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


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Nazir 8



(a) We have already cited the Mishnah 'Hareini Nazir ke'Sa'ar Roshi u'che'Afar ha'Aretz, Harei Zeh N'zir Olam, u'Megale'ach Achas li'Sheloshim Yom'. Rebbi however, disagrees. In his opinion, he is a Nazir forever, and does not need to shave every thirty days and bring his Korbanos. He would agree with the Rabbanan however - if the Noder would say 'Hareini *Nezirus* ke'Sa'ar Roshi ... '.

(b) When someone says 'Hareini Nazir Melo ha'Bayis O Melo ha'Kupah' - we ask him what he meant. If he replies that he meant to accept one large Nezirus lasting thirty days, then that is what he is.

(c) The box or the house in question is empty.

(d) If he says that he meant S'tam, then we consider them to be full of mustard-seeds and he is a Nazir for as many days as one can fit mustard-seeds into the box or the house (which practically means until he dies).

(a) We have also cited the Mishnah 'Hareini Nazir mi'Ka'an ve'Ad Makom P'loni ... '. We do not take account of the number of inns along the way - because, as we explained earlier, the Tana is speaking when the Noder had already set out on his journey ... .

(b) Someone who declares 'Hareini Nazir ke'Minyan Yemos ha'Chamah' - is a Nazir for three hundred and sixty five periods of Nezirus.

(c) His Din is not similar to that of a N'zir Olam - because he is not obligated to shave every thirty days and to bring Korbanos like a N'zir Olam does.

(d) Rebbi Yehudah tells of a case where, as the Nazir completed his terms of Nezirus, he died - indicating that many years passed until his Nezirus terminated, in support of the Tana Kama.

(a) The Tana just taught us that in the case of 'Melo ha'Bayis', if he replies 'S'tam', then we consider the house to be full of mustard-seeds, and he is a Nazir for the rest of his life. 'Why mustard-seeds?' we ask. 'Why not pumpkins ... '? Practically speaking - he would have to observe one term of Nezirus of thirty days, seeing as one might just as well have asked from a dough large enough to fill the house, as from pumpkins.

(b) The question to go le'Kula in a S'feika d'Oraysa is justified - by a Mishnah in Taharos, which states 'Safek Nezirus le'Kula'.

(c) Nevertheless above, in the Mishnah of 'mi'Ka'an ve'Ad Sof ha'Olam' we asked the very opposite (that we ought to go le'Chumra) - because there, the Lashon 'mi'Ka'an ve'Ad Sof ha'Olam' implies that he the Noder accepted a long Nezirus (whereas in our case there is no reason to assume that he meant a houseful of mustard-seeds more than with pumpkins), and it is when it is fifty-fifty that we say 'Safek Nezirus le'Kula'.

(d) Taking into account that he may have meant a house full of pumpkins or of dough constitutes a Chumra - because on the one hand, he is obligated to shave and to bring his Korbanos due to the possibility that he meant a houseful of mustard-seeds, which require him to serve consecutive periods of Nezirus. However now that he may have referred to a houseful of pumpkins or of dough, bringing this Korban would constitute bringing Chulin to the Azarah, so he is unable to bring it.

(a) If someone undertakes to be a Nazir if the pile in front of him contains a hundred Kur, and before he has a chance to measure it, it is stolen, Rebbi Shimon in a Beraisa considers him to be a Nazir - because he holds 'Safek Nezirus Lehachmir', and that a person is willing to enter a situation where the Safek is more stringent than the Vaday.

(b) Rebbi Yehudah - does not consider him to be a Nazir.

(c) We initially think that in the case of our Mishnah ('Hareini Nazir Melo ha'Bayis O Melo ha'Kupah') - Rebbi Yehudah will hold le'Kula, (that we consider the house as if it was full of pumpkins or of dough).

(d) According to Rebbi Shimon ...

1. ... the Nazir has no alternative but to adopt permanent Nezirus (on account of the Safek [since he is unable to bring his Korbanos at the end of the thirty-day period]). There is a way round this however - by the Noder stipulating, before he actually begins counting the thirty days, that he abides by his original Nezirus, if in fact there *was* a hundred Kur there, but in case there was not, he now undertakes a new Nezirus of thirty days. Consequently, when the thirty days terminates, he will be able to bring his Korbanos 'mi'Mah Nafshach' without any qualms.
2. ... who is strict in the case of 'Mei'ah Kur', despite the fact that whether the Nazir is a Vaday Nazir or a Safek, he simply brings one set of Korbanos at the termination of his Nezirus (as we just explained), he nevertheless refers to it as 'S'feiko Chamur mi'Vada'o' - because of the eventuality that he becomes Tamei before he made his stipulation, leaving him a Safek Nazir Tamei, and with no way of bringing the Korbanos that a Nazir Tamei brings (seeing as these cannot be brought through conditions).
(a) Rebbi Yochanan nevertheless establishes our Mishnah even like Rebbi Yehudah - because, in our case, he says, unlike the case of the hundred Kur (where Rebbi Yehudah goes le'Kula, due to the fact that the Noder may not have accepted Nezirus at all), he is definitely a Nazir, only we are not certain for how long. In that case, he will concede to Rebbi Shimon that we go le'Chumra.

(b) We attempt to refute Rebbi Yochanan's explanation - by suggesting that he could shave at the end of thirty days (which he is obligated to do whether he meant a houseful of pumpkins or of mustard-seeds). Then, once he has brought his Korbanos, Rebbi Yehudah will go le'Kula with regard to the second period of Nezirus, just like he does in the case of the hundred Kur.

(c) We establish Rebbi Yehudah like Rebbi however. The significance of this is - that if the Noder meant a houseful of mustard-seeds, then he is not a N'zir Olam (who shaves ... every thirty days), as we believed until now, but a permanent Nazir, because Rebbi Yehudah holds like Rebbi in our Mishnah.




(a) The problem with establishing Rebbi Yehudah like Rebbi from our Mishnah (regarding the case of 'ke'Minyan Yemos ha'Chamah' where the man died just as he terminated his terms of Nezirus) is - that, if Rebbi Yehudah holds like Rebbi, that Nazir would only have terminated one term of Nezirus, and how can Rebbi we cite Rebbi Yehudah in support of the Tana Kama, (like every story bought in a Mishnah) when in fact, he disagrees with him?

(b) Rebbi Yehudah says that someone who undertakes Nezirus like the number of piles of drying figs in the field or like the number of paths in the field in the Sh'mitah year - must serve that number of terms of Nezirus.

(c) We reconcile both of these cases with Rebbi Yochanan (who established Rebbi Yehudah like Rebbi) - by differentiating between where the Noder did *not* mention the word 'Minyan' and where he did, (and it is only in the former case that Rebbi Yehudah holds that he serves one extended period of Nezirus).

(d) Even though it is evident from our Mishnah that Rebbi himself makes no such distinction, and that even when he did use the word 'Minyan' he serves one extended period of Nezirus - Rebbi Yehudah agrees with Rebbi in principle, but disagrees with him in this point.

(a) The difference between a person who says 'Hareini Nazir Kol Yemei Chayai' and one who says 'Hareini Nazir Elef Shanah' is - that the former is a N'zir Olam (who is obligated to shave once every thirty days - according to the Rabbanan of Rebbi, and to bring his Korbanos); whereas the latter is a Nazir for the rest of his life.

(b) A man who says ...

  1. ...'Hareini Nazir ve'Achas ve'Od' - will have to serve three terms of Nezirus.
  2. ...'Hareini Nazir ve'Achas ve'Od ve'Shuv' - will have to serve four.
(c) The Tana needs to add this last case -because we would otherwise have thought that 've'Shuv' comes to add another three, and that he is obligated to observe six terms.

(d) In another Beraisa, Sumchus presents a list of Leshonos regarding Nezirus. A person who used the Lashon ...

  1. ... 'Puntigon' - would have to serve five terms of Nezirus.
  2. ... 'Tatrigon' - ... four.
  3. ... 'T'rigon' - ... three.
  4. ... 'Digon' - ... two.
  5. ... 'Hein' - ... one.
(a) The Tana of another Beraisa says - that a two or three sided house is not subject to Tum'as Nega'im.

(b) Neither is ...

  1. ... a round house - or
  2. ... a five-sided house.
(c) We learn from the "(Kir) Kiros" mentioned twice in Metzora - that only a four-sided house is subject to Tum'as Nega'im.
***** Hadran Alach Kol Kinuyei *****

Next daf


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