BAL TE'ACHER FOR NEZIRUS
Answer #3 (Rav Acha bar Yakov): Bal Te'acher applies when he accepted Nezirus in a cemetery.
Question #1: This is like the opinion that Nezirus does not take effect immediately in such a case;
According to the opinion that Nezirus takes effect immediately, Bal Te'acher does not apply!
Question #2: Mar bar Rav Ashi taught that all agree that it takes effect immediately, and they argue only about whether or not he is lashed (if he eats grapes before leaving the cemetery)!
Answer (to both questions): He transgresses Bal Te'acher for delaying Nezirus in Taharah.
Inference (and Answer #4 - Rav Ashi): This shows that if a Nazir intentionally makes himself Tamei, he transgresses Bal Te'acher of Nezirus Taharah.
Answer #5 (R. Acha brei d'Rav Ika): Bal Te'acher applies to shaving (at the end of Nezirus).
This is not only according to the opinion that it is Me'akev (the permission to drink wine). Even according to the opinion that it is not Me'akev, it is a Mitzvah, and he delays it!
Answer #6 (Mar Zutra brei d'Rav Mari): Bal Te'acher applies to bringing Korbanos Nezirus.
Question: We don't need the Hekesh for this. Bal Te'acher applies to all Korbanos!
Answer: One might have thought that Bal Te'acher does not apply to Nezirus, for it is a Chidush (special law).
Question: What is the Chidush?
Suggestion: One cannot be Makdish (an animal to be) a Chatas Nazir (unless he is a Nazir).
Rejection: Bal Te'acher applies to Chatas (for any Kares, e.g. eating) Chelev, even though he cannot be Makdish a Chatas Chelev (unless he ate Chelev)!
Answer #1: The Chidush is that one becomes a full Nazir even if he vowed only to be a Nazir (abstain) from grape skins.
Question #1: This is like the opinion that one becomes a full Nazir in such a case;
According to R. Shimon, who says that one becomes a Nazir only if he vows from all the Isurim, how can we answer?
Question #2: That Chidush is a stringency! (All the more so Bal Te'acher should apply to Korbanos Nezirus!)
Answer #2: The Chidush is that if he shaved after bringing only one of the three Korbanos, he is permitted (to drink wine).
Answer #3: The Chidush is (like we suggested above) that one cannot be Matfis a Chatas Nazir.
Question: We asked that this is no Chidush, for Bal Te'acher applies to Chatas Chelev, even though he cannot be Matfis it!
Answer: Chatas Chelev is for atonement (therefore Bal Te'acher applies), but Chatas Nazir is not.
Question: Chatas Yoledes is not for atonement, yet Bal Te'acher applies to it!
Answer: Chatas Yoledes permits her to eat Kodshim (therefore Bal Te'acher applies to it).
THE SOURCE FOR HAFARAH
(Beraisa (3a)): Just like a father or husband can annul the Nedarim of his daughter or wife, he can annul her Nezirus.
Question: Why do we need to learn this from a Hekesh? We should be able to learn from a Mah Matzinu (precedent)!
Answer: One might have thought that he can annul Nedarim, for (Stam, i.e. unspecified) Nedarim are permanent, but he cannot annul Nezirus, for (Stam) Nezirus is only for 30 days.
THE FULL TEXT OF THE VOWS IN THE MISHNAH
(Mishnah): If one said 'I am Mudar from you', ('I am separated from you', or 'I am distanced from you'...)
(Shmuel): In every case he is forbidden only if he also said 'that I will eat (or taste) from you.'
Question (Beraisa #1): If one said 'I am Mudar from you', 'I am separated from you', or 'I am distanced from you', he is forbidden. If he said 'that I will eat from you' or 'that I will taste from you', he is forbidden. (We cannot say that the first three vows require one of the latter two expressions, for each of the latter two works by itself!)
Answer: The Beraisa means that the first vows take effect only if he added one of the latter expressions.
Question (Beraisa #2): If one said 'that I will eat from you' or 'that I will taste from you', he is forbidden. If he said 'I am Mudar from you', 'I am separated from you', or 'I am distanced from you', he is forbidden.
Answer: Beraisa #2 means that the first vows take effect only if he previously said one of the latter expressions.
Objection #1: If so, this teaches exactly like Beraisa #1! (Why was it taught differently?)
Objection #2: Why does it say 'he is forbidden' twice?