(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


by Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld

Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

Megilah 8

MEGILAH 6-10 sponsored by a generous grant from an anonymous donor. Kollel Iyun Hadaf is indebted to him for his encouragement and support and prays that Hashem will repay him in kind.


(a) Mishnah: One who vowed not to benefit from his friend, has only 2 stringencies above one who vowed not to eat from him: he may not walk on his property, and he may not borrow vessels not used for food.
(b) Gemara: We infer that neither may borrow vessels used for food.
(c) Question: Why can he not walk on his property - people do not mind!
(d) Answer: Our Mishnah is like R. Eliezer, who says that Vitur (benefits which people give freely) is prohibited to someone that vowed not to get benefit.
(e) Mishnah: The only stringency of a Neder (acceptance to bring a Korban) over a Nedavah (declaring that a certain animal is a Korban) is that one must bring a substitute for a Neder if it cannot be offered.
(f) (Gemara): We infer, they are the same regarding the mitzva not to delay bringing one's Korban.
(g) (Mishnah): A Neder is when a person says, "it is upon me to bring an Olah"; a Nedavah is when a person says, "this is an Olah". The difference is, if a Neder dies, is stolen or lost, the person must bring a different animal, but by a Nedavah, he is exempt.
(h) (Beraisa): R. Shimon learns this from the verse "It will be acceptable to him to atone *upon him*"; what is *upon* a person, he must make restitution for; not for what is not upon a person.
1. Question: How is this learned from the verse?
2. Answer (R. Yitzchak Bar Avdimi): Once he says "upon me", it is as if he bore it on his shoulders.
(a) Mishnah: The only stringency of a Zav (a man that had seminal emissions) who saw 3 emissions over one who saw 2 is the need to bring a Korban.
(b) (Gemara): We infer, they have the same law for making impure Mishkav and Moshav (vessels special for sitting or lying on), and must both count 7 days without emissions to become pure.
1. Question: From where do we know this?
2. Answer (Beraisa - R. Simai): The Torah called a Zav impure after 2 sightings, and again after 3 sightings. We deduce, after 2 sightings he is impure, after 3, he brings a Korban.
3. Question: Let us say, 2 sightings make him impure, without a need for a Korban; 3 sightings require a Korban, but he is pure!
4. Answer: This is illogical - before he sees 3, he sees 2, and is already impure!
5. Question: Let us say, after 2 sightings he brings a Korban, but is pure; the 3rd sighting adds impurity.
6. Answer: This cannot be - (Beraisa - verse): "The Kohen will atone for him in front of Hashem *Mizovo*" (*from* his emission) - some Zavs bring a Korban (those that saw 3 times), others (who saw only twice) do not.
7. Question: Perhaps, one who saw twice brings, but not one who saw 3 times!
8. Answer: One who saw 3 times, already saw twice!
(c) The teaching of R. Simai and the verse "Mizovo" are both needed.
1. If we did not have "Mizovo", I would think as question 5.
2. If we did not have R. Simai, we would not know how many sightings obligate one to bring a Korban.
(d) Question: If "Mizovo" teaches as we said, what will we learn from the verse "When the Zav will become pure *Mizovo*"!
(e) Answer (Beraisa): "When the Zav will become pure" - when his emissions will cease;
1. "Mizovo" - and not from his emissions and plague (he need not become pure of his plague before counting the days to become pure from his emissions);
2. "Mizovo v'Siper" - (the adjacency of these words) teaches that a Zav who saw 2 emissions needs to count 7 clean days.
3. Question: We do not need a verse to know this!
i. Since he makes impure Mishkav and Moshav, he certainly must count 7 clean days!

ii. Answer: We could not learn from that - A Shomeres Yom k'Neged Yom makes impure Mishkav and Moshav, but doesn't need 7 clean days! Therefore, we must learn from the verse.
(f) Question (Rav Papa): Why does "Mizovo" come here ((e)2.) to include one who saw twice, but above ((b)6.) it excludes one who saw twice!
(g) Answer (Abaye): Here, if it was coming to exclude, there would be no need to write it - we would have no source that 7 clean days are required!
1. We can't learn from the fact that he makes impure Mishkav and Moshav, as we said (3.ii.).
(h) Question: We already learned from this "Mizovo", that he need not purify from his plague first!
(i) Answer: If only that was to be learned, the Torah would have said "when the Zav will become pure"; the word "Mizovo" is extra, to teach that after 2 sightings, 7 clean days are required.
(a) Mishnah: The only stringency of a Metzora Muchlat (absolute leper) above a Musgar (closed) is tearing clothing and letting his hair grow:
(b) The only additional steps of purification of an absolute leper over a closed leper are birds and shaving.
(c) Gemara: We infer that they are the same regarding being sent from the city and impurity.
(d) Question: What is the source that a Musgar is exempt from tearing clothing and letting his hair grow?
1. (Rav Shmuel Bar Yitzchak): We learn this from the verse, "The Kohen will purify him ... and he will be pure", he was always pure (exempt) from tearing clothing and letting his hair grow.
2. Question (Rava): It also says by a Zav, "and he will be pure" - and we cannot explain there, he was always pure from something!
i. Rather, there it must mean, he is now pure from contaminating earthenware vessels which he moves; even if he sees another emission, and is retroactively impure, the vessels which he moved in the meantime are pure.
ii. Also by the leper, the verse teaches that even if the plague will return, vessels in a house he entered in the meantime are pure.
(e) Answer#2 (Rava): We learn from the verse "The leper that the plague is in" - tearing clothing and letting hair grow only apply to one whose leprosy depends on his body (a Muchlat; a Musgar is impure for 7 days, even if the plague goes away).
1. Question (Abaye - verse): "All the days that the plague is in him" - by the above reasoning, this should say that a Musgar need not be sent outside the city!
2. One cannot say that this is so - the Mishnah did not list this as a stringency of a Muchlat!
3. Answer (Rava - verse): "All the days" teaches that also a Musgar is sent from the city.
(f) Question: What is the source that a Musgar does not need birds and shaving to become pure?
(g) Answer (Abaye - verse): "... the plague is healed from the leper", birds and shaving are only needed for one whose purification depends on healing of the plague (and not a Musgar, whose purification depends on days).
(a) Mishnah: The only difference between Seforim and Tefilin and Mezuzas is that Seforim may be written in any language; Tefilin and Mezuzas may only be written Ashuris.
(b) R. Shimon Ben Gamliel says that the only other language for Seforim is Yevanis.
(c) Gemara: We infer, they have the same law of being sewn with sinews and making hands impure.
(d) Question: The Mishnah contradicts this Beraisa: The following 3 do not make hands impure:
1. *Mikra* (words of the Bible in Hebrew) which were written Targum (Aramaic translation).
2. Targum (words of the Bible in Aramaic) which were written in Hebrew.
3. Hebrew letters written *Ivri*.
4. Only letters written *Ashuris*, in a Sefer with ink make hands impure.
Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,