“I will be handsome” (cont.)
Yüklə 50,33 Kb. Pdf görüntüsü
|
- Bu səhifədəki naviqasiya:
- 2) “I am like this”
- 6) Clarifying the dispute between R’ Meir and Chachamim
- ג ריזנ ‘ Mitzvah wine
- ןיבור ה"ע,דוד ר תב הנח תרמ
- The bitter cups
| 1) “I will be handsome” (cont.) The Gemara explains why a declaration, “I will be hand- some” constitutes a pledge to be a nazir, despite the fact that being a nazir is sinful. 2) “I am like this”
Shmuel explains the conditions necessary for a declaration of “I am like this” to be a pledge to be a nazir. 3) “I am a mesalsel” An example of the use of the term mesalsel in reference to hair is cited. It is suggested that the term mesalsel refers to Torah ra- ther than nezirus. Shmuel answers that the one who made the declaration was holding his hair.
An example of the use of the term mechalkel in reference to hair is cited. It is suggested that the term mechalkel refers to supporting the poor rather than nezirus. Shmuel answers that the one who made the declaration was holding his hair.
A verse is cited that indicates that the word חוליש refers to growing hair. An alternative translation of the term חוליש is suggested. Two resolutions to this challenge are presented.
Reish Lakish suggests an explanation of the dispute be- tween R’ Meir and Chachamim. R’ Yochanan offers an alternative explanation of the dis- pute. The Gemara records a series of unsuccessful challenges to R’ Yochanan’s explanation. A practical difference between Reish Lakish and R’ Yochanan’s explanation is suggested. This explanation is unsuccessfully challenged. - 7) MISHNAH: The Mishnah teaches that even if a person mentions only one of the prohibitions in his nezirus declara- tion he is, nonetheless, a full fledged nazir. 8) The authorship of the Mishnah It is noted that the Mishnah does not reflect R’ Shimon’s opinion as recorded in the Baraisa that a person is not a nazir unless he vows to abide by all the restrictions. The Gemara explains the rationale for the positions of R’ Shimon and Rabanan, respectively. Tuesday, August 25 2015 עשת לולא 'י “ ה
OVERVIEW of the Daf
איה יאמ תושרה ןייכ הוצמ ןיי רוסאל ― אתלדבאו אתשודק O ur Gemara points out that although a nazir is prohibited from drinking wine, we might have thought that this restriction does not include wine that is used for a mitzvah. Nevertheless, there is a special verse ( ריזי רכשו ןיימ) which teaches us that all wine, including that of mitzvos, is included in the restriction. What is the case of wine of a mitzvah? The Gemara identi- fies this as wine used for Kiddush and Havdalah. In the Sifrei (Parashas Naso) the “wine.of mitzvah” is identified as wine of ma’aser sheni. Why does our Gemara use the example of wine used for Kiddush and Havdalah, a definition which is questiona- ble, as noted in the Gemara and in Tosafos, rather than to use the definition suggested by the Sifrei? The רצואה תיב (159) explains that the Sifrei argues with our Gemara regarding the mitzvah of eating ma’aser sheni. The Sifrei is of the opinion that the owner himself has a mitzvah to eat his ma’aser sheni. This is why the Sifrei understands that there is a necessity for the verse to specifically exclude the wine of ma’aser sheni and to prohibit its consumption for the nazir. Our Gemara, however, is of the opinion that ma’aser sheni wine can be drunk by anyone, as long as it is consumed in Yerushalayim. Therefore, there is no specific reason to think that a nazir should be able to drink the wine of ma’aser sheni. If there is a need for a verse, it would be to teach that the nazir may not drink the wine of Kiddush and Havdalah. The
רהמ “ תויח ץ points out that when drinking the cup of Kiddush and havdalah, it is enough to drink the majority of a cup which contains a תיעיבר (one fourth of a log), but a nazir is only in violation of his nezirus if he drinks a full תיעיבר. This means that even if a nazir would drink from Kiddush, his nezi- rus is not violated. Why, then, would it be necessary for a verse to prohibit his drinking wine which does not interfere with his condition? Although any and all wine is prohibited ( רועיש יצח הרותה ןמ רוסא), we would not consider drinking less that a full amount to be דמועו עבשומ, as described in the Gemara. Accordingly, רהמ
“ תויח ך
explains that our Gemara follows the view of Rabbi Shimon, who holds that a nazir invalidates his nezirus if he drinks any wine at all, not only a full amount of a תיעיבר. Distinctive INSIGHT
This month’s Daf Digest is dedicated in memory of Rivka Yenta bas Asher Anshel & Yosef ben Chaim haCohen Weiss on 8 and 14th of Elul By Mr. and Mrs. Manny Weiss This week’s Daf Digest is dedicated by The family of
Mrs. Ann Ruben o.b.m. Number 1140– ג ריזנ
‘
תמאב constitute an oath? העובש וז ירה ןימי רמואה אינתהו
S hulchan Aruch 1 rules that saying “Right hand” constitutes an oath and Shach 2 adds that it only counts as an oath when a person refers to the right hand of Hashem. Thus we see that even if a person does not refer to Hashem by His name or one of the descriptive terms commonly used to name Him, it none- theless constitutes an oath since he used a term that refers to Him. Another application of this principle is found in Teshu- vas Zera Emes. Teshuvas Zera Emes 3 ruled that the use of the term תמאב— in truth— also constitutes an oath. To a large degree he bases this ruling on the comments of Reishis Chochmah who wrote that one should be cautious from swear- ing with the term תמאב since this a reference to Hashem. Thus, for example, Teshuvos V’Hanhagos 4 rules that a person should not say, “In truth it was like this – ךכ היה תמאב,” since such a declaration would constitute a vow. Teshuvas P’nei Yitzchok 5 , however, cites numerous in- stances that indicate that the use of the term תמאב does not constitute an oath. Furthermore, he claims that Reishis Chochmah cannot be relied upon to draw this conclusion. One reason is that Reishis Chochmah only wrote that one should be cautious ( ש “
“ ) which hints that there is no actual prohibition. Secondly, the section Sha’arei Kedusha presents matters of piety not halacha. Teshuvas Haradvaz 6 rules that the term תמא constitutes an oath and adds that if one declares, “Just like Hashem is true so too this matter is true” he may have taken an oath and should conduct himself as if an oath was taken. Furthermore, even if he follows through appropriately on his oath he has commit- ted a terrible transgression that borders on heresy. The reason is that a person should not equate the truth of Hashem with the truth of any creation. This applies even if the person is certain that his statement is true and all the more so if he is uncertain that the matter is true.
1
.'ח 'עס ז"לר 'יס ד"וי ע"וש
2
.ד"י ק"ס םש ך"ש
3
.ט"צ 'יס ב"ח תמא ערז ת"וש
4
.ה"כקת 'עס א"ח תוגהנהו תובושת ת"וש
5
.'ה 'יס ד"וי א"ח קחצי ינפ ת"וש 6 .
.ז"י 'יס א"ח ז"בדרה ת"וש HALACHAH Highlight
HaRav Yehoshua Eichenstein, shlit”a HaRav Pinchas Eichenstein, Nasi; HoRav Zalmen L. Eichenstein, Rov ;Rabbi Tzvi Bider, Executive Director, edited by Rabbi Ben-Zion Rand. Daf Yomi Digest has been made possible through the generosity of Mr. & Mrs. Dennis Ruben. The bitter cups "...תושרה ןייכ הוצמ ןיי רוסאל היל יעבמ"
A
advance of technology, we can usually get whatever we need relatively inexpensive- ly, this was not always the case. It used to be that the price of wine depended on the success of the grape yield in one’s area and on the success of importers. Sometimes wine could be exceedingly expensive. Nevertheless, for the four cups of wine required on Pesach, people spent as much as was necessary to procure wine needed to fulfill this precious mitzvah. Somehow, a very bitter substance had been mixed into a certain person’s expensive wine. The owner of the wine approached his Rav to ask whether he could still use it. He explained, “Of course, it tastes rather vile, but I hate wine anyway. It gives me a headache. I drink exactly eight cups of it. Four one each of the seder nights. So to me it doesn’t matter much that it’s so repul- sive. Do I really have to pay the exorbi- tant price of another eight cups of wine if I’m willing to drink what I have?” The man’s Rav was not sure that the man could use the very bitter tasting wine. He decided to consult with the Kesav Sofer, zt”l. The gadol answered, “In Nazir 3b we learn from the verse that a nazir may not even drink wine and beer for Kiddush or Havdalah. However, a Nazir may drink wine in a manner in which he gets no pleasure. If one can discharge his obliga- tion with wine mixed with something very bitter, what is the verse teaching us? Clearly one may not use regular wine if there is a permitted way to do the mitz- vah, since there is no mitzvah to have pleasure from the wine. The Kesav Sofer concluded, “We see from here that one may not discharge one’s obligation with matzah or wine that was mixed with something so bitter that normal people would not wish to eat it. So if this man can’t procure some oth- er wine, he may use such drink for the mitzvah. Since there are opinions that he can discharge his obligation, he should at least use what he has…” STORIES Off the Daf
לסלסמ? _________________________________________ 2. According to Reish Lakish, what is the point of dispute between R’ Meir and Rabanan? _________________________________________ 3. Why does declaring “right hand” constitute an oath? ________________________________________ 4. Explain the dispute between R’ Shimon and Rabanan. ________________________________________ REVIEW
and Remember Yüklə 50,33 Kb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|