(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Har Nof
Rosh Kollel: Rav Mordecai Kornfeld

Ask A Question about the Daf

Previous daf

Nidah 61


QUESTION: Rava says that even though one may not believe Lashon Hara, he may suspect that it is true in certain situations. The Gemara demonstrates this from Rebbi Tarfon, who refused to harbor two individuals who were rumored to have killed someone. Rashi (DH Meichish Lei) explains that he refused to save them because perhaps they may have indeed killed someone and it is forbidden to save murderers.

If Rebbi Tarfon refused to protect them because it is forbidden to save murderers, then he was not only suspecting that the Lashon Hara might be true -- he was accepting it fully! (Rosh)

ANSWER: TOSFOS (DH Atmarinchu) cites the SHE'ILTOS D'RAV ACHAI who explains that Rebbi Tarfon did not want to harbor the suspected murderers because the king had decreed that anyone who harbored a murderer would be killed, and thus he was suspecting that the Lashon Hara might be true only to protect himself. In such a situation -- to *protect oneself or others* -- one may suspect that Lashon Hara is true. This is what Rashi means when he says that it is forbidden to save the murderers; it is forbidden by the *king*, and therefore doing so would put himself in danger.


OPINIONS: Rav Yosef infers from the Beraisa that says that one may use shrouds for a Mes that are made out of Shatnez that "Mitzvos will no longer be binding in the future." Similarly, Rebbi Yochanan deduced from a verse that "once a person dies, he becomes absolved from the Mitzvos." What does this mean?
(a) TOSFOS (DH Amar Rav Yosef) explains that when a person *is resurrected* when Techiyas ha'Meisim occurs, and he rises in the Shatnez shrouds in which he was burried, he will not be obligated in Mitzvos and he will not have to remove his Shatnez shrouds.

(b) The RASHBA (cited by the Ran) understands it to mean that while a person is *dead* he has no obligation to observe the Mitzvos. Certainly, though, he will be obligated to observe the Mitzvos when he is resurrected, and he must remove the shrouds then.

QUESTION: The SIDREI TAHARAH cites a proof for the opinion of the Rashba. The Gemara in Sanhedrin (90b) quotes the verse, "And you shall give Terumah to Aharon," and asks, "Will Aharon be alive forever [so that you will give Terumah to him]?" The Gemara answers, in the name of Rebbi Yochanan, that Aharon will be resurrected and the Jewish people will give Terumah to him. From here we see that a person *will be* obligated in Mitzvos when he comes back to life, for otherwise why would we be giving Terumah to Aharon after Techiyas ha'Meisim? This supports the opinion of the Rashba.

ANSWER: The ARUCH LA'NER answers that there will actually be two sets of Techiyas ha'Meisim (he bases this on a Gemara in Yoma 5a and a Zohar; see also Ritva, Maseches Rosh Hashanah, end of 16b). The first will involve the resurrection of Moshe and Aharon, who will teach the Jewish people regarding the laws relevant to the Beis ha'Mikdash which will be rebuilt. Then, the final and mass resurrection of the Jewish people will occur. After the first resurrection, the Mitzvos will of course still be binding. After the *second* resurrection, the Mitzvos will no longer be binding.

The SHULCHAN ARUCH (Yoreh Deah 301:6) rules like Tosfos (this is clear from the explanation of the TAZ there (301:9)).

[1] NOZ
OPINIONS: What is the meaning of the word "Noz?"
(a) RASHI (DH v'Noz) learns that Noz means *woven together* (when the wool and linen are joined to each other by needle).

(b) TOSFOS (DH Shua Tavi v'Noz) disagrees with Rashi's explanation. We learn that the prohibition of Shatnez applies only when the wool and linen are woven together from the word "Yachdav" in the verse. If so, Noz does not mean "woven together." Rather, Noz means that the threads must be *wound together*.

The RASH on the Mishnayos (Kilayim 9:8) agrees with Rashi with regard to Noz.

OPINIONS: Do the wool and linen have to be Shua, Tavi, v'Noz (combed, spun, and wound or woven together) with each other or independently?
(a) RASHI holds that they must be Shua, Tavi, v'Noz together. That is, the strands of wool must be combed and spun together with the strands of linen in order to transgress the prohibition of Shatnez. If the strands of wool are combed or spun separately from the strands of linen, even though they are later sewn into a garment together, the Torah prohibition of Shatnez has not been transgressed.

(b) TOSFOS learns that Shua, Tavi, v'Noz means that each type of material is combed, spun, and wound by itself, and afterwards the wool and linen threads are sewn together.

The RASH (ibid.) learns like Tosfos that if each type of thread is processed separately and later combined, the prohibition of Shatnez has been transgressed.

Next daf


This article is provided as part of Shema Yisrael Torah Network
Permission is granted to redistribute electronically or on paper,
provided that this notice is included intact.
For information on subscriptions, archives, and other Shema Yisrael
Classes, send mail to daf@shemayisrael.co.il

Shema Yisrael Torah Network
Jerusalem, Israel

In the U.S.:
Tel. (908) 370-3344
Fax. (908) 367-6608

Toll free line for dedications: 1-800-574-2646