Nazir Daf 13 - Nezirus Upon Having a Child
Summary
- The shiur presents the Mishnah’s rulings on accepting a conditional *nezirus* upon having a child, delineating how the terms “בן” and “ולד” determine outcomes for a *bat*, *tumtum*, *androgynos*, and *nefel*, and establishing that “בן” means a definite male while “ולד” includes any child. The sugya contrasts the lenient stance of *Tanna Kamma* (identified with Rabbi Yehuda) with Rabbi Shimon’s stringency in cases of doubtful viability and records Rabbi Shimon’s required stipulation to enable bringing offerings and shaving. The Gemara explores whether offerings designated after a doubtful *nefel* acquire *kedushah* upon a subsequent twin’s viable birth, limiting any consequence to prohibitions of shearing and labor, and then presents unresolved cases of a second person saying “ועלַי” or “ואני” in response to a conditional *nezirus*. The closing Mishnah organizes how to count overlapping *stam nezirus* and child-triggered *nezirus*, prioritizing the vow accepted first and addressing shaving constraints.
- The Mishnah states that one who says הריני נזיר לכשיהיה לי בן becomes a *nazir* if a son is born, and he does not become a *nazir* if a *bat*, *tumtum*, *androgynos*, or *nefel* is born. The Mishnah further states that if he says לכשיהיה לי ולד, then even a *bat*, *tumtum*, or *androgynos* triggers the *nezirus*.
- The Arukh defines a *tumtum* as one whose genital signs are closed, deriving טומטום from a root of closure, as in אונקלוס on סתמום פלשתים (וטמונון פלשתאי), and notes the possibility of surgical opening to reveal whether the person is male or female. The Arukh explains that an *androgynos* presents signs of both male and female, with a Greek etymology in which “אנדרו” denotes male and “גינוס” denotes female.
- Tosafot and the Rosh state that when one vows *nezirus* conditioned on having a “בן,” he means a definite son and not a *tumtum*, even though a *tumtum* might be a male, because his intent is a clear, identifiable *ben vadai*. Mishneh LaMelech raises a doubt where one says הריני נזיר לכשיהיה לי בן או בת and a *tumtum* is born, weighing whether “either a son or a daughter” is satisfied, or whether the intent still demands a definite, identifiable category, excluding a *tumtum*.
- The Gemara explains that “בן” in the Mishnah means a male and not “*lek’she’ibaneh*,” and that “ולד” means any baby and not necessarily one of the “*machshevei bnei inshi*.” Tosafot, the R”Sh, and the Mepharsh indicate that “*machshevei bnei inshi*” excludes a *tumtum* and *androgynos* and may also exclude a *bat*, while the Rambam in פירוש המשניות states explicitly that a *bat* is within “*machshevei bnei inshi*.”
- The Mishnah states that if the wife miscarried and the viability of the *velad* is unknown, he is not a *nazir* according to *Tanna Kamma*, while Rabbi Shimon requires him to say: אם היה בן קיימא הרי אני נזיר חובה ואם לאו הרי אני נזיר נדבה. Tosafot explains that this stipulation is necessary to avoid bringing offerings as potential *chullin ba’azarah*, enabling all three obligatory offerings, whereas without the stipulation he could not complete the process properly. The Ran notes that although shaving on only an *olah* and *shelamim* can end *nezirus* post facto, lechatchilah one must bring all three offerings; Tosafot in Nedarim adds that full-head shaving outside *nezirus* constitutes *hakafat kol ha-rosh*, violating *pe’at ha-rosh*, thus necessitating certain *nezirus* through the stipulation.
- The Mishnah states that if later she gives birth to a definite *ben kayama*, the vow now takes effect, and Rabbi Shimon instructs him to say: אם הראשון בן קיימא הראשון חובה וזו נדבה, ואם לאו הראשון נדבה וזו חובה.
- The Gemara attributes the *Tanna Kamma* ruling “אינו נזיר” in the doubtful miscarriage to Rabbi Yehuda דקרי (Nazir 8a), who holds that a person does not accept *nezirus* on a doubtful fulfillment of his condition.
- The Gemara asks whether offerings designated after a doubtful *nefel* become consecrated if a second twin is born the same day as a clear *ben kayama*, considering the principle from Niddah that twins come from טיפה אחת שנתחלקה לשתים yet allowing that parts of the drop could implant days apart. The Gemara limits the practical difference to prohibitions of shearing and labor on the animals and not to actually bringing them as offerings, since even if the second birth indicates viability it is not a conclusive proof sufficient to authorize sacrificial use according to Tosafot.
- Ben Rechumi asks Abaye whether a second person who hears הריני נזיר כשיהיה לי בן and says “ועלַי” thereby links his vow to the first person’s condition or accepts a parallel condition on himself, and whether “ואני” in front of the first person indicates personal acceptance or “*Rachimna lach kevasach*,” tying himself to the other’s gratitude. Ben Rechumi further asks whether saying “ואני” in response to הריני נזיר לכשיהיה לפלוני בן, when the subject is not present, indicates personal acceptance (*shelo befanav*) or alignment with the first speaker’s condition, and the Gemara leaves these questions as *teibai*, which Rabbeinu Peretz equates with *teiku*.
- The Mishnah states that if one first accepts “הריני נזיר” and then “ונזיר שיהיה לי בן,” he completes his own *stam nezirus* first and then counts the child-triggered *nezirus* upon the child’s birth. The Mishnah states that if one first accepts “הריני נזיר שיהיה לי בן” and then says “ונזיר,” he begins the immediate *stam nezirus*, pauses it when the child is born to fulfill the earlier-accepted child-triggered *nezirus*, and afterward completes his own *nezirus*; Tosafot and the Rosh note that he does not shave after the first term so that he will have thirty days of hair growth to enable shaving at the end, and he brings two sets of offerings at the conclusion.
Previous Page
Next Page
Daf Images are property of Vagshal and may not be reproduced.
Suggestions