(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 48


(a) What does Rebbi learn from the Pasuk in Naso (written in connection with a Nazir becoming Tamei for his relatives) "Lo Yitama Lahem *be'Mosam"*?

(b) What does he then learn from the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "Imo" (by a Kohen Gadol) "Imo" (by a Nazir)?

(c) What important Halachah (regarding Kohanim burying their relatives) do we learn from the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "Achvah" "Achvah" from the B'nei Ya'akov?

(d) Why is "Imo" (by Kohen Gadol) therefore superfluous (to enable us to learn a 'Gezeirah-Shavah')? How would we have known it from a 'Kal va'Chomer' from a Kohen Hedyot?

(a) Since we already know that a Kohen Gadol is not permitted to bury his relatives from the Pasuk "ve'Al Kol Nafshos Meis Lo Yavo" (as we learned earlier), why do we need the 'Kal va'Chomer' to forbid him to bury his mother? Why might we have thought that he is permitted to bury *her* more than other relatives?

(b) So what does the 'Kal va'Chomer' teach us?

(c) Why is one's father's family considered more family than one's mother's?

(d) Nevertheless, how can we learn Meis Mitzvah from "Aviv"? Perhaps "Aviv" comes to preclude from the theory that "Imo" (who is certainly his mother) precludes his father (who is not)?

(a) We ask from where we know that a Nazir is permitted to bury a Meis Mitzvah.
Why can we not learn it from the same 'Gezeirah-Shavah' ("Imo" "Imo") from which we just learned that a Kohen Gadol is permitted to render himself Tamei for Tum'as Nega'im and Zivus?

(b) We have learned from "Aviv" that a Kohen Gadol may not render himself Tamei even for a relative.
What do we learn from the Pasuk "Kol Yemei Haziro la'Hashem al Nefesh Meis Lo Yavo"?

(c) What would we have said had the Torah omitted the word "Meis"?

(a) Rebbi Yishmael disagrees with (the Tana Kama's need to learn) the previous D'rashah.
What does he learn from the Pasuk " ... Lo Yavo"?

(b) On what grounds do we refute the suggestion that ...

  1. ... Nazir does not require a special Pasuk, because we can learn it from a 'Kal va'Chomer' from Kohen Gadol (whose Kedushah is permanent)?
  2. ... "le'Aviv (u'le'Imo") comes to preclude Meisim who are not relatives from the prohibition?
(c) How could we even think that a Nazir is forbidden to bury his relatives but permitted to bury strangers? Is that not illogical?

(d) So what does the 'Kal va'Chomer from Kohen Hedyot teach us?

Answers to questions



(a) The Tana tries to compare 'K'lalus' by Nazir to 'K'lalus' by Kohen Gadol, inasmuch as just as we infer from "le'Aviv (u'le'Imo") written by the latter, that he may bury a Meis Mitzvah, so too will we make the same inference by "le'Aviv (u'le'Imo") of Nazir.
What is meant by 'K'lalus'?

(b) How can he learn Nazir (who brings a Korban) from a Kohen Gadol (who does not - as we asked above)?

(c) But he rejects this on the grounds that one may well infer the opposite from the 'K'lalus' of a Kohen Hedyot.
How would we do that? What would we then learn from "le'Aviv"?

(a) From "le'Imo", the Tana learns the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' ('li'Nega'am u'le'Zivam' of Rebbi).
From where will he learn Meis Mitzvah?

(b) Seeing as "Imo" by Kohen Gadol is redundant (as we learned above), why does the Tana need "Imo" by Nazir to be redundant too?

(c) Which two Pirchos could we ask to prevent learning Nazir from Kohen Gadol?

(a) And what does the Tana learn from the Pasuk ...
  1. ... " ve'la'Achoso ha'Besulah ... *Lo Yitama*"?
  2. ... "*ve'la'Achoso* ha'Besulah ... Lo Yitama"?
(b) Why does he Darshen the Pesukim in the wrong order? Why does he not first Darshen "Imo" "Imo" for the 'Gezeirah-Shavah', and then "le'Achiv" to preclude a Meis Mitzvah?
(a) Rebbi Akiva Darshens the Pasuk by Nazir quite differently. According to him, "Al Nafshos" refers to strangers, and "Meis" to relatives. "Nafshos" in his opinion, does not imply a dead animal, either because the Torah writes "Lo Yavo" (like Rebbi Yishmael), or because the Torah may well refer to a dead animal as "Nefesh Meis", but not as "Nefesh" S'tam.
Why else can the Pasuk not be speaking about a dead animal?

(b) What does Rebbi Akiva learn from "le'Aviv u'le'Imo Lo Yitama"?

(c) He learns from "le'Achiv" that even a Kohen Gadol who is also a Nazir must bury a Meis Mitzvah.
Why does he not require a D'rashah for a Kohen Hedyot?

(a) From where does Rebbi Akiva learn that a Kohen Gadol may bury a Meis Mitzvah?

(b) Seeing as he Darshens the entire Pasuk of Nazir (even "le'Aviv" and "le'Imo" as two separate D'rashos, as we shall soon see), how can he agree with Rebbi's 'Gezeirah-Shavah' (seeing as only the Pasuk of Kohen is Mufneh but not that of Nazir)?

(c) And from where will Rebbi Yishmael (who needs "le'Aviv" to teach us relatives, and who consequently has only one Pasuk for a Nazir burying a Meis Mitzvah) know that a Nazir who is also a Kohen Gadol must buries a Meis Mitzvah (in spite of the double Kedushah)?

(d) Seeing as Rebbi Yishmael does not differentiate between one and two La'avin, why does he require "Achoso" to obligate someone who is going to Shecht his Pesach or to perform B'ris Milah on his son to bury a Meis Mitzvah.

Answers to questions

Next daf


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