REVIEW QUESTIONS ON GEMARA AND RASHI
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Nazir 33 & 34
(a) We learned that if the man coming towards the six travelers turned back,
then none of them is a Nazir. Based on an inference, the author of this
section of our Mishnah cannot be Rebbi Tarfon, because of what Rebbi Yehudah
said in his name.
What did he say?
(b) Why do we quote Rebbi Yehudah? Why can we not learn this from Rebbi
Tarfon's statement in our Mishnah?
(a) We conclude that the author (of 'Hirsi'a le'Achorav') must be 'Rebbi
What does Rebbi Yehudah say there about a pile of
produce that is stolen?
(b) What does Rebbi Shimon say?
(c) Rav Ashi in Nedarim does not seem to agree with our Sugya.
Rav Ashi comment there about Rebbi Yehudah, who invalidates the Nezirus due
to the fact that the pile was stolen?
(d) How will Rav Ashi then explain our Mishnah? Who *is* the author?
(a) The Tana discusses a case if someone sees a Koy and declares Nezirus if
it is a Chayah, whilst his friend declares Nezirus if it is not.
the third and fourth friends say?
(b) The fifth friend declares Nezirus if it is both a Chayah and a
Beheimah, and the sixth that it is neither.
If it is neither, then what is
it? What are the ramifications of this Halachah?
(c) If it is both, what are the ramifications of saying that it is ...
- ... a Chayah?
- ... a Beheimah
(a) The seventh friend declares Nezirus if one of them is a Nazir.
does the eighth friend say?
(b) The ninth friend declares Nezirus if all of them are Nezirim.
(c) What does the Tana rule?
(a) This Tana appears to follow the opinion of Beis Shamai, who rule in the
previous Mishnah too that all of them are Nezirim.
Since when do Tana'im
go out of their way to teach us the rulings of Beis Shamai?
(b) In fact, the author is Beis Hillel according to Rebbi Shimon.
(c) Some commentaries explain that the last three are ...
(d) What is the problem with the nine Nezirim in our Mishnah? What does the
Tana seemingly omit?
- ... Vaday Nezirim.
Why is that?
- ... Safek Nezirim.
Why is that?
(a) Some explain our Mishnah to mean that all nine people are Nezirim (as we
***** Hadran Alach Beis Shamai *****
How do others explain it?
(b) The problem with this is how it is possible to apply the last three
cases in the Mishnah ('she'Echad Mikem Nazir', 'she'Ein Echad Mikem Nazir'
How do we resolve it?
***** Perek Sheloshah Minim *****
(a) Our Mishnah teaches us that Nezirus comprises three prohibitions. What
do we learn from the Pasuk ...
Answers to questions
(b) According to the Mishnah Rishonah, one is only Chayav for drinking a
Revi'is (one and a half egg-volumes) of wine.
- ... "Kadosh Yih'yeh Gadeil Pera"?
- ... "*mi'Kol* Asher Ye'aseh mi'Gefen ha'Yayin, me'Chartzanim ... "?
What does Rebbi Akiva say?
(c) According to the Tana Kama, one is Chayav even if one ate a k'Zayis of
pits or of skins.
What does Rebbi Elazar ben Azaryah say?
(d) According to Rebbi Yehudah, "Chartzanim" are the skins and "Zagim", the
pits. What does Rebbi Yossi say? What sign does he give by which to remember
(a) What do we infer from our Mishnah, which states that a Nazir
transgresses when he eats anything that is 'Yotze min ha'Gefen'?
(b) Others make the same inference from the Seifa 've'Eino Chayav Ela ad
she'Yochal k'Zayis min ha'Anavim'.
Why do they decline to learn like the
(c) Either way, this does not conform with the opinion of Rebbi Elazar.
What does Rebbi Elazar say?
(d) Both Tana'im derive their respective opinions from the Pasuk "mi'Yayin
ve'Sheichar Yazir ... mi'Kol Asher Ye'aseh mi'Gefen ha'Yayin ... . Rebbi
Elazar Darshen this Pasuk in the form of a 'Mi'ut and Ribuy'.
What does he
- ... include from the latter Pasuk?
- ... exclude from the former one?
(a) The Rabbanan add the Pasuk "me'Chartzanim ve'Ad Zag", and Darshen all
What form of D'rashah do they now make?
(b) How do they subsequently Darshen the 'P'rat u'Chelal u'Ferat'?
(c) On what grounds do they Darshen the P'rat in this way (in spite of the
fact that it is actual food), and not literally (confining the La'av to
(d) In any event, it is quite inconceivable to exclude wormy grapes for two
reasons, one of them because it is no worse that vinegar, which the Torah
What is the other reason?
(a) We ask why the Pasuk needs to add "Mechartzanim ve'ad Zag".
But did we
not just use that as the second P'rat?
(b) Why then, *does* the Torah place it after the K'lal?
(c) How would we have Darshened the Pasuk if there had not been a P'rat
after the K'lal?
(d) With which Tana in our Mishnah does Rebbi Elazar conquer?
(a) The 'P'ri referred to in the Beraisa is the fruit itself, and the
'Peso'les P'ri', vinegar. 'Af Kol P'ri' comes to include 'Guharki', and the
'Af Kol' of Peso'les P'ri, 'Invi Dichrin'.
What is ...
(b) From "*ve'Ad* Zag" we include 'de'Bein ha'Beinayim'.
- ... 'Guharki'?
- ... 'Invi Dichrin'?
What does this
(c) Having already included unripe grapes, why do we need a Pasuk to include
these small grapes?
(a) Others explain 'de'Bein ha'Beinayim' to mean the flesh between the pits
and the skin.
Answers to questions
On what grounds do we initially reject this explanation?
(b) How do we ultimately accept it (answering the previous Kashya in the