NAZIR 44 (Shmini Atzeres) - l'Iluy Nishmas Chaim Noach ben ha'Chaver Reb Yehudah (Kruskal). Dedicated by his son and family

1)

(a)Regarding the three Halachos of a Nazir, the Tana lists the various Chumros of the one over the other. What is the Chumra of ...

1. ... Tum'ah and shaving over wine?

2. ... Tum'ah over shaving?

(b)The Chumra of wine over shaving and Tum'ah is the fact that it has no exceptions, whereas the other two do. What is the exception with regard to ...

1. ... Tum'ah?

2. ... shaving?

(c)If not for the exclusive source of each of the Chumros, we would learn one from the other. How might we otherwise learn Tum'ah from a 'Kal va'Chomer' from wine that there are no exceptions?

(d)So from which Pasuk in Naso do we learn that a Nazir is permitted (even obligated) to render himself Tamei for a Mes Mitzvah?

1)

(a)Regarding the three Halachos of a Nazir, the Tana lists the various Chumros of the one over the other. The Chumra of ...

1. ... Tum'ah and shaving over drinking wine - is that they both demolish the Nezirus (either completely or in part), whereas drinking wine does not.

2. ... Tum'ah over shaving is - that whereas the former demolishes the Nezirus completely, the latter only demolishes thirty days.

(b)The Chumra of wine over shaving and Tum'ah is the fact that it has no exceptions, whereas the other two do. The exception of ...

1. ... Tum'ah is - Mes Mitzvah.

2. ... shaving is - a Nazir who is a Metzora.

(c)If not for the exclusive source of each of the Chumros, we would learn one from the other. Otherwise, we otherwise learn Tum'ah from a 'Kal va'Chomer' from wine - which does not demolish, yet it has no exceptions, Tum'ah, which does demolish, should certainly have no exceptions.

(d)We learn that a Nazir is obligated to render himself Tamei for a Mes Mitzvah - from the Pasuk in Naso "l'Aviv u'le'Imo Lo Yitama".

2)

(a)Which of the Chumros in our Mishnah do we learn from the Pasuk in Naso "mi'Yayin v'Sheichar Yazir"?

(b)And what do we learn from the Pasuk "veha'Yamim ha'Rishonim Yiplu, Ki Tamei Nizro"?

2)

(a)From the Pasuk there "mi'Yayin v'Sheichar Yazir" we learn - that there are no exceptions regarding the prohibition of drinking wine, because wine of Mitzvah is included in the prohibition.

(b)And from the Pasuk "v'ha'Yamim ha'Rishonim Yiplu, Ki Tamei Nizro" - we learn that Tum'ah demolishes the Nezirus but not shaving.

3)

(a)Who receives Malkus, if Reuven shaves Shimon who is a Nazir?

(b)We learned in our Mishnah that the Halachah of Tum'ah is more stringent than that of shaving, inasmuch as the former demolishes the entire Nezirus, whereas the latter only demolishes thirty days. What 'Kal-va'Chomer' do we suggest to learn shaving from Tum'ah? What Chumra does the former have over the latter?

(c)Then which Pasuk prevents us from applying it?

3)

(a)If Reuven shaves Shimon who is a Nazir (assuming that Shimon assists Reuven) - both of them will receive Malkus.

(b)We learned in our Mishnah that the Halachah of Tum'ah is more stringent than that of shaving inasmuch as the former demolishes the entire Nezirus, whereas the latter only demolishes thirty days. The 'Kal-va'Chomer' we suggest learning from the former is - the Chumra that someone who shaves the Nazir receives Malkus, whereas someone who is Metamei him does not.

(c)We cannot apply it however - on account of the same Pasuk as the previous Derashah "v'ha'Yamim ha'Rishonim Yiplu, Ki Tamei Nizro", implying that only Tum'ah demolishes the entire Nezirus (but not shaving).

4)

(a)What do we learn from ...

1. ... "v'Timei Rosh Nizro" (with regard to rendering a Nazir Tamei)?

2. ... "Ta'ar Lo Ya'avor al Rosho") with regard to shaving a Nazir)?

(b)If wine, which does not demolish the Nazir's Nezirus, does not have any exceptions to its prohibitions, why do we not learn shaving, which does, from a 'Kal va'Chomer'?

(c)And why do we not say that if wine, which has no exceptions, does not demolish the Nezirus, 'Kal va'Chomer' shaving?

(d)Conversely, why do we not then learn from a 'Kal va'Chomer' (from shaving, which has exceptions) that wine (which does not) demolishes thirty days of Nezirus?

4)

(a)We learn from ...

1. ... "v'Timei Rosh Nizro" - that it is only the Nazir himself who receives Malkus for rendering himself Tamei, but not someone else who is Metamei him.

2. ... "Ta'ar Lo Ya'avor al Rosho" - that someone else who shaves a Nazir is Chayav just like the Nazir himself (since "Lo Ya'avor" can also be read "Lo Ya'avir al Rosho").

(b)Even though wine, which does not demolish the Nazir's Nezirus, does not have any exceptions to its prohibitions, we cannot learn shaving, which does, from a 'Kal va'Chomer' - because the Torah specifically writes in Metzora "Es Rosho v'Es Zekano", implying that even if he is a Nazir, the Metzora is obligated to shave.

(c)Nor can we say that if wine, which has no exceptions, does not demolish the Nezirus, 'Kal va'Chomer' shaving - because shaving has to demolish the Nezirus in order to allow a thirty-day growth before the final shaving.

(d)Conversely, we do not then learn from a 'Kal va'Chomer' (from shaving, which has exceptions) that wine (which does not) should demolish thirty days of Nezirus - since after drinking wine, his hair is still intact, so there would be no point in demolishing anything.

5)

(a)We just asked why we do not learn from a 'Kal va'Chomer' (from shaving, which has exceptions) that wine should demolish thirty days of Nezirus. Why could we not have refuted the suggestion from the fact that someone who shaves a Nazir is Chayav like the Nazir himself, whereas someone who feeds a Nazir wine is not?

5)

(a)We just asked why we do not learn from a 'Kal va'Chomer' (from shaving, which has exceptions) that wine demolishes thirty days of Nezirus. We could not have refuted the suggestion from the fact that someone who shaves a Nazir is Chayav like the Nazir himself, whereas someone who feeds a Nazir wine is not - because if the 'Kal va'Chomer' were to stand, someone who feeds a Nazir wine would indeed be Chayav Malkus, too.

44b----------------------------------------44b

6)

(a)Our Mishnah discusses the Dinim of shaving regarding a Nazir who became Tamei. When does he shave and when does he bring his Korbanos?

(b)If he postponed shaving until the eighth day, Rebbi Akiva permits him to bring his Korbanos on the same day.

(c)How does Rebbi Tarfon query him from the Din of Metzora (which initially, follows the same procedure as a Nazir Tamei)? What did he hear about a Metzora who did not shave until the eighth day?

(d)From whom did he hear it?

6)

(a)Our Mishnah discusses the Dinim of shaving regarding a Nazir who became Tamei, who - shaves on the seventh day and brings his Korbanos on the eighth.

(b)If he postponed shaving until the eighth day, Rebbi Akiva permits him to bring his Korbanos on the same day.

(c)Rebbi Tarfon queries him however, from the Din of Metzora (which initially follows the same procedure as a Nazir Tamei). In fact, he heard that a Metzora who did not shave until the eighth day - must wait until the ninth before bringing his Korbanos ...

(d)... and he heard it - from none other than Rebbi Akiva himself.

7)

(a)To answer Rebbi Tarfon's Kashya, what distinction does Rebbi Akiva draw between a Metzora and a Nazir Tamei?

(b)How does this explain why a Metzora is obligated to wait until the ninth day whilst a Nazir is not?

7)

(a)To answer Rebbi Tarfon's Kashya, Rebbi Akiva draws a distinction between a Metzora and a Nazir Tamei - in that the Taharah of the former depends on the shaving, whereas that of the latter depends on the days.

(b)Consequently, seeing as the Metzora remains Tamei until after he has shaved on the eighth day, he is not permitted to bring his Korbanos before nightfall (until when he is called a Tvul Yom, despite the fact that he Toveled on the seventh day); whereas a Nazir Tamei becomes Tahor after Toveling on the seventh day (irrespective of whether he has shaved or not), and his period of Tvul Yom terminates with nightfall.

8)

(a)What does Hillel (ha'Katan) quoting a Beraisa, say about a Nazir who shaved on the eighth day?

(b)What are we trying to prove from there?

(c)How do we know that Hillel is talking about a Nazir Tamei and not a Metzora?

(d)Rava establishes the Beraisa when he did not Tovel on the seventh day either (whereas Rebbi Akiva is speaking when he did). How does this enable us to establish the Beraisa even like Rebbi Akiva?

8)

(a)Hillel (ha'Katan) quoting a Beraisa, rules that a Nazir who shaved on the eighth day - must wait until the ninth, before bringing his Korbanos.

(b)We are trying to prove from there - that Rebbi Tarfon did not accept Rebbi Akiva's answer to his query (because if he did, who would be the author of this Beraisa).

(c)We know - from tradition, that Hillel is talking about a Nazir Tamei and not a Metzora.

(d)Rava establishes the Beraisa when he did not Tovel on the seventh day either - making it possible for the author of the Beraisa to be Rebbi Akiva, since even he will concede that someone who did not Tovel until the eighth day, will be a Tvul Yom until the eve of the ninth, and will have to wait for the ninth day before bringing his Korbanos.

9)

(a)The Torah writes in Metzora (in connection with the Korbanos that the Zav brings on his eighth day) "uva'Yom ha'Shemini Yikach ... u'Va Lifnei Hash-m El Pesach Ohel Mo'ed, u'Nesanam el ha'Kohen". What does the Beraisa comment on this Pasuk?

(b)What did the companions of Rav Nasan bar Hoshaya extrapolate from the Tana's comment (regarding a Tvul-Yom)?

(c)What are the ramifications of this statement? Are they confined to a Zav who saw three times (and who is obligated to bring Korbanos), or does it even apply to a Zav who saw only twice?

9)

(a)The Torah writes (in connection with the Korbanos that the Zav brings on his eighth day) "uva'Yom ha'Shemini Yikach ... u'Va Lifnei Hash-m el Pesach Ohel Mo'ed, u'Nesanam el ha'Kohen". The Beraisa comments on this Pasuk - that he is only permitted to enter the Machaneh Leviyah after he Toveled and waited for nightfall.

(b)The companions of Rav Nasan bar Hoshaya extrapolate from the Tana's comment - that the Tevul Yom of a Zav has the Din of a Zav himself (who is forbidden to enter the Machaneh Leviyah).

(c)The ramifications of this statement are - that someone is not even permitted to slaughter the Korbanos of a Zav and sprinkle their blood for him to eat them after nightfall. And this applies even to a Zav who saw only twice and who is not obligated to bring Korbanos (for his Zivus).

10)

(a)What do we learn from the Pasuk in Bo "Vayikach Moshe es Atzmos Yosef Imo"?

(b)Sha'ar Nikanor is the extremity of Machaneh Leviyah. Where exactly was Sha'ar Nikanor situated?

(c)What is the significance of the Sha'ar Nikanor with regard to Mechusrei Kaparah (see Rashi)?

10)

(a)We learn from the Pasuk "Vayikach Moshe es Atzmos Yosef Imo" - that (min ha'Torah) one is even permitted to bring a Mes into the Machaneh Leviyah.

(b)Sha'ar Nikanor was the extremity of Machaneh Leviyah. It was situated - at the entrance to the Ezras Nashim.

(c)The significance of the Sha'ar Nikanor with regard to Mechusrei Kaparah is - that all Mechusrei Kaparah were taken there for their purification ceremony (Rashi).

11)

(a)On the understanding that the companions of Rav Nasan bar Hoshaya base their statement on the Lashon "u'Va Lifnei Hash-m (as we pointed out earlier), what does Abaye extrapolate from the Pasuk (written in connection with a Tamei Nazir) "uva'Yom ha'Shevi'i Yavi Shtei Torim ... v'Heivi Keves ben Sh'naso l'Asham"?

(b)What Kashya does this pose on the companions of Rav Nasan bar Hoshaya?

(c)From where do we learn that even a Mes may be brought into the Machaneh Leviyah (min ha'Torah)?

11)

(a)On the understanding that the companions of Rav Nasan bar Hoshaya base their statement on the Lashon "u'Va Lifnei Hash-m (as we pointed out earlier), Abaye extrapolates from the Pasuk "uva'Yom ha'Shevi'i Yavi Shtei Torim ... v'Heivi Keves ben Sh'naso l'Asham" - that a Tamei Nazir has to wait to bring his Korbanos until he has Toveled and waited for nightfall (because 'Tevul Yom d'Mes k'Mes').

(b)The Kashya that this poses on the companions of Rav Nasan bar Hoshaya is - that this thought process cannot be correct, since a Tamei Mes and certainly a Tvul Yom of a Tamei Mes, are permitted to enter Machaneh Leviyah, as we just proved.

(c)We learn that even a Mes may be brought into the Machaneh Leviyah (min ha'Torah) - from the Pasuk in Beshalach "Vayikach Moshe Es Atzmos Yosef Imo" ('Imo bi'Mechitzaso').

12)

(a)In which point does Abaye now dispute the statement of the companions of Rav Nasan bar Hoshaya? How will he explain the Pasuk "uva'Yom ha'Shemini Yikach ... u'Va Lifnei Hash-m el Pesach Ohel Mo'ed ... " (and that of uva'Yom ha'Shevi'i Yavi Shtei Sorim ... v'Heivi Keves ben Sh'naso l'Asham"). See Rosh until the end of the Sugya?

(b)Then from where does the Tana of the Beraisa learn that until he has Toveled and waited for nightfall, the Zav is forbidden to enter the Machaneh Leviyah?

12)

(a)Abaye now disputes the statement of the companions of Rav Nasan bar Hoshaya. According to him - the Lashon "uva'Yom ha'Shemini Yikach ... u'Va Lifnei Hash-m el Pesach Ohel Mo'ed ... does not imply that before Tevilah, the Zav is not permitted to enter the Machaneh Leviyah (just as the Pasuk "uva'Yom ha'Shevi'i Yavi Shtei Torim ... v'Heivi Keves ben Shenaso l'Asham" cannot imply this), because we hold that a 'Tvul Yom of a Zav is not like a Zav.

(b)The Tana of the Beraisa learns that until he has Toveled and waited for nightfall, the Zav is forbidden to enter the Machaneh Leviyah - from the Pasuk "El Pesach Ohel Mo'ed" (as we will now explain).

13)

(a)Even though a Tvul-Yom who has two sightings is permitted to enter the Machaneh Leviyah, a Tevul-Yom who saw three times is not. Why is that?

(b)Seeing as the Pasuk in Metzora (" ... u'Va Lifnei Hash-m") is speaking about the Machaneh Leviyah, why is it referred to as "Ohel Mo'ed" (which is normally reserved for the Machaneh Shechinah)?

(c)What do we learn from the Pasuk in Chukas ...

1. ... "Tamei Yiheyeh"?

2. ... "Od Tum'aso Bo"?

13)

(a)Even though a Tvul Yom who has two sightings is permitted to enter the Machaneh Leviyah, a Tvul Yom who saw three times is not - because he is also a Mechusar Kipurim.

(b)Although the Pasuk (" ... u'Va Lifnei Hash-m") is speaking about the Machaneh Leviyah, it is nevertheless referred to as "Ohel Mo'ed" (which is normally reserved for the Machaneh Shechinah) - to compare the Machaneh Leviyah with regard to a Mechusar Kaparah (who is also a Tvul Yom) to a Mechusar Kaparah who is forbidden to enter the Machaneh Shechinah.

(c)We learn from the Pasuk ...

1. ... "Tamei Yiheyeh" - that a Tvul Yom is forbidden to enter the Machaneh Shechinah.

2. ... "Od Tum'aso Bo" - that a Mechusar Kaparah is forbidden too.

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES
ON THIS DAF