Ask A Question about the Daf

Previous daf

Nazir, 60

1) BRINGING A KORBAN WHILE ONE IS A METZORA

QUESTION: The Beraisa explains how a Nazir who is a Safek Metzora and a Safek Nazir Tamei can become Tahor from his Safek Tzora'as. He brings the Korbanos with a Tenai, saying that "if I am a Nazir Tahor, then this is the Korban for my Nezirus; if I am a Metzora (and cannot bring a Korban Nezirus), then this is a Nedavah."

We see from here that a Metzora is permitted to send a Korban Nedavah to the Beis ha'Mikdash. Similarly, the Gemara later (60b) quotes a Tosefta in which Rebbi Shimon bar Yochai's Talmidim asked him if a Nazir Tahor who is a Metzora (b'Yimei Chaluto) can have one haircut count for both the Taharah from his Tzora'as and for his Nezirus. Obviously, if the Nazir is shaving he must have already brought at least one of his Korbanos Nezirus (46a). Hence, he must have brought the Korban while he was a Metzora, before he shaved. We see from there as well that it is permitted for a Metzora to send Korbanos to the Beis ha'Mikdash.

How can this be reconciled with the Gemara in Moed Katan (14b-15a) which teaches that a Metzora *cannot* send Korbanos to the Beis ha'Mikdash? (MINCHAS BARUCH 23:3; MIRKEVES HA'MISHNEH, Hilchos Nezirus 10:7; RASHASH)

According to TOSFOS in Zevachim (75a) and Menachos (62b) who writes that the Gemara in Moed Katan only means to prohibit a Metzora from sending a Korban Asiris ha'Eifah (the Korban of a Kohen who begins serving in the Beis ha'Mikdash, or the Korban of a Kohen Gadol), this question is no question. A Metzora *is* permitted to send all other Korbanos, including the Korban of a Nazir Tahor.

Similarly, this question is not a question according to TOSFOS in Chagigah (4b), who writes that the prohibition is only for a Metzora to send his own Korban Taharah if he had a relapse of his Tzora'as.

However, Tosfos in Moed Katan (14b) clearly understands from the Gemara there that a Metzora may not send *any* Korbanos. This is also evident from the words of the TOSFOS HA'ROSH and TOSFOS RID there (who add that even b'Yimei Sifro the Metzora may not send Korbanos). The RAMBAM (Hilchos Bi'as Mikdash 2:11) also rules that a Metzora may not send any Korbanos to the Beis ha'Mikdash, and if he does, the Korbanos are not Mechaper for him. How, then, can the Safek Metzora in the case of the Mishnah send a Korban with a Tenai that if he is a Metzora the Korban should be a Nedavah? Likewise, how can the Vadai Metzora, about whom the Talmidim of Rebbi Shimon bar Yochai asked, send his Korban Nazir Tahor to the Beis ha'Mikdash while he is still a Metzora b'Yimei Chaluto (or b'Yimei Sifro)?

ANSWERS:

(a) The ZECHER YITZCHAK (#43 and #44) suggests that even though a Metzora cannot send Korbanos himself, someone else can send an animal on behalf of the Metzora to exempt the Metzora from his obligation to bring a Korban. Similarly, the AVI EZRI (Mahadura Kama, Hilchos Korban Pesach 6) suggests that even if the Korban normally must belong to the Nazir, there is still a case where someone else can bring a Korban Nazir on behalf of the Metzora: when a father makes an oath of Nezirus for his young son, and then the son becomes a Metzora, the father -- who made the Nezirus for his son -- can send a Korban on his son's behalf, since the father is the one who brought about the Nezirus.

However, the Gemara here makes no mention of having someone else send a Korban for the Metzora. Rather, it implies that the Metzora himself sends it.

(b) The OR SAME'ACH (Hilchos Bi'as Mikdash 2:11) infers from the Rambam that although the Korban that the Metzora sends is not going to be Mechaper for him, nevertheless the Korban itself is a valid Korban. (See also MIKDASH DAVID, Kodshim 27:5.) Accordingly, if a Nazir sends his Korban while he is a Metzora, then although it is not Mechaper for him, it will still be a valid Korban, like a Nedavah.

Rebbi Shimon (Nazir 46b) holds that a Nazir may be Megale'ach on a Korban Nedavah that he brings, even though it is not one of the Korbanos of Nezirus. The Talmidim of Rebbi Shimon (bar Yochai) are asking that according to Rebbi Shimon's own opinion that a Nazir may be Megale'ach on a Korban Nedavah, could a Metzora, who is a Nazir, be Megale'ach on a Korban that he sends (which has the status of a Nedavah)? (See also AVI EZRI, Mahadura Revi'a, Hilchos Bi'as Mikdash 2:11, who gives the same answer.)

This will also answer the question from the Mishnah as well, because the Gemara says that the Tana of the Mishnah is Rebbi Shimon.

In practice, though, the RAMBAM does not rule like Rebbi Shimon, even though he quotes the Mishnah.

(c) The CHAZON ISH explains that the Talmidim of Rebbi Shimon were asking whether the Gilu'ach of the Nazir-Metzora could count for his Tzora'as and Nezirus if he already brought the first of his Korban Nezirus *before* he became a Metzora. (In any case, the only way to understand the question of the Talmidim is that it refers to when the Nazir finished his Nezirus period before the Tzora'as, because the days of his Tzora'as do not count towards the days of his Nezirus, like the KEREN ORAH points out.)

However, the Mishnah (59b) and Beraisa (60a) seem to be discussing a case of a Nazir who became a Safek Metzora *before* he finished his Nezirus period, and he is bringing his Korbanos Nazir Tahor during the period in which he might be a Metzora.

The MINCHAS BARUCH and MIRKEVES HA'MISHNEH (loc. cit.) answer that according to the Rambam, the Mishnah also is not a problem, because the Rambam holds that a Metzora may not send Korbanos only b'Yimei Chaluto, but b'Yimei Sefiro he may send Korbanos. Therefore, the only problem from the Mishnah is how the Nazir could send a Safek Korban Taharah before the *first* Tiglachas (while he is still b'Yimei Chaluto). The Rambam (Hilchos Nezirus 10:7), however, writes that the Tenai which the Nazir makes when sending his Olas Behemah is that "if I am a Metzora, then I want this Olah to count as the Olah of a Metzora." A Metzora may certainly bring, during his Tzora'as, the Olah that a Metzora is obligated to bring for his Tzora'as. (Although the Metzora is not required to bring a Korban Metzora until after his second Tiglachas, nevertheless the Rambam holds that he may bring it even before his first Tiglachas if he so desires. See RADVAZ cited by SEFER HA'KOVETZ. The RA'AVAD here asks why the Rambam saw fit to explain that the Olah brought before the first Tiglachas is an Olas Metzora, if a Metzora normally brings his Korban later, after the second Tiglachas? According to what we have explained, the answer is that the Rambam is trying to answer our question that a Metzora is not permitted to bring a Korban Nedavah.)

However, TOSFOS, TOSFOS HA'ROSH and TOSFOS RID (in Moed Katan) prohibit a Metzora from bringing a Korban even b'Yimei Sefiro, and therefore they will not be able to give the answer of the Rambam. The Olos brought before the first and second Tiglachas cannot *both* be Korbanos of a Metzora, but only one of them is the Korban of a Metzora.

(d) To answer the Mishnah, we might suggest that a Metzora is permitted to bring any Korban which is necessary in order for him to become Tahor from his Tzora'as. Since the Nazir who is a Safek Metzora cannot be Megale'ach to become Tahor from his Tzora'as unless he brings the Korban (on Tenai) which is a Safek Nedavah, he is permitted to send that Korban. The Korban has become part of his Taharah process and therefore he may send it even though he is a Metzora. This is especially true according to what the Tosfos ha'Rosh and Tosfos Rid in Moed Katan write, that the reason a Metzora may not send a Korban is because he is in a state of Tza'ar, distress, just like an Onen who may not send a Korban. This would apply to any Korbanos that are not related to the Tzora'as. But if the Korban is being brought in order to remove the Tzora'as, then the Tza'ar should not prevent the Metzora from bringing it.

This answers our Mishnah and Beraisa, but it does not answer the question of the Talmidim of Rebbi Shimon bar Yochai. Their question implies that a Nazir who is a Vadai Metzora can bring a Korban for his Nezirus before he becomes Tahor from his Tzora'as, even though he can just as well bring the Korban for his Nezirus *after* he becomes Tahor and thus the Korban Nezirus is not part of the process of his Taharah from Tzora'as.

We could answer that question like the Chazon Ish answers it, by saying that the case is where the Nazir already brought his Korban Nezirus before he became a Metzora.

Alternatively, this might actually be the intention of Rebbi Shimon bar Yochai's response. Rebbi Shimon bar Yochai ultimately answered his Talmidim that the Tiglachas cannot count for both the Tzora'as and for Nezirus Taharah, because the Metzora only brings Korbanos after his Tiglachas, but a Nazir brings Korbanos *before* his Tiglachas. Most Acharonim understand this to mean that the Tiglachos of a Metzora and of a Nazir are qualitatively different and that is why they must be done separately. However, it is possible that Rebbi Shimon bar Yochai is asking his Talmidim our question: how could the Metzora be Megale'ach for Nezirus if he needs to bring a Korban before he may do the Tiglachas for Nezirus and he is still a Metzora until after the Tiglachas of Nezirus (when he becomes fit to bring the Korbanos of Metzora)?

The Rambam might have understood the Gemara in this manner based on the way he quotes the continuation of the Gemara. The Gemara continues and says that the Talmidim asked that even if the Tiglachas of a Metzora cannot count as the Tiglachas of a Nazir Tahor for the reason we mentioned, it should count as the Tiglachas of a Nazir Tamei, who -- like a Metzora -- brings Korbanos only *after* his Tiglachas.

Rebbi Shimon bar Yochai responded that a Nazir Tamei must be Tovel for his Tum'ah before his Tiglachas, while a Metzora is Tovel for his Tum'ah only *after* the Tiglachas. The Acharonim understand this to mean that the two haircuts are qualitatively different; one is a "pre-Tevilah" Tiglachas and one is a "post-Tevilah" Tiglachas. The Rambam (Hilchos Nezirus 10:13), however, writes that the reason the second Tiglachas of a Metzora cannot also count as the Tiglachas of a Nazir Tamei is because a Nazir Tamei cannot start counting the seven days that a Nazir Tamei must wait before shaving (in order for his hair to grow long enough to be shaved) until *after* the days of Sefirah for his Tzora'as. The KEREN ORAH here asks that the Rambam should have mentioned Rebbi Shimon bar Yochai's reason -- that the two Tiglachos are different! It seems that the Rambam might have learned that this was exactly what Rebbi Shimon bar Yochai replied to his Talmidim: the Nazir Tamei must be Tahor from all Tum'ah before he does his Tiglachas, and the Metzora only becomes Tahor from his Tzora'as *after* the Tiglachas. This is exactly what the Rambam writes! Similarly, he might have learned that the first response of Rebbi Shimon bar Yochai to his Talmidim was that a Metzora cannot be Megale'ach the Tiglachas of a Nazir Tahor since he cannot send his Korbanos until after he is Tahor from the Tzora'as.

60b

QUESTION: The Gemara says that a Nazir who is a Safek Metzora Muchlat and Vadai Tamei Mes may eat Kodshim after 37 days, and may drink wine after 74 days. TOSFOS explains that since the Nazir is a Safek Muchlat, he must be Machmir and shave for Tzora'as only at a time when it would be permitted to shave for his Nezirus. Therefore, the first Safek Tiglachas of Metzora is done after the first 7 days have passed, during which the Nazir does Haza'ah. He shaves on day 8 for the Tiglachas of Nazir Tamei. The same day (day 8) he begins counting the days of Nezirus Taharah, in case he is *not* a Metzora. Thirty days later, he performs a Tiglachas which is the Safek Tiglachas of Nazir Tahor and the Safek *second* Tiglachas of Metzora Muchlat.

(In our text, Tosfos says that he shaves on day 31 of the Nezirus Taharah. However, this is an obvious printing error, as the RASHASH points out, because Tosfos writes that the day after the second Tiglachas (the day on which he may start eating Kodshim) is day 38, counting from the start. If the second Tiglachas is done after 7 plus *31* days, then the following day would be day *39*. Tosfos' logic for allowing the Nazir to shave on day 30 rather than on day 31 is that the Rabanan were lenient to allow him to shave on day 30 in order for him to eat Kodshim later. See Tosfos 55b, DH u'Midakdek.)

Tosfos continues and says that after these two Tiglachos, the Nazir is certainly no longer a Metzora. In case, though, he was a Metzora until now, he must wait another 7 days, after which he performs a Tiglachas which is the Safek Tiglachas of Nazir Tamei, and then he must observe Nezirus for 31 days and then do Tiglachas on day 31 for his Nezirus Taharah. On the 75th day (7+30+7+31), he may drink wine.

Why does Tosfos write that starting from day 38, the Nazir must count 7 days of Nazir Tamei before his Tiglachas of Nazir Tamei? The only reason a Nazir needs to wait 7 days before his Tiglachas of Nazir Tamei is in order to become Tahor from Tum'as Mes with Haza'ah on the third and seventh days. Tosfos already wrote that this Nazir already had his Haza'os performed during the first 7 days, when he was a Safek Metzora, so why should he not be able to bring his Korban of Safek Nazir Tamei immediately after the Tzora'as is over?

Even though he is a Safek Metzora on the first 7 days, that should not prevent the Haza'os from being Metaher him, since the Gemara in Zevachim (93a) teaches that Haza'ah can be done for a Nidah in order to be Metaher her from Tum'as Mes; even though the Mei Chatas becomes Tamei because of Nidus the moment it lands on her, nevertheless it is still Metaher her from Tum'as Mes. The Sifri Zuta (as cited by the Kesef Mishneh, Hilchos Parah Adumah 11:3) tells us that the same applies to a Zav or Zavah, who can become Tahor from Tum'as Mes through Haza'ah, as the Rambam writes l'Halachah (Hilchos Parah Adumah 11:3). Why, then, does the Nazir need to wait another 7 days after becoming Tahor? (SHITAH MEKUBETZES)

ANSWERS:

(a) The KEREN ORAH writes that the 7 days that a Nazir Tamei waits before his Tiglachas are not just in order to become Tahor from Tum'as Mes, but they are a requirement in the Halachah of counting days. Just like a normal Nazir must observe 30 days, so, too, a Nazir Tamei must observe 7 days. Just like a Nazir Tahor cannot count his 30 days during days of Tzora'as, a Nazir Tamei cannot count his 7 days during days of Tzora'as. Support for this can be found earlier (39b) where the Gemara says that the Nazir Tamei must wait 7 days before his Tiglachas (see Gemara there).

However, this is a very original approach which we do not find mentioned in the Gemara or Rishonim.

(b) The SHITAH MEKUBETZES (see also Lechem Mishneh, Hilchos Nezirus 10:12, and Birchas Rosh) explains that the reason why the Nazir Tamei must wait 7 days is because he just had his hair cut for the second Tiglachas of a Metzora. In order to cut his hair again, his hair must grow back for at least 7 days so that it will be considered a Tiglachas. This is indeed the way the Yerushalmi, as cited by the Keren Orah (DH v'Sha'alu), explains this Halachah.

However, this does not seem to be the intention of Tosfos. Tosfos writes that the Nazir Tamei only starts his 7-day count on day 38, the day on which he brings his Korbanos of Metzora. If the reason why he needs to wait 7 days is for his hair to grow back, then he should begin counting on day 37 immediately after his Tiglachas! (The Shitah Mekubetzes points this out, and indeed argues with Tosfos and says that the Nazir Tamei's 7-day count starts on day 37.) In addition, if the Nazir Tamei is already considered Tahor before he starts his 7-day count, he should be able to do the Tiglachas on the seventh day and start his count of Nezirus Taharah on the same day, like Rebbi Akiva says in the Mishnah earlier (44b). Why does Tosfos write that he starts his Nezirus of Taharah on the day following the Tiglachas of Nazir Tamei (on day 8)?

(c) It therefore seems that Tosfos takes an entirely different approach. Tosfos indeed seems to hold that Haza'ah cannot be Metaher a Metzora, even though it could be Metaher other Teme'im. Indeed, when the Rambam writes that a person with any Tum'ah may do Haza'ah for Tum'as Mes, he lists as examples only Zav, Zavah, Nidah, and Yoledes, but not Metzora. This is evident as well from what he writes in Hilchos Nezirus 10:10-12. (See Lechem Mishneh there.)

TOSFOS HA'ROSH in Yevamos (71b, DH Arel) writes explicitly that perhaps a Metzora is different from the other forms of Tum'ah and he *cannot* do Haza'ah. Why should Metzora be different? Tosfos ha'Rosh explains that a Metzora is compared to a Mes (Nedarim 64b). Since his Tum'ah is similar to that of the Tum'ah of Mes, and it will remain after the Haza'ah, the Haza'ah cannot be Metaher him from Tum'as Mes. (See TOSFOS 48a, DH Hachi Garsinan.)

Although the Rambam (Hilchos Nezirus 10:12) writes that this only applies to a Metzora "b'Yimei Chaluto" (in the days when he is Tamei due to a definite appearance of Tzora'as), while "b'Yimei Sefiro" (in the days he counts towards his Taharah) he *may* do Haza'ah, Tosfos apparently holds that even b'Yimei Sefiro he may not do Haza'ah and therefore the Haza'ah of the Nazir Tamei must wait until after his second Tiglachas (in the case where he is a Safek Metzora) and after he brings the Korbanos of a Metzora. Only then may he do Haza'ah, when the Tum'ah of Metzora is entirely removed from him. That is why Tosfos writes that on day 38 he starts counting 7 days, and on the eighth day, after the sun has set and he has had "he'Erev Shemesh," he then does Tiglachas (for Nazir Tamei) and starts counting his Nezirus Taharah.

According to this explanation, what does the Gemara mean when it says that he may eat Kodshim after day 37? He is still Tamei with Tum'as Mes for another seven days and he needs Haza'ah, and a Tamei Mes may not eat Kodshim! The answer apparently is that the Gemara means to say that he is not a Mechusar Kipurim after day 37 (he is not lacking any Korbanos which would prevent him from eating Kodshim). It is true that he still cannot eat Kodshim, but it is not because he is Mechusar Kipurim, but only because he is Tamei with Tum'as Mes.