(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 13

NAZIR 13 (1 Cheshvan) - l'Iluy Nishmas ha'Ga'on Rav Gedalya Rabinowitz (of Manchester and, towards the end of his life, Bnei Brak), well-remembered for his spirited Shi'urim that kindled many a heart with the fire of Torah.



(a) The Tana needs to tell us 'Hareini Nazir ke'she'Yih'yeh Li Ben ...
1. ... ve'Nolad Lo Ben, Harei Zeh Nazir' - not for an intrinsic Chidush, but because of the Seifa, as we shall now see.
2. ... Nolad Lo Bas, Tumtum ve'Androginos, Eino Nazir' - because we might otherwise have thought that by 'ke'she'Yih'yeh Li Ben', he meant - a child that will 'build' his family, irrespective of whether it is a male or a female.
(b) And he finds it necessary to add 've'Im Amar ke'she'Yih'yeh Li V'lad, Afilu Nolad Lo Bas, Tumtum ve'Androginos Harei Zeh Nazir' - because we might otherwise have thought that by 'V'lad', the Noder meant a child that is significant (i.e. a son, to which people tend to attach more significance).

(c) The author of the Seifa 'Hipilah Ishto, Eino Nazir', is Rebbi Yehudah of 'K'ri' - where he says that if someone declares Nezirus provided that the pile in front of him contains a hundred Kur, and the pile is stolen before it can be measured, he is not a Nazir.

(a) Rebbi Aba asked Rav Huna what the Din will be regarding someone who said 'Hareini Nazir le'che'she'Yih'yeh Li Ben', and his wife gave birth to a stillborn son. Then, after he designated his Korban, she gave birth to a live twin son. What makes this case different from that of our Mishnah is - the fact that the second twin was born alive, indicating that the first twin too, was a ninth-month baby.

(b) The She'eilah is - whether the Korban that he designated is Kadosh as regards its shearings and working with it.

(c) It is confined to Rebbi Yehudah, but not to Rebbi Shimon - because in the opinion of the latter, he is a Nazir anyway, and the Korban is definitely Kadosh.

(d) The She'eilah remains unresolved.

For the following Sugya I have used 'Rashi' instead of Tosfos, because of the problem with the variety of texts in Tosfos.


(a) ben Rechumi asked Abaye whether, someone who hears his friend say 'Hareini Nazir le'che'she'Yehei Li Ben', and responds by saying 've'Alai', this refers to 'Diburei' or to 'Nafshei'. By ...
1. ... 'Diburei' he means - that he strictly followed the Neder of the first Nazir, and that he too, undertakes Nezirus if his friend has a boy.
2. ... 'Nafshei' he means - that he too, undertakes Nezirus if his own wife give birth to a boy.
(b) He then ask him what the Din would be regarding where the friend responded by saying 'va'Ani' - perhaps 'va'Ani' has more personal implications, and there he is certainly referring to his own wife giving birth to a boy.

(c) On the assumption that 'Im Timtzi Lomar' is conclusive, we resolve these She'eilos - that whenever he is in the presence of the person whose wife is giving birth, he definitely refers to the Noder's situation and not to his own (since he would be too embarrassed to hurt the Noder by doing that).

(d) He then asked him what the Din will be if the friend said 'va'Ani' after hearing him say 'Hareini Nazir le'che'she'Yehei li'Peloni Ben'. In fact - the same She'eilah will apply if he said 've'Alai', only ben Rechumi mentioned one of two possibilities.

4) The outcome of ben Rechumi's final She'eilah is - 'Teiku' (only the Lashon 'Tiba'i' is used because the Lashon of Nedarim and Nazir is sometimes unusual).




(a) Someone who declared 'Hareini Nazir ve'Nazir ke'she'Yih'yeh Li Ben', and his wife gave birth to a son after he had already begun to observe one period of Nezirus - should complete the Nezirus that he started (including shaving and bringing his Korbanos) before observing the Nezirus for his son.

(b) And in the same case, only where he had declared 'Hareini Nazir ke'she'Yih'yeh Li Ben, ve'Nazir', placing 've'Nazir last - he should break the Nezirus that he started, and first carry out the Nezirus for his son before completing the Nezirus that he began.

(c) As for his other obligations - when he terminates his second Nezirus, he shaves (for both sets of Nezirus), and brings two sets of Korbanos, one for each Nezirus.

(d) He does not first shave for his earlier Nezirus, before commencing with the second one - because, having shaved in the middle, how will he be able to complete his first Nezirus before commencing with the second one?

(a) Rava asked what the Din will be if a person declares 'Hareini Nazir le'Achar Esrim Yom, u'Me'achshav Me'ah Yom'. The hundred days Nezirus might not begin until after the termination of his S'tam Nezirus, which begins in twenty days time, because we assume that a person does not normally intend to divide his Nezirus into two parts. It might, on the other hand, be effective immediately - seeing as a period of over thirty days (eighty, to be precise) will remain for him to grow his hair.

(b) If it is not effective immediately (like the first Tzad), then what the Noder meant when he said 'Me'achshav' was - that he accepts the Nezirus immediately, but that it will only come into effect as from twenty days time.

(c) In the latter contingency, the Noder shaves after his thirty-day Nezirus The shaving will not prevent him from completing the last eighty days of his first Nezirus - because shaving in the middle of one's term of Nezirus requires recommencing one's term of Nezirus, only if one is not left with at least thirty days to grow one's hair (such as he is in our case).

(d) We cannot prove from the Seifa of our Mishnah, where the Tana rules 'Meni'ach es she'Lo u'Moneh es shel B'no, ve'Achar-Kach Mashlim es she'Lo', that the Noder does not mind dividing his Neder into two parts - because that will only pertain to that case, where the Noder did not know that his wife would give birth before he had terminated his first Nezirus, and probably even anticipated that she would not do so; but not to our case, where, at the time when he declared the Neder, he knew that the hundred-day Neder will have to be divided, should he begin it immediately (Tosfos).

(a) We conclude that, in fact, Rava incorporated into his She'eilah, the case where the Noder said 'Hareini Nazir le'Achar Esrim Yom, u'Me'achshav S'tam Nazir'. In that case - he first asked about the thirty-day Nezirus, and, even if we will say there that (seeing as he will only be left with ten days after the termination of the twenty-day Nezirus), he does not wish to divide it, what will be the Din if he first accepts a hundred-day Nezirus? Perhaps where he will remain with a minimum of thirty days after the termination of the second Nezirus, he will not mind dividing it into two parts?

(b) In the first She'eilah, he would not have to shave until after the termination of both periods of Nezirus (otherwise, the shaving of the second Nezirus will demolish the first one completely).

(c) Rava could equally well have asked what the Din will be if he switched the order and said 'Hareini Nazir Me'ah Yom ve'Nazir le'Achar Esrim Yom' - but he presented one of two possible She'eilos.

Next daf


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