Study Nedarim folio 73A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
The Talmud rejects this conclusion as well: Here too, it is a case in which the husband says to the steward: When I hear the vow, then it will be nullified for her. The Talmud asks: Let him nullify the vows for her when he actually hears them. Why do so earlier? The Talmud answers: He reasons: Per
§ Rami bar Ḥama asks: With regard to a deaf man, what is the halakha with regard to his nullifying vows for his wife? If you say that a husband who is not deaf can nullify a vow without hearing it, then perhaps this is because he is capable of hearing. But with regard to a deaf man, who is not capa
As R' Zeira said: For any amount of flour suitable for mingling with oil in a meal-offering, mingling is not indispensable for it. Even though it is a mitzva to mingle the flour and oil ab initio, if they were not mingled, the meal-offering is still valid. But for any amount of flour not suitable
Or perhaps the phrase “and her husband hears it” (Numbers 30:8) does not mean that hearing is indispensable to the nullification of a vow, so that even a deaf man can nullify his wife’s vows. Rava said: Come and hear a baraita interpreting that verse: “And her husband hears it”; this excludes the w
§ A dilemma was raised before the rabbis: Concerning a husband, what is the halakha with regard to nullifying vows for his two wives simultaneously? Do the words “but if her husband disallows her on the day that he hears it, and he nullifies her vow which is upon her” (Numbers 30:9), stated in the