ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Nazir 14
(a) After the She'eilah of 'Hareini Nazir le'Achar Esrim Yom, u'me'Achshav
Me'ah Yom', Rava goes on to ask 'Hareini Nazir le'Achar Esrim Yom,
u'me'Achshav Nazir le'Olam' (see Rosh), Mahu? The sequence of these two
She'eilos is - that even if, in the previous case, the hundred-day Nezirus
begins immediately, maybe this one will not, as we shall now see.
For the Sugya of Nezirus Shimshon, refer to the explanation of the Rosh.
(b) 'Nazir le'Olam' ...
1. ... might not take effect immediately, even if 'Me'ah Yom' does - because
the latter only does because the Noder is able to resume the first Nezirus
after the second one terminates; whereas in this case, once the Nezirus
le'Olam commences, he will never be able to shave, in which case he will not
be able to resume the first Nezirus.
(c) According to the first Tzad of the She'eilah - his hundred-day Nezirus
will not commence at all.
2. ... might nevertheless begin immediately like 'Me'ah Yom - because he is
able to have the Nezirus le'Olam revoked by a Chacham. Consequently, he may
as well begin the first Nezirus on the off-chance that he will decide to do
(d) Others have the text 'N'zir Olam' (rather than 'Nazir le'Olam' - Tosfos
reverses the implications of the two phrases). 'N'zir Olam', who may trim
his hair every thirty days, until the end of his life (but never cut it
properly) might not take effect immediately, even if 'Me'ah Yom' does -
because in the latter case, even if the hundred days begin immediately, his
second Nezirus will *not* be considered a break in his first Nezirus (due to
their basic similarity), whereas it *will* be considered a break in the case
of a 'N'zir Olam', which has different Halachic implications than a regular
(a) If someone undertakes Nezirus Shimshon after twenty days and S'tam
Nezirus immediately, the S'tam Nezirus not take effect immediately even if,
in the previous case, a 'N'zir Olam' or a 'Nazir le'Olam' does - because,
like them, it will demolish the S'tam Nezirus once it takes effect, but
unlike them, it cannot be annulled.
(b) The problem that Nezirus Shimshon creates vis-a-vis S'tam Nezirus
continuing afterwards - is the fact that a N'zir Shimshon is never allowed
(c) The alternative to observing the first twenty days of S'tam Nezirus and
not being able to complete it - would be not to observe it at all.
(a) If someone declared 'Hareini ke'Moshe be'Shiv'ah ba'Adar' ...
We categorically resolve - the first She'eilah from a Beraisa, which reads
'Hareini Nazir le'Achar Esrim Yom, u'me'Achshav Me'ah Yom, Moneh Esrim,
ve'Achar-Kach Moneh Sheloshim, ve'Achar-Kach Moneh Shemonim, K'dei Lehashlim
1. ... he might he be a Nazir - because that is the day on which Moshe died,
and it is presumed that many people adopted Nezirus on that day due to the
pain that they felt at Moshe's passing.
(b) The problem that we have with this (since we apparently talking about
S'tam Nezirus - though it is unclear why Tosfos takes this for granted) is -
that those who undertook Nezirus after Moshe died would have had no option
but to remain Nezirim le'Olam, because the Korbanos of a Nazir, which are
considered Korbenos Nedavah, could not be brought on a Bamah (which is what
they had to sacrifice on - Tosfos). (See Meso'res ha'Shas and Rashash).
2. ... he might not however, be a Nazir - because the term could also refer
to the day that Moshe was born, in which case he meant that he would
(a) We learned in our Mishnah 'Meni'ach es she'Lo u'Moneh shel B'no'.
According to Rebbi Yochanan, if he became Tamei during the term of Nezirus
for his son, he also demolishes his first term of Nezirus. According to
Resh Lakish - he does not.
(b) Rebbi Yochanan's reason is because he considers the two Nezirus to be
one long Nezirus - which in turn, is due to the fact that he only shaves
once at the end of the second Nezirus (though we will see later that this
requirement is not really necessary.
(c) In the equivalent situation in the Reisha of our Mishnah, where the Tana
says 'Moneh es she'Lo, ve'Achar-Kach Moneh shel B'no' - Rebbi Yochanan would
concede to Resh Lakish that he does not demolish his first Nezirus (even
though, it would appear, he may not yet have brought his first set of
(a) If a Nazir contracted Tzara'as during his term of Nezirus, the Tzara'as
does not demolish the days of Nezirus that he already counted (in spite of
the fact that a Metzora is obligated to shave before he becomes Tahor) -
since the Tzara'as has nothing to do with the Nezirus (though this will be
explained in more detail in the following Perek).
(b) Rebbi Yochanan holds however, that, if that Nazir became Tamei whilst he
was a Metzora, he demolishes the days of Nezirus that he already counted -
due to the fact that he is still in the middle of his term of Nezirus.
(c) According to Resh Lakish, he does not, because, like he said in the
previous case, Tzara'as and Nezirus are two different issues. They find it
necessary to repeat their Machlokes (despite its similarity to the previous
case), because we might otherwise have thought that they only argue ...
1. ... in the previous case - because the two Nezirus at least share the
same name, whereas in our current case, where Nezirus and Tzara'as are two
different issues, even Rebbi Yochanan would concede to Resh Lakish that his
Nezirus will not be demolished.
2. ... in this case - because they are two different issues, but in the
previous one, where the two issues share the same name, even Resh Lakish
would concede to Rebbi Yochanan that it will.
(a) 'Nitma be'Yom Gidul Se'ar, Rav Omer, Eino Soser'. 'Yom Gidul Se'ar' -
refers to someone who accepted a thirty-day Nezirus, and after twenty days,
shall we say, robbers forcibly cut off his hair. He now has to wait thirty
days for his hair to grow in order to shave, and 'Yom Gidul Se'ar' refers to
when he became Tamei on one of those twenty days between the thirtieth day
of his Nezirus and the final day when his haircut falls due.
(b) We now speak about '*Yom* Gidul Se'ar', whereas before we spoke about
'*Yemei* Tzara'ato' - because whereas the days of Tzara'as cannot possibly
last only one day, Yom Gidul Se'ar can (if the robbers were to cut off his
hair on the second day of his Nezirus, extending his Nezirus by only one
day) - Tosfos.
(c) Rav's reason is - because his Nezirus has already terminated, in which
case, even Rebbi Yochanan will agree that 'Eino Soser'.
(d) Shmuel holds 'Soser' - because it is all still part of the same Nezirus,
in which case even Resh Lakish will agree that 'Soser'.
(a) According to Rav Chisda, everyone agrees that 'Im Kidesh Se'ar be'Dam,
Ein Lo Takanah'. 'Im Kidesh Se'ar be'Dam' means - that the Nazir became
Tamei after the blood of his Korban has already been sprinkled, but before
his hair has been cut-off.
(b) We initially interpret 'Ein Lo Takanah' to mean - that the Nazir may
never cut his hair or drink wine.
(c) This cannot go like Rebbi Eliezer - who says that shaving is crucial the
term of Nezirus' completion, in which case he is no different than someone
who became Tamei during the days of Nezirus, who demolishes his Nezirus and
begins again (and who will ultimately be able to cut his hair or drink
(a) Rav Chisda does not appear to go like the Rabbanan either - because
according to them, the shaving is not crucial, and there is no reason why
the Nazir in this case should not be permitted to cut his hair or drink wine
as soon as he has brought his Korbanos.
(b) We therefore answer the Kashya by re-interpreting 'Ein Lo Takanah' to
mean - that he has lost the Mitzvah of shaving, according to the Rabbanan.
(a) Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina says that - if a Nazir whose term of Nezirus
has terminated renders himself Tamei, he receives Malkos, but not if he
shaves or drinks wine.
(b) Even if he renders himself Tamei - he does not demolish the days between
the termination of his Nezirus and the day that he brings his Korbanos
(c) We initially learn Rav Chisda's Din from the Pasuk in Naso "*Kol Yemei*
Haziro la'Hashem". We then ask that if this is indeed so, then why do we not
also learn from the Pasuk there ...
1. ... "*Kol Yemei* Neder Nizro Ta'ar Lo Ya'avor al Rosho" - that he should
also receive Malkos for shaving during that term.
(d) We ultimately learn from the Pasuk "ve'Tamei Rosh Nizro" - that when he
reaches the stage when all he needs to do is to cut his hair (i.e. when his
days of Nezirus have terminated), then he receives Malkos for rendering
himself Tamei (but not for cutting his hair and drinking wine).
2. ... "*Kol Yemei* Nizro, mi'Kol Asher Ya'aseh mi'Gefen ha'Yayin" - that he
should also receive Malkos for drinking wine.
(a) If the Nazir became Tamei after he brought his Korbanos, but before he
shaved, he will not receive Malkos (according to the Rabbanan of Rebbi
Eliezer) - because, in their opinion, shaving is not crucial.
(b) We repudiate Rav Chisda's statement however, from a Beraisa which
specifically states - that a Nazir who rendered himself Tamei, shaved or
drank wine after his term of Nezirus has terminated but before he has
shaved, all receive Malkos.