POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
Prepared by Rabbi P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous daf Nazir 42
NAZIR 41 & 42 - sponsored by Harav Ari Bergmann of Lawrence, N.Y., out of
love for Torah and those who study it.
1) THE MAJORITY IS AS THE WHOLE
(a) (Beraisa): If (a Levi, leper or Nazir) shaved without a razor, or left 2
hairs, he did not fulfill the Mitzvah.
2) UNINTENTIONAL REMOVAL OF HAIR
(b) (Rav Acha brei d'Rav Ika): From here we learn that the Torah considers
the majority as the whole.
(c) Question: How do we see this?
(d) Answer: Since the Torah said by Nazir "He will shave it" (teaching that
he must shave the entire head), we see that here, the whole is required; in
all other places, the majority is as the whole.
(e) Objection (R. Yosi bar Chanina): This verse is written about a Nazir
1. Objection to objection (sages of Eretz Yisrael): We learn that a Nazir
Tamei must shave with a razor from a Nazir Tahor - likewise, we can learn
from a Nazir Tamei, that a Nazir Tahor that left 2 hairs did not fulfill the
(f) Question (Abaye): A Nazir shaved and left 2 hairs. His hair sprouted
(grew to the size to bend a hair onto its root), and he shaved them (Rashi -
and all his hair) - has he fulfill the Mitzvah?
(g) Question (Rava): A Nazir shaved and left 2 hairs; he shaved 1 of them,
and the other fell out - what is the law?
1. Objection (Rav Acha from Difti): Is Rava asking the law of one who shaves
1 hair at a time (of course this is valid)!
(h) Correction: Rather, Rava asked if 1 of the 2 remaining hairs fell out,
and he shaved the last hair - what is the law?
(i) Answer (Ravina): He did not fulfill the Mitzvah to shave; no hair
(j) Objection: If there is no hair left, he fulfilled the Mitzvah!
(k) Correction: Rather, even though no hair remains, he did not fulfill the
(a) (Mishnah): A Nazir may rub (shampoo) his hair, and may separate the
hairs, but he may not comb his hair.
3) MULTIPLE LASHES FOR MULTIPLE TRANSGRESSIONS
(b) (Gemara) Question: Which Tana permits rubbing and separating hairs?
(c) Answer: R. Shimon, who permits something which may result in a
transgression if the person does not intend to transgress.
(d) Question: The end of the Mishnah forbids combing - this is as Chachamim!
1. Is the beginning of the Mishnah R. Shimon, and the end of the Mishnah
(e) Answer (Rabah): The entire Mishnah is as R. Shimon; anyone who combs
intends to uproot dangling strands.
(f) (Mishnah): R. Yishmael says, he may not shampoo with earth, since it
causes hair to fall out.
(g) Question: Does the Mishnah read 'Because it makes hair fall out', or
'Because of that (earth) which makes hair fall out'?
1. The difference is, if one has earth which does not make hair fall out.
(h) This question is unresolved.
i. If the text is 'Because it makes hair fall out', if we know that this
earth does not, it is permitted.
ii. If the text is 'Because of that which makes hair fall out', it is always
(a) (Mishnah): A Nazir that drank wine all day is only liable for 1 set of
lashes; if they warned him, 'Don't drink, don't drink' and he drank, he is
liable for each warning;
(b) If he was shaving all day, he is only liable once; if they warned him,
'Don't shave, don't shave' and he shaved, he is liable for each warning.
(c) If he was becoming Tamei through a corpse all day, he is only liable
once; if they warned him, 'Don't become Tamei, don't become Tamei' and he
became Tamei, he is liable for each warning.
(d) (Gemara - Rabah citing Rav Huna): The Torah says "He will not become
Tamei', and also 'He will not enter (a tent in which there is a corpse); it
speaks in all situations - (even if he is already Tamei, he is liable for
entering a tent with a corpse);
1. He is not lashed twice for becoming Tamei twice if the latter Tum'ah is
not via a tent.
(e) Rav Yosef: I swear, Rav Huna said that even for touching twice, he is
1. (Rav Huna): A Nazir was in a cemetery. They passed the corpse of his
relative or any corpse to him, and he touched it - he is liable.
(f) Question (Abaye - Beraisa): A Kohen was carrying a corpse. They passed
the corpse of his relative or any corpse to him, and he touched it. One
might have thought that he is liable - "He will not profane" (most change
the text to "To profane himself"), the Torah does not speak of one who is
already profaned (Tamei).
2. Even though he is already Tamei, we see that Rav Huna obligates him for
(g) Counter-question (Rav Yosef): This opposes our Mishnah!
1. (Mishnah): If he was becoming Tamei through a corpse all day, he is only
liable once; if they warned him, 'Don't become Tamei, don't become Tamei'
and he became Tamei, he is liable for each warning.
(h) Answer (Abaye; according to the Rosh, Rav Yosef): In the Beraisa, the
Tum'os are connected (he is still touching the 1st corpse when he touches
the 2nd; in the Mishnah, he touches the 2nd after having let go of the 1st.
2. Even though he is already Tamei, he is liable for touching Tum'ah!
3. Since the Beraisa opposes the Mishnah, there must be a mistake in the
text, so we discard the Beraisa (Tosfos; Rosh - Rav Yosef is asking
rhetorically, how do we resolve this?)
(i) Question: Is connected Tum'ah really mid'Oraisa?!
1. (R. Yitzchak bar Yosef): Connected Tum'ah was only said regarding Terumah
and Kodshim; it was not said regarding a Nazir or one offering the Pesach
(j) Answer: (If Reuven touches) a person who is touching a person touching a
corpse, Reuven is Tamei for 7 days mid'Rabanan; (if Reuven touches) a person
touching a corpse, he is Tamei for 7 days mid'Oraisa (Tosfos; Rashi - if
Reuven touches a person that is no longer touching a corpse, Reuven is Tamei
for 7 days mid'Rabanan; if Reuven touches a person touching a corpse, he is
Tamei for 7 days mid'Oraisa).
2. If it was a Torah law, it would apply in all cases!
(k) Question: We are saying that if while touching a corpse, he touches
another corpse, he is not liable for the latter, because he is already
1. The same applies if he enters a tent (containing a corpse) while he is
Tamei (and Rabah said one is liable in this case)!
(l) Answer #1 (R. Yochanan): If the corpse is in a house, he becomes Tamei
at the moment he enters, so he is liable for becoming Tamei and for
1. If the corpse is in a field, he becomes Tamei when he touches it; even if
he later enters a tent with a corpse, since he is already Tamei when he
enters, he is exempt for entering.