Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) A SIN-OFFERING CANNOT BE CHANGED (cont. from previous Daf)

(a) Answer: "His sacrifice" - a man is Yotzei with his own sacrifice, and not with the sacrifice of his father.
(b) Suggestion: Perhaps he is not Yotzei with money that his father separated, even for sins of the same severity, but he is Yotzei with an animal he separated for himself, even for sins of different severity!
(c) Rejection: "His sacrifice for his sin" - his sacrifice must be for the sake of his sin (that it was originally separated for).
(d) Suggestion: Perhaps he is not Yotzei with an animal he separated for himself, even for sins of the same severity, for if he separated a sacrifice for eating Chelev and offered it for eating blood or vice-versa, he did not transgress Me'ilah (if unaware of his mistake) and did not get atonement.

1. But he is Yotzei with money he separated for himself, even for sins of different severity, for if he separated money for a sacrifice for eating Chelev and offered it for eating blood or vice-versa, he transgresses Me'ilah (if unaware of his mistake) and gets atonement.

(e) Rejection: "For his sin" - his sacrifice must be for the sake of his sin.
(f) (Summation of Rava's question): The Beraisa teaches that a Nazir cannot bring an animal that his father separated for the father's Nezirus (i.e because it is considered specified).

1. Suggestion: The Beraisa speaks even about a blemished animal.

(g) Answer: No, the Beraisa speaks only of an unblemished animal.
(h) Question: But if a blemished animal is considered as unspecified, why did it say that he can bring sacrifices from money his father separated - let it teach the case of a blemished animal!
(i) Answer: It does! The Kedushah of a blemished animal is its value (it stands to be redeemed) - when the Mishnah teaches about money, a blemished animal is included!

(a) (Mishnah): A husband cannot annul the Nezirus of his wife after the blood of 1 of her sacrifices was thrown on the Altar;
(b) R. Akiva says, once 1 sacrifice was slaughtered, he cannot annul it;

1. This applies when she shaves (i.e. and brings sacrifices upon fulfillment of Nezirus) in Taharah; when she shaves in Tumah, he can annul it, for he can say that he does not want her to become repulsive (by being a Nezirah again).

(c) R. Meir says, even when she shaves in Taharah, he can annul it, for he can say that he does not want her to shave her hair.
(d) (Gemara): Our Mishnah is unlike R. Eliezer, who says that the prohibitions of Nezirus are in effect until he shaves his hair.

1. If the Mishnah were as R. Eliezer, since she cannot drink wine until she shaves, an element of revulsion remains, and he would be allowed to annul the Nezirus.

2. Our Tana holds, once the blood is thrown, she may drink wine, and there are no grounds for annulment.
3. R. Akiva holds, once an animal was slaughtered, he cannot annul the Nezirus, for this would cause the sacrifice to be lost (disqualified).

(e) Question (R. Zeira): We should be able to throw the blood, intending to be as a different sacrifice, and the meat should become permitted!

1. (Beraisa): The lambs (of the public Shelamim) of Shavu'os that were slaughtered with intent for a different sacrifice, or were slaughtered before or after Shavu'os - we may throw the blood, and the meat may be eaten;

i. If it was Shabbos, the blood should not be thrown; if it was thrown, it makes the sacrifice valid, permitting the appropriate parts to be burned on the Altar at night.

(f) Answer: If the burnt-offering or Shelamim was slaughtered - indeed, the blood may be thrown (*not* intending for a sacrifice of Nezirus), and the sacrifice is not lost!

1. The case is, the sin-offering was slaughtered first.
2. (Mishnah): If a Nazir shaved his hair after throwing the blood of any of the 3 sacrifices, he was Yotzei.

(g) (Mishnah): This applies when she shaves in Taharah; when she shaves in Tumah, he can annul it, for he can say that he does not want her to become repulsive;

1. R. Meir says, even when she shaves in Taharah, he can annul it, for he can say that he does not want her to shave her hair.

(h) The 1st Tana says this is not grounds to annul the Nezirus - she can wear a wig!

1. R. Meir holds, the husband is repulsed that his wife should wear someone else's hair.

(a) (Mishnah): A father can impose Nezirus on his son, but not a mother;

1. If the son shaved or protested, or relatives shaved him or protested (the Nezirus is annulled);

i. If an animal was specified for 1 of the sacrifices - if for the sin-offering, it must die; if for the burnt-offering, it is offered as a burnt-offering; if for Shelamim, it is offered as a Shelamim, without bread, and may only be eaten for 1 day.
ii. If money was designated for the sacrifices but not specified for which, it goes to Nedavah;
iii. If money was specified: money for the sin-offering goes to the Dead Sea, one may not benefit from it, but if one did, he did not transgress Me'ilah;
iv. Money for the burnt-offering is used to be a burnt-offering, Me'ilah applies to this money;
v. Money for the Shelamim is used for a Shelamim; it may only be eaten for 1 day, and is brought without bread.

(b) (Gemara) Question: Why can a father impose on his son and not a mother?
(c) Answer #1 (R. Yochanan): The whole law is a tradition from Moshe from Mount Sinai (we do not need reasons).