Nazir - Daf 24
- The halachos of designated korbanos or money of a nezirus which is revoked
The next Mishnah delineates the laws of korbanos or money previously designated for nezirus if the husband subsequently revoked his wife’s nezirus. If the animal was his property, תצא ותרעה בעדר – it goes out and grazes with the flock, i.e., it is chullin. If it was hers, the chatas is left to die, and the olah and shelamim are brought as voluntary korbanos, ונאכלין ליום אחד ואינן טעונין לחם – and [the shelamim] may only be eaten for one day (like the stringency of a nazir’s korban, and less than an ordinary shelamim), and they do not require the bread that is normally brought with a nazir’s shelamim. היו לה מעות סתומין יפלו לנדבה – If she had unspecified money designated for her korbanos, they are used for communal nedavos. מעות מפורשין – If she had specifically designated money, then the chatas-money goes into the Dead Sea (parallel to a chatas animal dying), the olah-money is used for a personal voluntary olah, and the shelamim-money is used for a personal voluntary shelamim, which has the same laws as the shelamim above.
- Machlokes of a husband’s obligation to provide his wife with her korbanos
Our Mishnah taught that animals provided by the husband revert to chullin upon the hafarah of the nezirus. The Gemara assumes that this is because the husband is not responsible to provide her with korbanos. It seems our Mishnah follows the Rabbonon who argue with Rebbe Yehudah. Rebbe Yehudah says: אדם מביא קרבן עשיר על אשתו – A person must bring a wealthy man’s korban for his wife (for a korban that depends on financial status, although she generally has no personal property), וכן כל קרבנותיה שהיא חייבת – as well as all of her obligatory korbanos. He holds that her korbanos are his obligation, to the point that they even follow his financial status, so he would presumably disagree with our Mishnah that his animal becomes chullin.
Rava explains that the Mishnah can accord with Rebbe Yehudah: כי משעבד לה במילתא דצריכא לה – When is he obligated to her, only for what she needs, במילתא דלא צריכא לה לא – but that which she does not need, he is not. The Gemara records another version of this discussion.
- The four rams which are not accompanied by bread
The Gemara says, ואלו הן ארבעה אילים שאינן טעונין לחם – These are the four cases of rams which do not require their normal bread accompaniment: שלו, ושלה, ושלאחר המיתה, ושלאחר כפרה – his, hers, after death, and after atonement. The factor common to these cases is that their korban has transformed into a voluntary one, and therefore no longer requires the bread accompaniment. The Gemara explains that “hers” refers to our Mishnah’s case of a nezirah’s shelamim after hafarah. “His” refers to a father who declared his son a nazir (discussed on Daf 28), which his son or relatives may protest, in which case the shelamim-money is used for a voluntary shelamim which does not require bread. “After death,” refers to a nazir who died after designating specific money for his korbanos, including a shelamim, and “after atonement,” is a case where an animal designated for a nazir’s shelamim was lost, and another was brought in its stead, after which the first was found. In these cases, as well, no bread is required, דלא חזיא לכפרה – because it is no longer fit for atonement, in the former case because he died, and in the latter, because he already received atonement.
