ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Nazir 59
(a) In the second Lashon, Rebbi Chiya bar Aba Amar Rebbi Yochanan again
sentences anyone who shaves the underarm hair or that of the Beis ha'Ervah
to Malkos. Once again, we ask from the Beraisa which presents it as only an
Isur de'Rabbanan. What he adds in this Lashon that renders the answer that
we gave in the first Lashon (that Rebbi Yochanan also means Lokeh Malkos
de'Rabbanan) unacceptable is - the source "Lo Yilbash Gever Simlas Ishah".
(b) We establish Rebbi Yochanan like the Beraisa 'ha'Ma'avir Beis ha'Shechi
... Lokeh Mishum Lo Yilbash Gever Simlas Ishah" rather than like the Beraisa
that we quoted earlier 'ha'Ma'avir Beis ha'Shechi ... Harei Zeh Lokeh' -
because we prefer to cite the Beraisa which quotes the Pasuk (which caused
us to ask on Rebbi Yochanan in the first place) Tosfos.
(c) The first Tana explains the Pasuk "Lo Yilbash" - as a prohibition for a
woman to dress-up as a man or vice-versa, for immoral purposes.
(d) He cannot explain the Pasuk in its literal sense (that it is forbidden
for a woman to wear men's clothes or vice-versa) - because the Torah adds
'To'eivah Hi", and there is nothing abominable in that.
(a) Rebbi Eliezer ben Ya'akov explains the Pasuk ...
1. ... "Lo Yihyeh K'li Gever al Ishah" - as a prohibition against a woman
(b) Rav Nachman permits a Nazir to shave his underarm hair and that of the
Beis ha'Ervah - because, he maintains, since he anyway shaves off all the
hair on his head, shaving *them* is not considered an act of beautification.
2. ... "ve'Lo Yilbash Gever Simlas Ishah" - as a prohibition against a man
wearing a woman's make-up.
(c) The Halachah however - is not like him.
(a) The Rabbanan were surprised to discover that Rebbi Yochanan had no
underarm hair - seeing as Rebbi Yochanan is the one who expressly forbade
shaving it earlier in the Sugya.
(b) Rav Sh'man bar Aba put their minds at ease - by attributing it to old
age (which causes hair to fall out).
(c) He not answer that Rebbi Yochanan probably cut it off with scissors -
proving that Rebbi Yochanan forbids even that, at least mi'de'Rabbanan (even
according to those who say that Rav permits it).
(a) Rebbi Ami exempted a certain man from Malkos (mi'de'Rabbanan), as they
were about to administer it, when he noticed, as they were removing his
clothes, that he did not shave his underarm hair (as was apparently the
custom of the Amei-ha'Aretz of that time). Consequently, on the grounds -
that he must be a Talmid-Chacham, he exempted him from Malkos
(b) When Rav ...
1. ... asked Rebbi Chiya whether shaving the underarm hair and that of the
Beis ha'Ervah was permitted - he replied that it was forbidden.
(c) According to ...
2. ... pointed out that the hair tends to grow and become painful - he
replied that (unlike the hair of the head, that grows very long), it only
tends to grow a little and then stop (so it would not cause much pain).
1. ... our original text in Rav (on the previous Amud), which does not
forbid shaving body-hair at all - Rebbi Chiya forbade shaving the underarm
hair and that of the Beis ha'Ervah with a razor.
(d) Neither did Rebbi Chiya permit scratching the hair until it falls out.
He did however - permit scratching it with a cloth, until it falls out.
2. ... the Ba'al Halachah Gedolos, in whose opinion Rav forbids even shaving
body-hair with a razor - he forbade shaving the underarm hair and that of
the Beis ha'Ervah even with scissors.
(a) The interesting Heter that emerges from the implication that, if it was
a matter of pain, it would be permitted to remove the hair is, that since
whatever is not for the purpose of beautification is not subject to "Lo
Yilbash" - it follows therefore that even though looking in a mirror in
order to look nice would be forbidden, doing so in order to avoid hurting
oneself whilst shaving, will be permitted.
(b) In the second Lashon, Rav asked Rebbi Chiya whether one is permitted to
scratch the underarm hair or the Beis ha'Ervah during Davening via a cloth.
He replied - in the negative.
(c) The Halachah however, is - that it is permitted.
(a) We learned in the previous Mishnah, that two Nezirim one of whom is
Tamei, must bring their Korbanos jointly and make the necessary conditions.
Rebbi Yehoshua suggests that, in the event that one of them dies - the
remaining Nazir finds someone who wants to adopt Nezirus anyway, and it is
with him that he brings his Korbanos jointly and with whom he makes the
(b) He begins by declaring 'If I was Tamei, then you are a Tahor Nazir
immediately, but if I was Tahor, then you will be a Nazir only after thirty
days'. After thirty days - they bring a Korban Tum'ah and a Korban Taharah.
He then declares 'If I was Tamei, then the Korban Tum'ah is mine and the
Korban Taharah is yours; whereas if I was Tahor, then the Korban Tahor is
mine and the Korban Tum'ah is a Safek' (since a Chatas ha'Of [unlike a
Chatas Beheimah] can be brought be'Safek).
(c) At the final stage thirty days after that - they bring a Korban Taharah,
and he declares - 'If I was the Tamei one, then the Korban Tum'ah that I
brought was mine, the Korban Tahor was yours and the Korban Tahor that I am
bringing now is mine But if I was the Tahor one, then the Korban Taharah
that I brought was mine, the Korban Tum'ah was a Safek, and the Korban that
I am now bringing is yours'.
(d) Ben Zoma disagrees with Rebbi Yehoshua on the grounds - that nobody
would be fool enough to join him.
(a) According to ben Zoma, the remaining Nazir brings a Chatas ha'Of and an
Olas Beheimah - as well as an Olas ha'Of (even though ben Zoma omits to
mention it) after thirty days.
(b) He then makes a condition and declares 'If I was Tamei, then the Chatas
ha'Of is obligatory and the Olas Beheimah a Nedavah; whereas if I was Tahor,
then the Olah is obligatory and the Chatas, a Safek'.
(c) He needs to bring the Olas Beheimah then (and not at the end together
with his other Korbanos) - to enable him to perform his first shaving on it
(seeing as one is never permitted to shave without bringing one of the
(d) After counting his second set of thirty days - he brings a Korban
Taharah (Chatas, Olah and Shelamim) and declares 'If I was Tamei, then the
first Olah was a Nedavah, and the one I am now bringing is my obligation;
whereas if I was Tahor, the first one was my obligation and this one is a
Korban Nedavah'. Then he is permitted to drink wine.
(a) Rebbi Yehoshua objects to ben Zoma's ruling on the grounds -that it
means splitting up the Nazir's Korbanos (as we explained).
(b) Rebbi Yehoshua's conclusion - is that the Chachamim nevertheless agreed
with ben Zoma.
(c) In fact, Rebbi Yehoshua does not only agree with ben Zoma, but he even
rules like him. He only presented a different opinion in our Mishnah in
order to sharpen the brains of the Talmidim.
(a) Rav Nachman queries with Rebbi Yehoshua because 'Mai Le'avid Lei Rebbi
Yehoshua le'Dakei de'Lo Yisru' (what will Rebbi Yehoshua do to stop the
interstices from going bad?) - by which he means that taking a second Nazir
as prescribed by Rebbi Yehoshua may help the solve the initial problem, but
it creates another one: because at the end of the final thirty days when
they bring the remaining Korbanos, they are both required to wave the
Cheilev of the Shelamim and then to shave, doubling the time that elapses
until the Cheilev is burned on the Mizbei'ach, thereby increasing the chance
of the intestines going bad.
(b) Rav Nachman is not worried about that in the previous Mishnah, when
everyone agrees that both men bring a combined set of Korbanos -because when
both S'feikos are alive, there is no other option; whereas here, it is
possible to do like ben Zoma.
(c) Others associate Rav Nachman's Kashya with the entire Olah, which,
according to Rebbi Yehoshua, will now have to wait until after both men had
shaved. We reject this explanation on the grounds that - firstly, the main
Korban of the Nazir is the Shelamim, and secondly, there is nothing to stop
the Kohanim from bringing the Olah before the two men shave.
(a) We have already discussed the Mishnah 'Nazir she'Hayah Tamei be'Safek
u'Muchlat be'Safek ... ' earlier (in Perek Kohen Gadol). He become permitted
1. ... to eat Kodshim - after sixty days.
(b) He has to wait sixty days before shaving for his Safek Muchlat - because
it is only the shaving of a *Vaday* Muchlat that overrides the Nazir's
prohibition to shave, but that of a Safek does not.
2. ... to drink wine and become Tamei Meis - after a hundred and twenty