ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Nazir 49
(a) Despite the fact that, according to Rebbi Akiva, Meis Mitzvah overrides
Nazir from "le'Aviv" and a Kohen Gadol who is a Nazir from "le'Achiv", the
Torah nevertheless needs to write "le'Imo". She is not automatically
included in "le'Aviv" - because she has the advantage of definitely being
the Nazir's mother, whereas his father is only a Safek. So perhaps for his
mother, he would be permitted to render himself Tamei.
(b) And the Torah also needs to write "le'Aviv". We cannot learn it from
"le'Imo" - because one's Yichus stems from one's father (as we learn from
the Pasuk in Bamidbar "le'Mishpechoseihem le'Veis Avosam"), so perhaps for
him, the Nazir could render himself Tamei.
(c) Although the relationship of a father is a Safek, he is nevertheless
obligated to honor him - on the basis of a Chazakah (because 'most Bi'os go
after a woman's husband', and consequently, most children are, so to speak,
their father's sons).
(a) The Torah writes in Emor with regard to Kohen Gadol "Al Kol Nafshos
Meis". Rebbi Akiva learns from ...
1. ... "Al Kol" - that a Nazir is forbidden to bury strangers.
(b) By Nazir too, the Torah writes "al Kol Nefesh Meis", and Rebbi Akiva
learns strangers from "Nefesh" (and not from "al Kol"). In fact here too,
he learns strangers - (not from "al Kol, but) from "al Kol Nafshos"
2. ... "Meis" - that he is forbidden to bury even relatives.
3. ... "Nafshos" - that a Revi'is of blood that seeps even from two corpses,
is Metamei be'Ohel.
(c) Nevertheless, he also uses "Nafshos" to teach us a Revi'is of blood from
two Meisim - because the Torah writes "Nafshos" (plural) and not "Nefesh"
(singular, like it does in the Parshah of Tum'as Kohen), thereby conveying
two D'rashos from the word (Tosfos).
(d) Despite the 'Kal va'Chomer' from a Kohen Hedyot, or because the Kohen
Gadol was already forbidden from the time that he was a Kohen Hedyot, Rebbi
Akiva requires a Pasuk (by Kohen Gadol) for the prohibition of strangers -
in order to add a second La'av (though it is strange that no mention is made
of this in the Sugya) Tosfos.
(a) 1. a corpse or a k'Zayis from a corpse; 2. a k'Zayis of juices from a
corpse; 3. a spoonful of dust from a corpse; 4. a spinal-cord and/or a skull
from a corpse; 5. a complete limb from a corpse; 6. a complete limb from a
living person with a befitting amount of flesh still attached to it all have
in common the following three Halachos; - they all render others Tamei by
touching, carrying or being under the same Ohel as them, for which the Nazir
is obligated to shave, demolish his Nezirus and begin all over again.
(b) 'a befitting amount of flesh' is considered - sufficient to enable the
limb to re-grow if it was still attached to the body (even if that is less
than a k'Zayis).
(c) Bones and blood are included in the above list too. The minimum Shiur of
1. ... bones is - half a Kav.
2. ... blood is - half a Log.
(a) The other condition that must be fulfilled before bones can fit into
this list is - that they must come from 'Rov Minyano' or 'Rov Binyano' of
the bones of a corpse.
(b) A Revi'is (a quarter-Log) of blood may well be Metamei be'Ohel - but a
Nazir does not need to shave (and demolish his Nezirus) on account of it.
(c) The source for all these measures is - 'Halachah le'Moshe mi'Sinai'.
(a) A bone the size of a barley (which also renders Tamei) differs from the
above - inasmuch as it renders Tamei through touching and carrying, but not
through Tum'as Ohel.
(b) In all the above cases, the Nazir requires sprinkling with the ashes of
the Parah Adumah on the third and seventh days. He demolishes his Nezirus -
entirely (and begins all over again).
(c) He recommences his Nezirus - as soon as he becomes Tahor.
(a) Rebbi Yehudah refused entry to the Beis-Hamedrash to the disciples of
Rebbi Meir after his death - because, he claimed, they did not come to learn
Torah, but to overwhelm him with Halachos (to make him angry).
(b) Sumchus managed to gain entry.
(c) Rebbi Yehudah proved his point when Sumchus cited our Mishnah in the
name of Rebbi Meir - ' ... al ha'Meis, ve'al k'Zayis min ha'Meis ... .' If a
Nazir must shave for touching a k'Zayis from a corpse, he asked - then why
did Rebbi Meir need to add that he must shave for touching a Meis?
(d) Rebbi Yossi reacted with the statement - Meir is dead, Yehudah is cross.
If Yossi remains silent, what will happen to Torah'?