Nazir 59

איכא דאמרי אמר רבי חייא בר אבא אמר רבי יוחנן המעביר בית השחי ובית הערוה לוקה משום לא ילבש גבר שמלת אשה מיתיבי העברת שיער אינה מדברי תורה אלא מדברי סופרים הוא דאמר כי האי תנא דתניא המעביר בית השחי ובית הערוה הרי זה עובר משום לא ילבש גבר שמלת אשה

Some say a different version of this statement: Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: A man who removes the hair of the armpit or the pubic hair is flogged, due to the prohibition: “A man shall not put on a woman’s garment” (Deuteronomy 22:5). The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita: The removal of hair is not prohibited by Torah law but by rabbinic law. How then does Rabbi Yoḥanan say that he is flogged, which by definition is a punishment for individuals who have transgressed a Torah law? The Gemara answers: It was he who said this halakha in accordance with the opinion of that tanna, as it is taught in a baraita: A man who removes the hair of the armpit or the pubic hair violates the prohibition of: “A man shall not put on a woman’s garment.”

ותנא קמא האי לא ילבש גבר מאי דריש ביה מיבעי ליה לכדתניא לא יהיה כלי גבר על אשה מאי תלמוד לומר אם שלא ילבש איש שמלת אשה ואשה שמלת איש הרי כבר נאמר תועבה היא ואין כאן תועבה

The Gemara asks: And what does the first tanna, who holds that the prohibition is by rabbinic law, learn from this verse: “A man shall not put on a woman’s garment”? The Gemara answers: He requires it for that which is taught in the baraita, where it states: “A woman shall not wear that which pertains to a man, and a man shall not put on a woman’s garment, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord your God” (Deuteronomy 22:5). What is the meaning when the verse states this? If it teaches only that a man may not put on a woman’s garment, and a woman may not wear a man’s garment, it is already stated in explanation of this prohibition that “it is an abomination to the Lord your God,” and there is no abomination here in the mere act of wearing a garment.

אלא שלא ילבש איש שמלת אשה וישב בין הנשים ואשה שמלת איש ותשב בין האנשים רבי אליעזר בן יעקב אומר מנין שלא תצא אשה בכלי זיין למלחמה תלמוד לומר לא יהיה כלי גבר על אשה ולא ילבש גבר שמלת אשה שלא יתקן איש בתיקוני אשה

Rather, it means that a man may not wear a woman’s garment and thereby go and sit among the women; and a woman may not wear a man’s garment and sit among the men. Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov says: From where is it derived that a woman may not go out with weapons to war? The verse states: “A woman shall not wear that which pertains to a man, and a man shall not put on a woman’s garment,” which indicates that a man may not adorn himself with the cosmetics and ornaments of a woman, and similarly a woman may not go out with weapons to war, as those are for the use of males. Rabbi Yoḥanan’s ruling follows this opinion.

אמר רב נחמן בנזיר מותר ולית הילכתא כוותיה אמרו ליה רבנן לרבי שמעון בר אבא חזינא ליה לרבי יוחנן דלית ליה אמר להון מחמת זקנה נשרו

§ Rav Naḥman said: For a nazirite, it is permitted to shave armpit hair. The Gemara comments: And the halakha is not in accordance with his opinion. The Gemara reports that the Sages said to Rabbi Shimon bar Abba: We have observed that Rabbi Yoḥanan does not have armpit hairs, despite his own ruling that it is prohibited to shave them. He said to them: They fell out due to old age.

ההוא דאיתחייב נגידא קמיה דרבי אמי איגלאי בית השחי חזייה דלא מגלח אמר להון רבי אמי שיבקוה דין מן חבריא הוא

The Gemara relates: There was a certain person who committed a transgression and was found liable to receive lashes before Rabbi Ami. When they removed his clothes to flog him, his armpit was exposed, and Rabbi Ami saw that he had not shaved his armpit hair. Rabbi Ami said to his attendants: Leave him; this is one of those who are meticulous in observance of mitzvot. We can see this is so, as he is particular about prohibitions that ordinary people do not observe.

בעא מיניה רב מרבי חייא מהו לגלח אמר ליה אסור אמר ליה והא קא גדל אמר ליה בר פחתי זמן יש לו כל זמן שהוא גדל נושר

Rav raised a dilemma before Rabbi Ḥiyya: What is the halakha with regard to shaving armpit hair? He said to him: It is prohibited. Rav said to him: But it grows and is uncomfortable. Rabbi Ḥiyya said to him: Son of nobles [bar paḥtei], this hair has a limited time. Whenever a hair grows too long it falls out, and therefore there is no concern that one’s armpit hair will become too long.

בעא מיניה רב מרבי חייא מהו לחוך אמר ליה אסור בבגדו מהו אמר ליה מותר איכא דאמרי בעא מיניה בתפלה בבגדו מאי אמר ליה אסור ולית הילכתא כוותיה

Rav raised another dilemma before Rabbi Ḥiyya: What is the halakha with regard to rubbing armpit hair and thereby removing it manually? Rabbi Ḥiyya said to him: It is prohibited. Rav continued to ask: What is the halakha with regard to rubbing armpit hair indirectly with one’s garment? Rabbi Ḥiyya said to him: It is permitted. Some say that this was not Rav’s question; rather, he raised the following dilemma before him: What is the halakha with regard to rubbing the armpit with one’s garment during prayer? Rabbi Ḥiyya said to him: It is prohibited. The Gemara comments: And the halakha is not in accordance with his opinion in this case.

מתני׳ מת אחד מהן אמר רבי יהושע יבקש אחד מן השוק שידור כנגדו בנזיר

MISHNA: The previous mishna described how two nazirites sacrifice offerings of impurity and purity, in a situation in which one of them has become impure but they do not know which one. This mishna discusses what must be done if one of them dies before bringing his offerings. Rabbi Yehoshua said: The surviving nazirite asks someone in the marketplace, a non-nazirite, to vow to be a nazirite corresponding to him, i.e., under the same conditions as his own naziriteship, so that he can bring offerings together with him.

ואומר אם טמא הייתי הרי אתה נזיר מיד ואם טהור הייתי הרי אתה נזיר אחר שלשים יום וסופרין שלשים ומביאין קרבן טומאה וקרבן טהרה ואומר אם אני הוא הטמא קרבן טומאה שלי וקרבן טהרה שלך ואם אני הוא הטהור קרבן טהרה שלי וקרבן טומאה בספק

And he says to him as follows: If I was impure, you are hereby a nazirite immediately; and if I was pure, you are hereby a nazirite after thirty days. And they both proceed to count thirty days and bring an offering of impurity and an offering of purity. And the nazirite who was defined as having uncertain impurity says: If I am the impure one, the offering of impurity is mine and the offering of purity is yours; and if I am the pure one, the offering of purity is mine and the offering of impurity we brought shall be of uncertain status.

וסופרים שלשים יום ומביאין קרבן טהרה ואומר אם אני הטמא קרבן טומאה שלי וקרבן טהרה שלך וזה קרבן טהרתי ואם אני הוא הטהור קרבן טהרה שלי וקרבן טומאה בספק וזהו קרבן טהרתך

And they subsequently count another thirty days and bring an offering of purity, and the first nazirite says: If I was the impure one, the offering of impurity that we sacrificed at the end of the first thirty days was mine, and the offering of purity we brought then was yours; and this offering I am bringing now is my offering of purity. And if I was the pure one, and the deceased nazirite was impure, the offering of purity we brought thirty days ago was mine, and the offering of impurity we brought earlier was of uncertain status, and this is your offering of purity.

אמר לו בן זומא ומי שומע לו שידור כנגדו בנזיר אלא מביא חטאת העוף ועולת בהמה ואומר אם טמא הייתי החטאת מחובתי והעולה נדבה ואם טהור הייתי העולה מחובתי והחטאת מספק

Ben Zoma said to Rabbi Yehoshua: And who will listen to him to vow to be a nazirite corresponding to him? How can one design a halakha on the assumption that a non-nazirite will agree to be a nazirite for a lengthy term? Rather, a different procedure is available: After thirty days of naziriteship he brings a bird sin-offering and an animal burnt-offering, and says: If I was impure, the sin-offering is for my obligation as an impure nazirite, and the burnt-offering is a regular gift offering. And if I was pure, the burnt-offering is for my obligation as a pure nazirite, and the sin-offering is of uncertain status.

וסופר שלשים יום ומביא קרבן טהרה ואומר אם טמא הייתי העולה הראשונה נדבה וזו חובה ואם טהור הייתי העולה הראשונה חובה וזו נדבה וזו שאר קרבני

And he counts another thirty days, and brings an offering of purity, and says: If I was impure, the first burnt-offering I brought should be considered a gift offering, and this one I am bringing now is for my obligation. And if I was pure, the first burnt-offering I brought is for my obligation as a pure nazirite, and this one I am bringing now is a gift offering. And these, i.e., the sin-offering and peace-offering I am sacrificing now, comprises the rest of my offerings that I was obligated to bring earlier.

אמר רבי יהושע נמצא זה מביא קרבנותיו לחצאים אבל הודו לו חכמים לבן זומא

Rabbi Yehoshua said: According to your opinion, it turns out that this nazirite brings his offerings in halves, i.e., in stages. If he was pure, he brings his burnt-offering thirty days before the rest of his offerings. However, the Rabbis agreed with ben Zoma, and disregarded the concern about splitting up the offerings.

גמ׳ ולייתי אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל לא אמר רבי יהושע אלא לחדד בה את התלמידים

GEMARA: The mishna taught that Rabbi Yehoshua countered ben Zoma’s opinion by pointing out that his solution would cause the nazirite to bring his offerings in stages. The Gemara asks: What is wrong with that? And let him bring the offerings in stages. Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: Rabbi Yehoshua said this comment only to sharpen the minds of the students. He did not really maintain that it is prohibited to act in this manner; rather, he wanted to test his disciples to see if they were aware of the halakha.

אמר רב נחמן מאי ליעביד ליה רבי יהושע לדקיה דלא ליסרו

Rav Naḥman said, in a light-hearted vein: What will Rabbi Yehoshua do with the intestines of his animals so that they will not spoil? If he insists that the offerings of purity must all be brought at the same time, the only way to do so is to wait thirty days after slaughtering the burnt-offering before burning its intestines, which is certainly impractical.

מתני׳ נזיר שהיה טמא בספק ומוחלט בספק אוכל בקדשים אחר ששים יום

MISHNA: In the case of a nazirite who, on the first day of his naziriteship, was impure from a corpse as a matter of uncertainty and was also a confirmed leper as a matter of uncertainty, i.e., it was uncertain whether or not he had leprosy, how can he fulfill the shaving obligations of a pure nazirite and an impure leper? The problem facing this nazirite is that a leper must shave both when he begins his purification process and at the close of it, one week later. However, a nazirite is prohibited from shaving. Additionally, a leper may not partake of sacrificial food, but a nazirite may. Therefore, he may partake of sacrificial food sixty days after he may have become impure, when the uncertainty with regard to leprosy will have been clarified. He shaves for the first time for his leprosy after thirty days, and for the second time thirty days later, the shaving of the end of the purification process; at which point he brings the offerings of a purified leper and may partake of sacrificial food.

ושותה יין ומטמא למתים אחר מאה ועשרים יום

But he may drink wine and become impure from the dead, effectively ending his naziriteship, only after 120 days. This is because he might have been a full-fledged leper, which means that his shavings count toward his leprosy, not his naziriteship. Consequently, after the first sixty days he must observe another thirty days of naziriteship and shave again. Even then he has yet to fulfill all his obligations, as he might have been impure from a corpse, which means his shaving after ninety days was for his impurity. He must therefore remain a nazirite for another thirty days, before shaving one final time at the end of 120 days to fulfill his naziriteship obligation.

שתגלחת הנגע דוחה תגלחת הנזיר בזמן שהוא ודאי אבל בזמן שהוא ספק אינו דוחה

The mishna notes: The reason that he cannot shave for his leprosy after seven days and perform the second shaving of a leper seven days later is because the shaving of leprosy overrides the prohibition of the shaving of a nazirite only when his status as a leper is definite. However, when his status as a leper is uncertain, the shaving does not override his naziriteship, and therefore he must wait thirty days before each of his shavings for leprosy.