(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 47


(a) According to Rebbi Eliezer in our Mishnah, a Nazir who became Tamei after shaving on one of his Korbanos demolishes everything.
What do the Chachamim say?

(b) They bring a proof from an incident that took place with Miriam the Tarmudian (a Nezirah) who, after bringing one of her Korbanos, heard that her daughter was dangerously ill.
What happened subsequently?

(a) What did Rebbi Eliezer say earlier in the Masechta about someone who became Tamei after his term of Nezirus had concluded?

(b) Then what does he mean when he says here that he demolishes everything?

(c) How do we prove this answer from the words of the Chachamim?

***** Hadran Alach 'Sheloshah Minim' *****

***** Perek Kohen Gadol *****


(a) Which stringency does a Nazir share with a Kohen Gadol?

(b) Which concession do they both have in common?

(c) Rebbi Eliezer holds that if a Nazir and a Kohen Gadol are walking together, then it is the Kohen Gadol who is obligated to bury the Meis Mitzvah rather than the Nazir.
Why is that?

(a) The Chachamim give priority to the Kohen Gadol, and it is the Nazir who must bury him.
Why is that?

(b) Will this apply even if the Nazir is a N'zir Olam?

(c) According to the Chachamim, who will have to bury the Meis Mitzvah if a Nazir is walking together with a Kohen Hedyot?

Answers to questions



(a) What is a Merubah Begadim? In which period did he serve?

(b) How is it possible for a Merubeh Begadim to continue to serve in the presence of a Mashu'ach be'Shemen ha'Mishchah?

(c) Why, if a Merubah Begadim is walking with ...

  1. ... a Mashu'ach, is it the Merubah Begadim who is obligated to bury the Meis Mitzvah?
  2. ... a Mashu'ach she'Avar, is it the Mashu'ach she'Avar who is obligated?
(d) In the first of the two cases, what is meant by 'Par ha'Ba al Kol ha'Mitzvos'?
(a) In the above-mentioned case of a Merubeh Begadim and Mashu'ach she'Avar, why did we not rather discuss the more simple case of a Merubeh Begadim and a Merubeh Begadim she'Avar, or a Mashu'ach and a Mashu'ach she'Avar?

(b) Why is it not possible to establish the case with just *two* Kohanim?

(c) Why can the case not be when the initial Mashu'ach became Tamei, was replaced, returned to his position and then, following his death, (after the anointing oil had been hidden), they appointed a new Kohen Gadol (Merubeh Begadim). And he was walking together with the Mashu'ach she'Avar when they came across a Meis Mitzvah?

(d) Then what *is* the case?

(a) Why must a Kohen Gadol who was removed because he was found to have a blemish bury the Meis Mitzvah rather than one who was removed because he was a Ba'al Keri? Is there any difference between a permanent blemish and a temporary one?

(b) We ask who would have to bury the Meis Mitzvah if the S'gan (the deputy Kohen Gadol) was walking with the Mashu'ach Milchamah.
What advantage did the ...

  1. ... Mashu'ach Milchamah have over the S'gan?
  2. ... S'gan have over the Mashu'ach Milchamah?
(c) We resolve this She'eilah from a Beraisa, which obligates the Mashu'ach Milchamah to perform the burial.
How does Mar Zutra reconcile this with another Beraisa, which gives the Mashu'ach Milchamah precedence over the S'gan?

(d) In which regard is the second Beraisa cited in Hori'os?

(a) How many Bigdei Kehunah were worn by ...
  1. ... the Mashu'ach Milchamah when going to war?
  2. ... the S'gan?
(b) Does the Mashu'ach Milchamah have any other Chumros over the S'gan?

(c) Then why does the Tana of the first Beraisa mention only the Din of the Mashu'ach Milchamah burying the Meis Mitzvah?

(d) In which other regard does the S'gan's higher level of Kedushah than the Mashu'ach Milchamah manifest itself?

(a) The Torah writes in Parshas Emor "Al Kol Nafshos Meis Lo Yavo".
How do we know that the Pasuk is not speaking about strangers?

(b) So it must be speaking about relatives, and the Torah writes it for the cases that follow.
What do we learn from ...

  1. ... "le'Aviv ... Lo Yitama"?
  2. ... "le'Imo"?
(c) What is the problem with using "le'Aviv" for this D'rashah, in view of the 'Kal va'Chomer' that we just Darshened?

(d) That being the case, Tosfos concludes, it is not really from a 'Kal va'Chomer' that we learn that a Kohen Gadol cannot render himself Tamei for strangers.
Then from where *do* we know it?

Answers to questions

Next daf


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