(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 44


(a) Regarding the three Halachos of a Nazir, the Tana lists the various Chumros of the one over the other.
What is the Chumra of ...
  1. ... Tum'ah and the prohibition of shaving over the prohibition of drinking wine?
  2. ... Tum'ah over the prohibition of shaving?
(b) The Chumra of the prohibition of drinking wine over that of shaving and Tum'ah is the fact that it has no exceptions, whereas the other two do. What is the exception of ...
  1. ... Tum'ah?
  2. ... the prohibition of shaving?
(c) In order not to learn one from the other, every detail has a specific source. How might we otherwise (for example) not permit any exceptions by Tum'ah (if not for a specific Pasuk) from a 'Kal va'Chomer' from the prohibition of wine?

(d) So from where do we learn that a Nazir is permitted (even obligated) to render himself Tamei for a Meis Mitzvah?

(a) Which of the Chumros in our Mishnah do we learn from the Pasuk "mi'Yayin ve'Sheichar Yazir"?

(b) And what do we learn from the Pasuk "ve'ha'Yamim ha'Rishonim Yiplu, *Ki Tamei Nizro"*?

(a) Who receives Malkos, if Reuven shaves Shimon who is a Nazir?

(b) We learned in our Mishnah that the Halachah of Tum'ah is more stringent than that of shaving inasmuch as the former demolishes the entire Nezirus, whereas the latter only demolishes thirty days.
Why should we not learn a 'Kal va'Chomer' from Tum'ah, that a Nazir who shaves must demolish his entire Nezirus and count again from the beginning?

(a) What do we learn from ...
  1. ... "ve'Timei Rosh Nizro" (with regard to rendering a Nazir Tamei)?
  2. ... "Ta'ar Lo Ya'avor al Rosho") with regard to shaving a Nazir)?
(b) If wine, which does not demolish the Nazir's Nezirus, does not have any exceptions to its prohibitions, why do we not say 'Kal va'Chomer' shaving, which does?

(c) And why do we not say that if wine, which has no exceptions, does not demolish the Nezirus, 'Kal va'Chomer' shaving?

(d) Conversely, why do we not then learn from a 'Kal va'Chomer' (from shaving, which has exceptions) that wine demolishes thirty days of Nezirus?

5) We just asked why we do not learn from a 'Kal va'Chomer' (from shaving, which has exceptions) that wine demolishes thirty days of Nezirus.
Why could we not have rejected the Kashya from the fact that someone who shaves a Nazir is Chayav like the Nazir himself, whereas someone who feeds a Nazir wine is not?

Answers to questions



(a) The Tana of our Mishnah discusses the Dinim of shaving regarding a Nazir who became Tamei. His procedure is described clearly in the Torah.
When would he normally shave and when would he bring his Korbanos?

(b) If he postponed shaving until the eighth day, Rebbi Akiva permits him to bring his Korbanos on the same day. Rebbi Tarfon queries him from the Din of Metzora (which initially, follows the same procedure as a Nazir Tamei). What did Rebbi Tarfon hear about a Metzora who did not shave until the eighth day? From whom did he hear it?

(c) What distinction does Rebbi Akiva draw between a Metzora and a Nazir Tamei to answer Rebbi Tarfon's Kashya?

(d) How does this explain why a Metzora is obligated to wait until the ninth day whilst a Nazir is not?

(a) What does Hillel (ha'Katan) quoting a Beraisa, say about a Nazir who shaved on the eighth day?

(b) What are we trying to prove from there?

(c) How do we know that Hillel is talking about a Nazir Tamei and not a Metzora?

(d) Rava establishes the Beraisa when he did not Tovel on the seventh day either (whereas Rebbi Akiva speaks when he did).
How does this enable us to establish the Beraisa even like Rebbi Akiva?

(a) The Torah writes in Metzora (in connection with the Korbanos that the Zav brings on his eighth day) "*u'va'Yom ha'Shemini Yikach ... u'Va Lifnei Hashem* el Pesach Ohel Mo'ed, u'Nesanam el ha'Kohen".
What does the Beraisa comment on this Pasuk?

(b) What did the companions of Rav Nasan bar Hoshaya extrapolate from the Tana's comment (regarding a T'vul-Yom)?

(c) What are the ramifications of this statement? Are they confined to a Zav who saw three times (and who is obligated to bring Korbanos), or does it even apply to a Zav who saw only twice?

(a) What do we learn from the Pasuk in Bo "Vayikach Moshe es Atzmos Yosef Imo"?

(b) Sha'ar Nikanor is the extremity of Machaneh Levi'ah.
Where exactly is Sha'ar Nikanor situated?

(c) What is the significance of the Sha'ar Nikanor with regard to Mechusrei Kaparah (see Rashi)?

(a) On the understanding that the companions of Rav Nasan bar Hoshaya base their statement on the Lashon "*u'Va Lifnei Hashem* (as we pointed out earlier), what does Abaye extrapolate from the Pasuk (written in connection with a Tamei Nazir) "u'va'Yom ha'Shevi'i Yavi Sh'tei Sorim ... *ve'Heivi Keves ben Sh'naso le'Asham*"?

(b) What Kashya does this pose on the companions of Rav Nasan bar Hoshaya?

(c) In which point does Abaye now dispute the statement of the companions of Rav Nasan bar Hoshaya? How will he explain the Pasuk "*u'va'Yom ha'Shemini Yikach ... u'Va Lifnei Hashem* el Pesach Ohel Mo'ed ... " (and that of u'va'Yom ha'Shevi'i Yavi Sh'tei Sorim ... *ve'Heivi Keves ben Sh'naso le'Asham*"). See Rosh until the end of the Sugya?

(d) Then from where does the Tana of the Beraisa learn that until he has Toveled and waited for nightfall, the Zav is forbidden to enter the Machaneh Levi'ah?

(a) Even though a T'vul-Yom who saw twice is permitted to enter the Machaneh Levi'ah, a T'vul-Yom who saw three times is not.
Why is that?

(b) Seeing as the Pasuk in Metzora (" ... u'Va Lifnei Hashem") is speaking about the Machaneh Levi'ah, why is it referred to as "Ohel Mo'ed" (which is normally reserved for the Machaneh Shechinah)?

(c) What do we learn from the Pasuk in Chukas ...

  1. ... "Tamei Yih'yeh"?
  2. ... "Od Tum'aso Bo"?
Answers to questions

Next daf


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