Nazir - Daf 42
- After shaving and leaving two hairs, one was shaved and the other fell out
Rava inquired: נזיר שגילח והניח שתי שערות – A nazir who shaved and left over two hairs, וגילח אחת ונשרה אחת מהו – and he then shaved one and the other one fell out, what is the halachah? Rav Acha of Difti asked Ravina: גילח שערה שערה קא מיבעי ליה לרבא – Was Rava asking about shaving one hair at a time? If a nazir shaved a single hair at a time, he surely would be yotzei after he shaves the second to last hair, leaving him with less than two, and that is what happened here. Rather, the inquiry is in a case where one fell out, and then he shaved the last. Ravina answered Rava’s inquiry, and the Gemara explains his meaning: אף על פי ששער אין כאן, מצות גילוח אין כאן – Even though there is no hair here, there is still no fulfillment of the mitzvah of shaving, since the second to last hair was not shaved, and shaving of the last hair is not significant.
- Shampooing or combing hair: דבר שאין מתכוין
The next Mishnah states: נזיר חופף ומפספס, אבל לא סורק – A nazir may shampoo his hair with cleansing agents and separate his hairs, but he cannot comb them. The Gemara explains that this Mishnah reflects the view of Rebbe Shimon, who holds דבר שאין מתכוין מותר – something which is unintended is permitted, meaning it is permitted to perform an act which may cause an unintended transgression. Here, too, although some hair may be removed inadvertently through the shampooing act, it is permitted. Still, combing is forbidden, as the Gemara explains: כל הסורק להסיר נימין מדולדלות מתכוין – Anyone who combs intends to remove dangling hairs. The Rosh explains this to mean that it is inevitable (פסיק רישא) that hairs will be removed during combing, and Rebbe Shimon agrees to forbid actions where the unintended transgression is inevitable. Similarly, Rebbe Yishmael forbids shampooing with earth in the next Mishnah, because it inevitably removes hair.
- Multiple malkos for multiple warnings, and a machlokes by repeated tumah
The next Mishnah states: נזיר שהיה שותה יין כל היום – A nazir who was drinking wine all day, אינו חייב אלא אחת – is only liable to one [set of malkos]. אמרו לו אל תשתה אל תשתה – If they told him “Do not drink! Do not drink!” (i.e., he was warned repeatedly between drinks), והוא שותה חייב על כל אחת ואחת – and he continued to drink, he is liable for each drink that followed a warning. The Mishnah says the same holds true for multiple shavings, or multiple tumos. Rabbah said in the name of Rav Huna that טומאה וטומאה לא - a nazir who came in contact with tumah twice is not liable a second time, since he was already tamei and the second contact does not add to his tumah. Rav Yosef swore that Rav Huna held that he is liable. Abaye challenged Rav Yosef from a Baraisa which says that a Kohen who has a corpse on his shoulder, and touches a second corpse, is not liable for the second tumah. Rav Yosef responded that our Mishnah proves the opposite, by saying that a nazir can receive multiple malkos for repeated tumah. There is no contradiction: כאן בחיבורין, כאן שלא בחיבורין – [The Baraisa] is a case of current contact with the first corpse, so the second corpse adds no tumah, whereas [the Mishnah] is a case of no current contact with the corpse, so the contact with the second increases his tumah, as the Gemara will discuss.
