1)

TOSFOS DH Ta Shma Bahem Yachol b'Chulan

úåñôåú ã"ä ú"ù áäí éëåì áëåìï

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains the answer and the rejection.)

âáé ùøöéí ëúéá àùø éôåì îäí àì úåëå åáî÷åí àçø ëúéá àùø éâò áäí áîåúí äà ëéöã ðééùá ùðé äî÷øàåú äììå åëå'

(a)

Explanation: It says regarding Sheratzim "Asher Yipol Mehem El Tocho", and elsewhere it says "Asher Yiga Bahem b'Mosam." How do we resolve these two verses?...

åùéòøå çëîéí áëòãùä ãîé÷øéà îäí ùæäå áî÷öú ùøõ àçã åîé÷øéà áäí ìôé ùäçåîè úçéìú áøééúå áëòãùä

1.

Chachamim estimated ka'Adashah (a lentil's worth) is called "Mehem", since this is part of one Sheretz, and it is called "Bahem", because the initial creation of a Chomet (snail or chameleon) is ka'Adashah.

åù"î ùéòåøà âîéøé îãáòéðï ëòãùä ùäøé äçåîè âí ëé äåé úçéìúå áëòãùä äééðå òí øâìéå å÷øðéå

2.

Inference: There is a tradition for a Shi'ur, since we require ka'Adashah, for a Chomet initial creation is ka'Adashah, i.e. with its legs and horns...

åî"î àé çúéê îéðéä ôåøúà ãîéôçúé' îëòãùä àô"ä çéä åàô"ä áòéðï ëòãùä îîù ëáøééúä åù"î ùéòåøà âîéøé

i.

And in any case, if one cut a little from it, it is diminished from ka'Adashah, and even so it lives, and even so, we require ka'Adashah, truly like its initial creation. We infer that there is a tradition for a Shi'ur.

åãçé à"ø ùîòéä ëé áòéðï ùéòåøà áëòãùä äéëà ãìà ðôìä áéä ðùîä ëâåï çåîè

(b)

Explanation (cont.): We reject this. Rav Sham'ayah taught that we require the Shi'ur of ka'Adashah when a Neshamah was not put in it, e.g. a Chomet [in its initial creation];

ùàí ðôçú îòè úçéìä àæ åãàé àéï ìðå ìäçùéáå áøéä áôçåú äåàéì åìòåìí ìà éôåì áå ðùîú çééí áôçåú îëï

1.

If it was diminished a little initially, then surely we should not consider it a creation with less, since a living Neshamah is never put in it with less than this;

àáì äéëà ãðôìä ìéä ðùîä (äâäú áøëú øàù) ëâåï ðîìä çéä çùåáä äéà áøéä (âéøñú ùèî"'÷ åäøà"ù) àó ëé (ëï äåà áãôåñ åðöéä) ÷éöõ øâìéä àå ùåí ãáø îîðä ãéëåìä (äâäú áøëú øàù) òãééï ìçéåú äøáä ùàéï çééä úìåéï áãáø ù÷öõ.

2.

However, when a Neshamah was put in it, e.g. a living ant, it is considered a creation, even if he cut off its legs or anything from it that it can still live much, that its life does not depend on the matter cut off.

2)

TOSFOS DH Tehorah

úåñôåú ã"ä èäåøä

(SUMMARY: Tosfos equates the laws of Tum'ah and Tereifah.)

áòìîà [àîøéðï] ëîä çñøåï áùãøä åëå' ãìà úèîà åàîø (äâäú áøëú øàù) ùîåàì áô' àìå èøôåú (çåìéï îá:) åëï ìèøôä

(a)

Observation: Elsewhere, we say "how much must the spine be missing... that it will not be Metamei?", and Shmuel said in Chulin (42b) that the same [Shi'ur] applies to Tereifah.

åâí ëàï ðøàä ìøáéðå éöç÷ ãéù ìäùååú ãàí ðùúáøå øåá öìòåúéä èøôä åëãàîø áô' àìå èøôåú (ùí ðá.) ðùúáøå áøåá ùðé öããéï èøôä ðò÷øå àôéìå áøåá öã àçã.

(b)

Assertion (R. Yitzchak): It seems that also here, we equate these. If most of the ribs were broken, it is Tereifah, like it says in Chulin (52a) that if most [of the ribs] were broken on both sides, it is Tereifah. If they were uprooted, even the majority on one side [makes it Tereifah].

3)

TOSFOS DH Ma'aseh she'Hevi'u Kupah Mele'ah Atzamos...

úåñôåú ã"ä îòùä ùäáéàå ÷åôä îìàä òöîåú...

(SUMMARY: Tosfos brings the Sifri regarding this episode.)

ôéøåù öåøôé ðçùú åäðéçåä áàåéø áî÷åí ùàéï ââ òìéå ôï éèîàå áàäì äðëðñéï ùí

(a)

Explanation: [They brought a box of bones to the Beis ha'Keneses of] copper smelters. (Presumably, they had their own Beis ha'Keneses because their odor bothers others - see Kesuvos 77a.) They left it exposed, where there is no roof over it, lest people who enter become Tamei through Ohel;

ðëðñ úåãåñ äøåôà åëì äøåôàéí òîå åàîøå àéï ëàï ùãøä îîú àçã

1.

Tudus the doctor entered, and all the doctors with him. They said "there is no spine here from one Mes."

åáôéøåù îùðéåú îöàúé ãäëé àéúà áñéôøé àîøå äåàéì åéù ëàï îèäøéï [åîèîàéï] ðòîåã ìîðéï

(b)

Citation: I found in Perush Mishnayos that so it says in the Sifri. They said "since some here are Metaher, and some are Metamei, let us vote";

ôéøåù ø"ò åçëîéí ùðçì÷å áùãøä åáâåìâåìú äáàéí îùðé îúéí åáñîåê îééúé ìä

1.

I.e. R. Akiva and Chachamim, who argue about a spine and skull from two Mesim [argued about this]. Below, the Gemara brings [their argument].

åáîñ' àäìåú ô"á (î"å) ðîé úðï ôìåâúééäå äúçéìå îø' ò÷éáà úçéìä åèéäø

2.

Also in Ohalos (2:6) their argument is taught. They began [the vote] with R. Akiva, and he was Metaher;

àîøå ìå äåàéì åàúä äåà ùäééú îèîà èéäøú éäå èäåøéï.

3.

They said to him "since you, who used to be Metamei, are Metaher, they should be Tehorim."

4)

TOSFOS DH Taima d'Leika Shidrah d'Mes Chada

úåñôåú ã"ä èòîà ãìéëà ùãøä ãîú çãà

(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses the need for the doctors to check the spine.)

ôé' îîú çãà äà àéëà ùãøä àå âåìâåìú ãîú çãà ðæéø îâìç òìéä åù"î àå ùãøä àå âåìâåìú úðï

(a)

Explanation: [There was not a spine] from one Mes. This implies that if there was a spine and skull from one Mes, a Nazir shaves for it, and that the Mishnah teaches a spine or skull.

åãçé ãìîà ìà îéáòéà ÷àîø ìà îéáòéà ùãøä åâåìâåìú ãîîú àçã ìéëà

1.

We reject this. He said even more. Not only there is not a spine and skull from one Mes...

ö"ò îä äéå öøéëéï ìäøàåú ìøåôàéí àí äùãøä îîú àçã àå ìà åäà îñúîà äéúä îôåø÷ú åîùåáøú åàîøéðï ìòéì ãàó îîú àçã èäåøä

(b)

Question: Why did they need to show the doctors whether or not the spine is from one Mes? Presumably it was fractured and broken. We said above that even from one Mes, it is Tahor! (Orach Mishur asks that this is only if the majority was broken!)

åàåîø øáéðå éöç÷ ãàééøé ëâåï ãòì àåúï òöîåú äàäéì äàãí áòåãï á÷áø åàîø ìòéì ä÷áø îöøôå.

(c)

Answer (R. Yitzchak): The case is, a person towered above those bones while they were in the grave. We said above that the grave joins them.

5)

TOSFOS DH Ta Shma... v'Al Chetzi Kav Atzamos she'Ba mi'Beis Mesim

úåñôåú ã"ä ú"ù...åòì çöé ÷á òöîåú ùáà îá' îúéí

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why it did not teach about a quarter Kav.)

åîãìà ÷àîø äëà åòì øåáò òöîåú äáà îùðé îúéí ëãúðï áîñëú àäìåú (ô"á î"å) áôìåâúà ãø"ò åøáðï

(a)

Observation: Here it does not mention a quarter Kav of bones from two Mesim, like in the Mishnah in Ohalos (2:6) regarding the argument of R. Akiva and Rabanan.

éù ìäåëéç ãäëà ìòðéï úâìçú ðæéø àééøé ãàéðå îâìç òì ôçåú îçöé ÷á

(b)

Inference: This shows that here we discuss [what obligates] a Nazir to shave. He does not shave for less than half a Kav;

åìäëé ð÷è çöé ÷á ãòì øåáò ä÷á àôé' (äâäú ø' áöìàì àùëðæé) ãàúé îîú àçã àéðå îâìç ëãúðï áîúðéúéï

1.

Therefore it mentions half a Kav, for regarding a quarter Kav, even from one Mes, he does not shave, like our Mishnah taught;

åäúí ìòðéï èåîàú àäì âøéãà ÷úðé.

2.

There (Ohalos 2:6) it teaches about mere Tum'as Ohel.

6)

TOSFOS DH Revi'is Dam she'Ba mi'Shnei Mesim

úåñôåú ã"ä øáéòéú ãí (äâäú îäø"á øðùáåøâ) ùáà îùðé îúéí

(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses why the Mishnah discusses this case.)

ãàéìå áà îîú àçã ìø"ò îâìç ëãúðï áîúðé' ìø"ò åôìéâé øáðï òìéä

(a)

Distinction: If it came from one Mes, according to R. Akiva he would shave, like our Mishnah (56b) taught according to R. Akiva, and Rabanan argue with him;

åäëà úðï ãø"ò äãø áéä

1.

Here, the Mishnah teaches that R. Akiva retracted.

åáãéï äåà ãîéáòé ìéä ìîéð÷è ìøáðï òì çöé ìåâ ãí äáà îùðé îúéí

(b)

Implied question: The Mishnah should have taught according to Rabanan [that he does not shave] for half a Log of blood from two Mesim!

àìà àééãé ãìø"ò ãàó áøáéòéú îâìç ð÷è äëé, äø"ó.

(c)

Answer (R. Peretz): Since R. Akiva holds that he shaves even for a Revi'is [from one Mes, after he retracted], it taught so [about a Revi'is from two Mesim].

52b----------------------------------------52b

7)

TOSFOS DH v'Iy Bo'is Eima Ki ka'Tani Midi d'Mes Midi d'Chai Lo ka'Tani

úåñôåú ã"ä åàéáòéú àéîà ëé ÷úðé îéãé ãîú îéãé ãçé ìà ÷úðé

(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses the rejections of the proof.)

åìà úçùåá áäðê ùùä ãáøéí àáø îï äçé

(a)

Explanation: Do not count among these six matters Ever Min ha'Chai.

åàéáòéú àéîà ëé ÷úðé îéìé ãðæéø îâìç òì àäéìå ìàôå÷é òöí ëùòåøä ãàéðå îâìç àìà òì îâòå åòì îùàå

1.

[We answer that] alternatively, we taught only matters that a Nazir shaves for their Tum'as Ohel. This excludes a bone the size of a barley seed. He shaves only for touching or moving it.

åàéáòéú àéîà îéãé ãäãø áéä ùçæø ø"ò ëã÷úðé ìòéì ùçæø áå ø"ò ìàôå÷é øáéòéú ãí äáàä îá' îúéí ãìà äãø

2.

Alternatively, we taught only matters about which R. Akiva retracted, like it taught above that R. Akiva retracted. This excludes a Revi'is of blood from two Mesim, about which he did not retract.

åùùä ãáøéí ã÷à çùéá îäðê ãäãø áéä åìòåìí ùãøä åâåìâåìú áúøé çùéá ìäå,

3.

It lists the six matters he retracted from. Really, a spine and skull count like two;

ãà"ì øáé ìáø ÷ôøà úìîéãéä ìà úùðä ãí øáéòéú áçæøä ùäøé ìîåã òøåê äåà áôéå ùì ø"ò, ãòì øáéòéú äáàä îá' îúéí ãðæéø îâìç åòåã äî÷øà îñééòå

4.

Rebbi told his Talmid Bar Kapara "do not teach a Revi'is of blood among matters about which R. Akiva retracted, for this teaching is [still] in his mouth, that a Nazir shaves for a Revi'is of blood from two Mesim. Further, the verse supports him."

åáà ìäëçéù ãáøé äàåîø ùø"ò çæø

i.

[Rebbi] comes to contradict the one who says that R. Akiva retracted [about this].

åáà ø"ù ìåîø ëøáé ãø"ò ìà çæø áå àìà ùàîø ãøê ÷ðúåø ëìôé ø"ò ùàîø àí îùîú çæø áå àéðé éåãò.

5.

R. Shimon comes to say like Rebbi, that R. Akiva did not retract, just [R. Shimon] said in a mocking way about R. Akiva, "if he retracted after his death, I do not know."

8)

TOSFOS DH Ta Shma d'Tanya Beis Shamai Omrim...

úåñôåú ã"ä ú"ù ãúðé' á"ù àåîøéí...

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains what Beis Hillel add to Beis Shamai's opinion.)

ôéøåù àå îùðéí àå îùìùä àáøéí éèîà øåáò òöîåú áàäì

(a)

Explanation: [Beis Shamai say that] a quarter Kav of bones from two or three limbs have Tum'as Ohel;

åáéú äìì àåîøéí îï äâåéä ôéøåù îòé÷ø äâåéä îøåá äáðéï àå îøåá äîðéï

1.

Beis Hillel say, from the Geviyah, i.e. from the primary part of the body, from the majority of the stature or the majority of the number;

ùøî"ç àáøéí éù áàãí ëãúðéà áøéù îñëú àäìåú å÷ë"ä äí øåá îðéï

2.

There are 248 bones in a person, like was taught in Ohalos (1:8), and 125 are the majority of the number;

åàí úôù ÷ë"ä òöîåú å÷éöä îòè îï ëì àçã åàçã òã ùäòîéã òì øåáò éèîàå áàäì.

3.

If one took 125 bones, and took a little from each, until he took a quarter Kav, they have Tum'as Ohel.

9)

TOSFOS DH Amar R. Yehoshua...

úåñôåú ã"ä àîø ø' éäåùò...

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains which bones Beis Shamai discusses.)

ðîöà øåá áðéðå ùì àãí îâåáä (äâäú îäø"á øðùáåøâ)

(a)

Explanation: [Through two shins and one thigh, or two thighs and one shin], this is the majority of the stature, i.e. of the height.

áîñ' àäìå' (ô"à î"ç) ÷çùéá (ëï äåà áãôåñ åðöéä) øî"ç àáøéí åçùéá îìîèä ìîòìä áôéñú (äâäú áøëú øàù) äøâì

1.

A Mishnah in Ohalos (1:8) counts the 248 bones, and counts from below to above. [It counts] in the foot...

åçùéá ùðéí áùå÷ çîùä áàøëåáä åàçã áéøê ìëàåøä îùîò îîúðé' ãäúí ãùå÷ ìîèä îï äàøëåáä åéøê ìîòìä,

2.

It counts two in the Shok, five in the knee, and one in the Yerech. The Mishnah there connotes that Shok is below the knee, and the Yerech is above [it];

îùðé ùå÷éí åéøê àçã àå îùðé éøëéí åùå÷ àçã äåàéì åäåà øåá áðéðå ùì àãí îâåáä

(b)

Explanation (cont.): From two shins and one thigh, or two thighs and one shin [is Metamei], since this is the majority of a person's build, i.e. of his height.

åîá' àå îùìùä ã÷àîøé á"ù

(c)

Implied question: Why do Beis Shamai say "from two or three"?

ìàå ãåå÷à àìà ëìåîø øåáò òöîåú äáà îøåá äáðéï åøåá äáðéï (äâäú îäø"á øðùáåøâ) äåé ìâåáä äàãí éøê ò"â ùðé ùå÷éí

(d)

Answer #1: This is not precise. Rather, it is a quarter Kav of bones that comes from the majority of the stature. The majority of the stature refers to the height of a person; a thigh on top of two shins [is the majority].

åéù îôøùéí ãùðé ùå÷éí åéøê àçã ÷øé ùðéí ìôé ùäùå÷éí ã÷éí áéåúø åäåå ëçã åòí éøê àçã ðçùáéí ëùðé òöîåú

(e)

Answer #2: Some explain that two shins and one thigh are called two, because the shins are very thin, and they are like one, and with one thigh, they are considered like two bones;

åùðé éøëéí åùå÷ àçã äøé ùìùä ìôé ùäéøëéí òáéí åâãåìéí ðçùáéï ëùðéí åäùå÷ òîäí äøé ùìùä.

1.

Two thighs and one shin, these are three, because the thighs are thick and big, so they are considered two, and with one shin, there are three.

10)

TOSFOS DH u'Beis Hillel Omrim Min ha'Geviyah mi'Rov ha'Minyan

úåñôåú ã"ä åá"ä àåîøéí îï äâåéä îøåá äîðéï

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel do not argue.)

äåàéì åéùðå øåá (äâäú áøëú øàù) äîðéï ãäééðå îôø÷é éãéí åøâìéí

(a)

Explanation: [Beis Hillel are Metamei] since there is in them the majority of the number, e.g. from the joints of the fingers and toes;

åá"ù àééøå áøåáò äáà îøåá äáðéï åá"ä àééøå áøåáò äáà îøåá äîðéï åîø àîø çãà åîø àîø çãà åìà ôìéâé

1.

Beis Shamai discuss a quarter Kav from the majority of the stature, and Beis Hillel discuss a quarter Kav from the majority of the number. Each said one matter; they do not disagree.

åîôø÷é éãéí åøâìéí îöéðå (äâäú îäø"á øðùáåøâ) øåá äîðéï áìà øåá äáðéï ëãîôøù áîñëú àäìåú (ô"à î"ç)

2.

From the joints of the fingers and toes we find the majority of the number without the majority of the stature, like it explains in Ohalos (1:8);

ãôøñú äøâìéí éù ì' ùùä áëì àöáò åáôéñú äéã ùìùéí ùùä áëì àöáò äøé ÷"ë àáøéí áéãéí åáøâìéí.

i.

In the feet there are six bones in every toe, and in the hand there are six bones in every finger. This is 120 bones in the hands and feet. (Orach Mishur - there are other bones in the arm that are not part of the majority of the stature, to get to 125. Perhaps words are missing from Tosfos.)

11)

TOSFOS DH Amar Rava Ta Shma ha'Shidrah veha'Gulgoles

úåñôåú ã"ä àîø øáà ú"ù äùãøä åäâåìâåìú

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains Rava's teaching and the question about it.)

ã÷úðé áîúðé' ãðæéø îâìç òìéäï

(a)

Explanation: [The spine and skull] taught in our Mishnah, for which a Nazir shaves...

å÷ñ"ã ãìéëà ùãøä åâåìâåìú ãìéú áäï øåáò òöîåú åàé ìà äåéà áäï øåáò òöîåú ìà îâìç

1.

We are thinking that there is no spine and skull without a quarter Kav of bones, and if there is not within them a quarter Kav of bones, he does not shave.

åìäëé ôøéê åàé ñ"ã øåáò òöîåú ãàúé îùãøä åâåìâåìú çîéø ìéúðé áîúðé' øåáò òöîåú äáà îï äùãøä åâåìâåìú

2.

Therefore, we ask, if you think that a quarter Kav of bones that come from a spine and skull is more stringent, the Mishnah should teach a quarter Kav of bones that comes from the spine or skull!

åìîä ìé ãúðé áîúðéúéï äùãøä åäâåìâåìú ãîùîò ãåå÷à ëùäï ùìîéï (îëàï îãó äáà) äà àôé' ùáåøéï åîôåø÷éï áòéú (ëï äåà áãôåñ åðöéä) ìîéîø àí éù áäï øåáò òöîåú ãðæéø îâìç òìéäï

3.

Why does it teach in our Mishnah the spine and skull, which connotes only when they are complete? Even if they are broken and separated, you want to say that if there is a Rova, a Nazir shaves for them!