to Wilna ed.). — As to the difference between 'boiled dishes' and 'food prepared in a pot', the first term applies to dishes completely boiled therein, the second to food only partially prepared therein and finished elsewhere. ');">¹⁵</span> <b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. It was taught: He who vows [abstinence] from what goes into a boiling pot, may not eat of what goes into a stew pot, because it has already entered the boiling pot before going into the stew pot; from what goes into a stew pot, he may eat of what goes into a boiling pot; from what is [wholly] prepared in a boiling pot, he may eat of what is prepared in a stew pot; from what is wholly prepared in a boiling pot, he may eat what is [partially] prepared in a stew pot. If he vows [abstinence] from what goes into an oven, only bread is forbidden him. But if he declares, 'Everything made in an oven be forbidden me,' he is forbidden everything that is made in an oven.

Explore related%20passage for Nedarim 101:12. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.