31b----------------------------------------31b
5)
(a) The Mishnah later speaks about six people traveling together when they see a man coming towards them. The first traveler declares that he is a Nazir if that person is Reuven. What does the second one say?
(b) The third traveler declares that he is a Nazir if one of the first two is a Nazir. What does the fourth one say? Is he disagreeing with the one who preceded him?
(c) The fifth traveler declares himself a Nazir if both of the first two are Nezirim. How is that possible?
(d) What does the sixth traveler declare?
click for answer
6)
(a) On what grounds do Beis Shamai hold that they are all Nezirim?
(b) In that case, they will also hold 'Hekdesh Ta'us Hekdesh'. In which way does this case differ from that of someone who declares a Temurah to take effect from midday? Why there is the Hekdesh not effective immediately?
(c) How will Rav Papa reconcile his opinion (that Beis Shamai do not hold 'Hekdesh Ta'us Hekdesh') with that Mishnah?
click for answer
7)
(a) Abaye establishes our Mishnah as we thought at first (that it is the white animal that is Hekdesh, even though the Noder specifically said 'the first black one'. How does he reconcile that with the case of someone who declares a Temurah to take effect from midday (where Beis Shamai agrees that we do not deviate from his words)? How does he change the case in the Mishnah to explain Beis Shamai)?
(b) What would Abaye say in the equivalent case, but where the Noder made his declaration with reference to the future, and then, when they told him that it was a white animal that emerged first, he said that, had he known that, he would have specifically said 'a white one'?
(c) Why the difference?
(d) In what way does this latter case differ from the case of Temurah, and from the Mishnah of the six travelers (where Beis Shamai hold 'Hekdesh Ta'us, Hekdesh')?
(e) And what do Beis Hillel say?
click for answer
8)
How does Abaye explain the future tense used by the Mishnah ('Dinar Zahav she'Ya'aleh Rishon ... ', and 'Chavis shel Yayin she'Ta'aleh Rishonah ... ')?
click for answer
9)
(a) What does Rav Chisda mean when he says ...
1. ... 'Uchma b'Chivra Lakya'?
2. ... 'Chivra b'Uchma Lakya'?
(b) What is the problem with that from our Mishnah, where Beis Shamai declare the white ox Hekdesh? Why would we take for granted that the Noder had in mind a black one?
(c) How will Rav Chisda explain our Mishnah to conform with his opinion?
(d) On what grounds do we reject his answer? From which case in the Mishnah is it evident that a person tends to be Makdish begrudgingly?
click for answer
10)
(a) Having concluded that a person tends to be Makdish begrudgingly ...
1. ... how will we explain the Seifa of Chavis, seeing as oil is generally more expensive than wine?
2. ... how will Rav Chisda explain the Reisha, where Beis Shamai considers the white ox Hekdesh, even though, in his opinion, it is more valuable?
(b) Based on these facts, why does the Tana of our Mishnah need to state all three cases? Why does it mention the case of ...
1. ... the coins (the middle case)?
2. ... the oxen (the Reisha)?
3. ... the barrels (the Seifa)?
click for answer
11)
(a) Rav Chisda also said that a black ox is good for its skin, and a red one for its meat. What is a white one good for?
(b) How does this appear to clash with his previous statement (that a black ox among white ones lessens their value)?
(c) We resolve these two statements by qualifying the first one. How do we do that?
(d) How will Rav Chisda then explain our Mishnah, which considers black oxen superior?
click for answer
12)
(a) Our Mishnah rules that if the Chacham declined to annul the Nezirus, the Noder continues to count his Nezirus from the time of the declaration. Why does the Tana need to teach us this? What is the case?
(b) What does the Tana say in a case where the Chacham did revoke the Nezirus, and where the Nazir had already designated an animal for his Korban?
(c) On what grounds will even Beis Shamai (who hold 'Hekdesh Ta'us Havi Hekdesh' concede to this ruling?
click for answer
13)
(a) What did Beis Shamai in fact counter (based on a Mishnah in Ma'aser Sheni), when Beis Hillel attempted to prove from here that 'Hekdesh Ta'us Lo Havi Hekdesh'?
(b) How do Beis Hillel refute Beis Shamai's proof from Ma'asar Behemah? If the reason there is not because of 'Hekdesh Ta'us', then what is it?
(c) How do they prove their point?
(d) What do Beis Shamai say to that? If the reason by Ma'asar Behemah is because of Hekdesh Ta'us, then why are only the three animals in question Ma'aser, and not the eighth or the twelfth?
click for answer
14)
(a) How will we reconcile what we learned in Perek 'Mi she'Amar', that, assuming that the Chatas of a Nezirah was purchased with her money, it must die with our Mishnah, which rules that it grazes ... ).
(b) Alternatively, the author there is Rebbi Elazar ha'Kapar, who requires that she brings a Chatas anyway (as we discussed there). On what grounds will Rebbi Elazar ha'Kapar concede in our case that even the Chatas grazes?
click for answer
Answers to questions
Next Daf
Index to Review Questions and Answers for Maseches Nazir
