Nazir - Daf 50
- Does the halachah of netzel apply to animals?
The Mishnah on Daf 49b had taught that a kezayis of netzel (a substance made of decomposed flesh) from a corpse is metamei a nazir. Here, Abaye asked Rabbah: יש נצל לבהמה או אין נצל לבהמה – Is there a rule of netzel for animals or not (i.e., would decomposed flesh from a neveilah continue to convey tumah)? מי אמרינן גמירי נצל דאתי מאדם – Do we say the tradition was learned only regarding netzel from a human corpse, אבל דאתי מבהמה לא – but not regarding that which comes from an animal, או דלמא לא שנא – or is there no difference? The Gemara clarifies its question: according to the opinion that טומאה חמורה עד לגר – stringent tumah (such as neveilah, which is an av hatumah) retains it tumah until it is unfit for human consumption, then it is clear that netzel of neveilah would not be able to be metamei, since it is not fit for human consumption. The inquiry is pertinent according to the opinion that טומאה חמורה עד לכלב – stringent tumah retains it tumah until it is unfit for a dog. The Gemara suggests two proofs and deflects them.
- The connection of a stream of liquid or melted food
The Gemara quotes a Mishnah: כל הנצוק טהור – Any liquid poured into a container of tamei liquid is tahor, meaning the upper part of the stream (and what remains in the upper container) is not connected to the tamei liquid below, חוץ מדבש הזיפים והצפיחית – except for Ziphite honey and tzapichis (a thick batter). Beis Shammai add a type of porridge to this list because its stream springs back to the upper container when one stops pouring it. The especially thick liquids are considered connected to the tamei liquid below (and become tamei), as the Gemara will analyze. Rami bar Chama asked: According to the Tanna Kamma, יש נצוק לאוכלין או אין נצוק לאוכלין – Is there connection regarding a stream of melted foods or not? The question revolves around which characteristic of the above liquids renders their stream a connection: מי אמרינן משום דאית בהו רירי – Do we say it is because they have strands which are drawn back into the upper container when he ceases pouring, והני לית בהו רירי – whereas these melted foods do not have strands, and thus would not be considered connected, או דלמא משום דסמיכין הוא – or perhaps it is because they are thick, והכא הא סמיכין – and these melted foods are also thick? The question is not resolved.
- The shiur of a “ladleful” of corpse-dust
The Mishnah taught that a nazir must shave after contracting tumah from a מלא תרווד רקב – a ladleful of corpse-dust. The Gemara here seeks to define this shiur (since the size of the ladle is not given). Chizkiyah says: מלא פיסת היד – a palmful (excluding the fingers). Rebbe Yochanan says: מלא חפניו – a handful. The Gemara quotes a Baraisa in which Rebbe Meir describes this shiur: ישנן מעיקר אצבעות ולמעלה – It is from the base of the fingers and upwards, which the Gemara understands to mean out towards the fingertips. The Chachomim say a handful. It emerges, then, that Rebbe Yochanan is following the opinion of the Chachomim, but Chizkiyah does not hold like either opinion!? The Gemara first answers that his measure of a palmful is identical to the volume of Rebbe Meir’s shiur. Rav Shimi bar Ada told Rav Pappa that Rebbe Meir’s shiur can be interpreted as from the base of the fingers and “upwards” towards the wrist, meaning the palm itself, exactly like Chizkiyah said.
