Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) ONE WHO TRANSGRESSED HIS VOW

(a) (Gemara) Question: Our Mishnah is not as R. Yosi, nor as Chachamim!

1. (Beraisa): One who vowed and transgressed his vow - we do not annul his vow (Rashi; Tosfos - we do not allow him to bring sacrifices for completing his Nezirus) until he keeps the prohibition(s) for as many days as he transgressed;
2. R. Yosi says, it suffices to keep the prohibition(s) for 30 days.

i. {Version #1 - our text, according to Rashi: The Mishnah cannot be as Chachamim - Chachamim say he must keep extra days when he accepted a short Nezirus (this also applies by a long Nezirus)!
ii. The Mishnah cannot be as R. Yosi - he says that it suffices to keep 30 days, even if he accepted a long Nezirus (and the Mishnah says, he must complete the full term he accepted)!

(b) Answer #1: The Mishnah can be as R. Yosi - it speaks only of a short Nezirus.}

i. {Version #2 - according to Tosfos: The Mishnah cannot be as Chachamim - Chachamim say he must keep extra days when he accepted a long Nezirus (the same applies by a short Nezirus)!
ii. The Mishnah cannot be as R. Yosi - he says that he must keep 30 days, even if he accepted a short Nezirus (and the Mishnah says, he need not keep extra days)!

(c) Answer #1: The Mishnah can be as R. Yosi - it speaks only of a long Nezirus.}
(d) Answer #2: The Mishnah can be as Chachamim - do not read, he counts Nezirus from the day he accepted - rather, he counts (extra) days as from the day he accepted (and transgressed).

(a) (Mishnah): If a Chacham declared his Nezirus to be void ...
(b) (R. Yirmiyah): From Beis Shamai, we can learn what Beis Hillel would say in a similar situation.

1. Beis Shamai say that mistaken Hekdesh is Hekdesh - but if it turns out that he was never a Nazir, an animal (designated for sacrifices he brings when he shaves) may graze with the flock (it has no Kedushah);
2. Also Beis Hillel, who agree that mistaken Temurah becomes Hekdesh - this only applies when the 1st animal really was Hekdesh;

i. If the Kedushah of the 1st animal is uprooted, also the Temurah becomes Chulin.

(c) (Mishnah): Don't you admit, if he called the 9th animal '10th' ...
(d) (Rav Nachman): (The 9th and 11th animals become Kodesh) only if he called them '10th' by mistake, not if he knew that they are not the 10th;
(e) (Rav Chisda and Rabah bar Rav Huna): They are Kodesh if he erred, all the more so if he knew that they are not the 10th!
(f) Question (Rava to Rav Nachman): Beis Shamai challenged Beis Hillel from the fact that the 9th and 11th get Kedushah by mistake - according to you, Beis Hillel should have answered, this law is different, since it does not work if he knowingly calls them '10th'!
(g) Answer (Rav Simi bar Ashi): This would not be a good answer - if Ma'aser of animals works (imparts Kedushah to the 9th and 11th) by mistake, even though it does not work with intention - all the more so, standard Hekdesh works by mistake (since it works with intention)!
(h) Rejection: This Kal v'Chomer is wrong - standard Hekdesh depends on the intention of the owner of the animal (but Ma'aser only depends on being the 10th)!
(i) (Mishnah): One who accepted Nezirus, and found that the animal he intended to bring when he shaves was stolen - if it was stolen after his vow, he is a Nazir; if it was stolen before he vowed, he is not a Nazir;

(j) Nachum the Mede erred in this law when Nezirim ascended from exile and heard that the 2nd Temple had been destroyed.

1. Nachum: Had you known that the Temple would be destroyed would you have vowed?
2. They said 'No'; he annulled their Neziriyos.
3. Chachamim: Anyone who vowed before the destruction is a Nazir; after the destruction, he is not a Nazir.

(k) (Gemara - Rava): Chachamim overwhelmed R. Eliezer with proofs, and persuaded him to agree with them (that we do not annul vows on the based on Nolad (subsequent unexpected events)).

1. (Mishnah - R. Eliezer): We suggest to people to annul their vows based on Nolad; Chachamim say, we do not, but we do suggest this with conditional Nolad.

i. We say, 'When you vowed, had a person told you that the Temple was destroyed (Tosfos - might be destroyed before you complete your Nezirus), would you have vowed?'

(l) (Rav Yosef): Had I been there at the time, I would have rebuked the Nezirim for not anticipating the destruction.

1. "The Heichal of Hash-m, the Heichal of Hash-m, the Heichal of Hash-m" - these refer to the 1st 2 Temples (which will both be destroyed, hence there will be a 3rd).

(m) Objection: This does not show that they are worthy of rebuke - granted, they knew it would be destroyed, but they did not know when!
(n) Counter-objection (Abaye): The time of the destruction was known - "70 7-year cycles have been decreed on your people and your Holy city (i.e. 490 years after the destruction of the 1st Temple)"!
(o) Answer: Granted, the year was known, but not which day of the year.

(a) (Mishnah): 6 men were walking on the road; they saw a man walking towards them.

1. 1 of the 6: 'I am a Nazir if the man approaching us is Ploni'.
2. A 2nd of the 6: 'I am a Nazir if the man approaching us is not Ploni'.
3. A 3rd of the 6: 'I am a Nazir if 1 of (the 1st 2) of you is a Nazir'.
4. A 4th of the 6: 'I am a Nazir if 1 of the (the 1st 2) of you is not a Nazir'.
5. A 5th of the 6: 'I am a Nazir if both of you (the 1st 2) are Nezirim'.
6. The 6th man: 'I am a Nazir if all of you are Nezirim'.
7. Beis Shamai says, all of them are Nezirim; Beis Hillel say, only those whose words were not fulfilled are Nezirim; R. Tarfon says, none of them are Nezirim;
8. If the approaching man reversed direction (and we do not know if it was Ploni, each of the 1st 2 men) is not a Nazir; R. Shimon says, each says, 'If I was correct, I am a Nazir from my previous acceptance; if I was wrong, I now accept Nezirus on myself'.

(b) (Gemara) Question: He whose words were not fulfilled - why is he a Nazir?!
(c) Answer #1 (Rav Yehudah): Rather, the Mishnah should read 'he whose words were fulfilled'.