REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Nazir 63
(a) If after shaving for his Taharah, a Nazir is informed that he is Tamei
Meis, he is obligated to demolish all of his Nezirus.
When would he not
need to do this?
(b) When would he have to demolish his Nezirus even for Tum'as Tehom?
(c) If having touched a Sheretz, the Nazir went to Tovel in a cave and after
the Tevilah, he found a k'Zayis of a Meis floating in the part of the Mikveh
that was outside the cave (and is not sure whether, at the time when he
Toveled, it was inside the cave or not) he is Tamei.
Why is that?
(d) Why is the k'Zayis of Meis not considered Tum'as Tehom?
(a) What will be the Din if after shaving, the Nazir is informed that the
bone was discovered buried in the ground of the cave, assuming that he had
previously Toveled ...
(b) Why does the Reisha of our Mishnah refer to someone who Toveled for
Tum'as Sheretz, and the Seifa, when he Toveled to cool down?
- ... to cool down?
- ... to Tovel for Tum'as Meis? Why the differene?
(c) How does ...
(d) In Pesachim, Rebbi Elazar and Resh Lakish do not argue, whereas in our
Sugya they do.
- ... Rebbi Elazar attempt to extrapolate Tum'as Tehom from the Pasuk Naso "ve'Chi Yamus Meis *Alav* be'Fesa Pis'om"?
- ... Resh Lakish extrapolates it from the Pasuk in Beha'aloscha "Ish Ish Ki Yih'yeh Tamei la'Nefesh O *be'Derech* Rechokah"?
What is the basis of the Machlokes between the two Sugyos?
(a) The Tana in a Beraisa defines Tum'as Tehom as Tum'ah that was unknown to
anybody in the world.
Why does that pose a Kashya on Rebbi Elazar (who
learns from "Alav")?
(b) What does the Tana of a Beraisa say about a Meis that was discovered
buried lying across a narrow street with regard to ...
(c) How does this Beraisa pose a Kashya on both opinions Rebbi Elazar and
- ... a Kohen who wanted to eat Terumah?
- ... a Nazir or someone who was about to bring his Korban Pesach?
(d) So what is the source for Tum'as Tehom (that will justify the two
(a) Our Mishnah gives the criterion for the discovery as being the shaving.
Why must the author be Rebbi Eliezer? What does he say?
(b) What would be the criterion according to the Rabbanan?
(a) What distinction does Rebbi Eliezer draw between a Nazir who became
Tamei Meis during the Me'los of his Nezirus and after the Me'los?
Answers to questions
(b) Will it make any difference whether it is ordinary Tum'ah or Tum'as
(c) What She'eilah did Rami bar Chama ask with regard to someone who became
Tamei Meis during the Me'los but only found out about it after the Me'los?
(a) Rava proves from our Mishnah 'Im Ad she'Lo Gilach, Bein-Kach u'Vein-Kach
Soser', that the Tana must be speaking when he only discovered the Tum'ah
after the Me'los.
How can Rava say 'I de'Isyada Lei be'Soch Me'los,
Tzericha Lemeimar'?, seeing as the Tana needs to teach us the case where
Tum'as Tehom applies?
(b) What would the Din be according to the Rabbanan, if the Nazir became
Tamei after the Me'los?
(c) On what grounds do we ...
- ... initially refute Rava's proof from our Mishnah to resolve our She'eilah?
- ... ultimately vindicate him?
(a) We learned earlier that if one discovers a corpse buried across the
street, any Kohen who previously passed that spot is Tamei and is forbidden
to eat Terumah (though a Nazir and someone who was about to bring the Korban
Pesach would be Tahor, provided nobody had known about the corpse at the
moment of passing). If however, the corpse did not take up the entire width
of the street, (even) the Kohen is Tahor. Why is that? How can we be so
lenient even by Terumah d'Oraysa?
(b) Under which circumstances does the Tana permit the Kohen to eat Terumah
even if the corpse took up the entire width of the street?
(c) And under which circumstances will this leniency not apply even to a
Kohen who walked past that spot without carrying a load?
(d) If however, he was riding or carrying a load, then even if the corpse
was not buried in a grave, the Kohen is forbidden to eat Terumah.
(a) Why is it that, if the corpse is buried (at ground level) in straw or in
pebbles it is considered Tum'as Tehom, whereas if he is buried in water, in
a dark corner or in a cave it is not?
(b) Does Tum'as Tehom apply to Tum'os other than Tum'as Meis?
(a) We learned in our Mishnah that if a k'Zayis of Meis is floating on the
water of a Reshus ha'Yachid, that, in the case of Safek Ohel (or Safek
Negi'ah) we go le'Chumra.
And what does Rebbi Shimon learn from the Pasuk there ...
What will be the Din in the equivalent case
regarding Safek Negi'ah if there is a Sheretz floating on the water,
according to the Tana Kama of the Beraisa?
(b) He does not differentiate between whether the water in which the Sheretz
is floating is in a vessel or whether it is in a pool on the ground.
does Rebbi Shimon say?
(c) What does the Tana Kama learn from the Pasuk in Shemini ...
(d) Now that we preclude a floating Sheretz from Safek Tum'ah (even in a
Reshus ha'Yachid) from "al ha'Aretz", will this preclusion also incorporate
a Sheretz that someone has thrown and that is traveling through the air?
- ... "*be'Chol* ha'Sheretz ha'Shoretz (al ha'Aretz)"?
- ... "(be'Chol) ha'Sheretz ha'Shoretz al *ha'Aretz*"?
Answers to questions
- ... "Ach Ma'ayan u'Bor Yih'yeh Tahor?"
- ... "Yitma?"