REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Nazir 61
NAZIR 61, 62 - The preparation of the study material for these Dafim was
supported by a grant from the Memorial Foundation for Jewish Culture, for
which the Kollel is grateful.
(a) Rami bar Chama asks whether the four shavings in our Mishnah are a
Mitzvah or whether their objective is purely to remove the hair.
the ramifications of this She'eilah?
(b) Three out of the four shavings have already been established as Mitzvos,
and Rami bar Chama is only really asking about the fourth one.
(c) How do we account for the fact that the Sugya in 'Sheloshah Minim'
learns Nazir Tamei from Nazir Tahor outright in this regard?
(d) Why must Rami bar Chama be speaking when some of the Nazir's hair was
already shaved off with a razor?
(a) We resolve Rami bar Chama's She'eilah from the Beraisa cited above
'u'Megalei'ach Arba Tiglachi'os'.
***** Hadran Alach Sh'nei Nezirim *****
What do we prove from there?
(b) Considering that the third shaving in this Beraisa incorporates the
possibility that he is a Nazir Tahor, which requires a razor anyway, what is
the proof from there?
***** Perek ha'Kutim *****
(a) Is Nezirus applicable to ...
(b) What Chumra applies to slaves in this regard but not to women?
- ... Nochrim?
- ... women and slaves?
(c) What do we learn from the Pasuk in Naso (written in connection with a
(d) Are Nochrim included in the Parshah of Nedarim?
- ... "Daber el B'nei Yisrael"?
- ... "ve'Amarta Aleihem"?
(a) Why at first glance, should we not even require a Pasuk to include
Avadim in the Parshah of Nezirus?
(b) How does the Pasuk "Le'esor Isar al Nafsho" change this?
(c) But that Pasuk speaks about Nedarim, and not about Nezirus?
(a) What does the Tana in a Beraisa learn from the Pasuk in Bechukosai
(written in connection with Erchin) ...
(b) What ought we then to learn from the Pesukim (written in connection with
Nezirus) "Daber el B'nei Yisrael" and "Ish (Ki Yidor .. )"?
- ... "Daber el B'nei Yisrael"?
- ... "Ish"?
(c) So we initially learn that Nezirus does not apply to a Nazir at all -
from the Pasuk "le'Aviv u'le'Imo Lo *Yitama*" (to preclude a Nochri, who is
not subject to Tum'ah, because he does not have a father).
Does this mean
that a Nochri does not inherit his father?
(a) What does Rebbi Chiya bar Aba Amar Rebbi Yochanan learn from the Pasuk
in Devarim "Ki Yerushah le'Eisav Nasati es Har Se'ir"?
Answers to questions
(b) Then why can we not apply the above D'rashah ("le'Aviv u'le'Imo Lo
Yitama") like this: 'Whoever is obligated to honor his father is included in
the Parshah of Nezirus, but not a Nochri, who is not'?
(c) Why did we not refute the previous suggestion (that Nochrim are
precluded because they do have parents with regard to inheritance - seeing
as inheritance is not mentioned in the Pasuk either)?
(d) What do we then learn from ...
- ... "le'Aviv u'le'Imo Lo Yitama" (Emor)?
- ... "ve'Ish Asher Yitma ve'Lo Yischata ve'Nichresah ha'Nefesh ha'Hi *Mitoch ha'Kahal*" (Chukas)?
(a) On what grounds do we retract from the previous D'rashah (that Nochrim
are not subject to Tum'ah from "ve'Ish Asher Yitma ve'Lo Yischata
ve'Nichresah ha'Nefesh ha'Hai Mitoch ha'Kahal")?
(b) What do we learn from the Pasuk in Chukas ...
(c) Why do we retract from this D'rashah, according to Tosfos ...
- ... "ve'Haysah la'Adas B'nei Yisrael le'Mishmeres ... "?
- ... "ve'Hizah ha'Tahor al ha'Tamei"?
(d) What do we then learn from the Pasuk there "ve'Ish Asher Yitma ve'Lo
- ... first explanation?
- ... second explanation
(a) What do we learn from the Pasuk in Behar "Vehisnachaltem Osam
(b) Rav Acha bar Ya'akov tries to reinstate the initial D'rashah that we
cited from "le'Aviv u'le'Imo Lo Yitamo" (that a Nochri, who does not inherit
his father is not subject to Tum'ah).
How does he answer the Kashya that
we asked there from Rebbi Chiya bar Aba Amar Rebbi Yochanan, who learns from
the Pasuk "Ki Yerushah le'Eisav Nasati es Har Se'ir" (that a Nochri inherits
his father by Torah-law) by means of the fact that a Nochri cannot inherit
an Eved Cena'ani?
(c) On what grounds do we reject this explanation?
(d) From where do we know that one Eved Cena'ani cannot acquire another Eved
Kena'ani (even if he receives him on the express condition that his master
should have no jurisdiction over them?
(a) Rava reinstates the Tana's original D'rashah "Daber el B'nei Yisrael ...
" (but not Nochrim).
Seeing as a Nochri is completely precluded from Nezirus, what is the point
of Rebbi Yossi ha'Gelili's D'rashah (precluding Nochrim from the Korban of a
How does he resolve the problem that this Pasuk would
then preclude Nochrim from bringing a Korban Nazir, but that "Ish" would
include them as far as becoming Nezirim is concerned?
(b) What do we learn from the Pasuk in Emor (in connection with Korbanos)
(c) And what does Rebbi Yossi ha'Gelili learn from the last word in the
(d) And how do we know that "Ish" does not come to teach us that a Nochri
can be a Nazir, and "B'nei Yisrael", that ...
- ... a Nochri cannot declare a permanent Nezirus?
- ... he cannot declare his son to be a Nazir?
- ... the children of a Nochri are not permitted to shave on the money that their deceased father designated for his Korban?
Answers to questions