Daf Yomi for Women - Hadran

Latest Episodes:

Nazir 47 - Shabbat March 11, 18 Adar Mar 10, 2023

Show notes

Today's daf is sponsored by Bracha Stuart in loving memory of her brother Aryeh Leib ben Simcha HaKohen on his second yahrtzeit. "I miss you every day. May your neshama have an Aliyah on this day and also in the merit of my learning the daf with this holy Hadrian community."

What happens when someone becomes impure after the blood of one of the sacrifices is sprinkled? Rabbi Eliezer and the rabbis disagree about whether the sacrifice needs to be brought again with the rest of the sacrifices after the nazir becomes pure or does that sacrifice count and after the purification process, the nazir only brings the rest of the sacrifices. The rabbis try to prove their opinion from the case of Miriam from Tarmod who was a nazir who became impure at that stage. A nazir and a kohen gadol are not allowed to become impure to anyone who died, unless it is a met mitzva, one who there is no one to bury them. If a nazir and a kohen gadol were walking together and there was a met mitzva, which of them should become impure? Rabbi Eliezer and the rabbis disagree. What is the reason for each opinion? The Gemara brings a hierarchy of kohanim gedolim and other high-ranking kohanim and asks who proceeds who in terms of impurity. When it comes to a kohen who goes out to war and a kohen who is in standby to be the kohen gadol, the higher one is the standby one. But this contradicts a different sugya where there is a need to save them and only one can be saved, it is the one who goes out to war who precedes the standby. Why is there a difference in the ruling in the two cases?

Nazir 46 - March 10, 17 Adar Mar 10, 2023

Show notes

.Today's daf is sponsored by Rachel Savin in memory of her father, Shalom ben Shmuel, on his first yahrzeit

At what point in the process is the nazir permitted to drink wine and become impure to dead people? There is a debate between tanna kama and Rabbi Shimon and from a braita, the rabbis hold like Rabbi Shimon and Rabbi Eliezer like tanna kama. From where do each of them derive their opinions? Rav says that the waving of the nazir is critical and if it is not performed, the nazir is not permitted to drink wine, etc. There are two different versions of the discussion that ensued from this statement. In the first version, after questioning which opinion is Rav holding, they answer that he holds like Rabbi Eliezer and explains why you may have thought that the waving is not an essential part of other offerings and therefore Rav needs to tell you that here it is. The Gemara asks: Is the waving really critical, don't we see from a braita regarding a nazir who doesn't have hands that it is not an essential part as the braita compares one without hands to one with hands - just as one without hands can be a nazir, even though they can't do the waving, likewise, one with hand does not need to do the waving? This is resolved by bringing another braita regarding a nazir who is bald, and yet the shaving is still essential - the same can be said by the waving. Regarding shaving, they put a razor over the bald nazir's head and the waving can be done with the nazir's arms. In the second version, the question is asked according to who Rav's statement was made and issues are raised with each side as in the previous version. However, here no answer is given. The Gemara then proceeds to question the rabbi's position who would presumably say that waving is not essential, as the braita regarding a person with no hands can be understood in the following manner: one with no hands can never get out of being a nazir as they cannot do the waving, likewise, one who has hands but does not do the waving cannot finish being a nazir. They bring the braita with the bald nazir to resolve this question as in the braita Beit Hillel understands the comparison differently - it is not coming to talk about whether or not it is essential but how to do it. Just as a nazir with hair puts a razor on his head, likewise one who is bald. Rabbi Avina rejects this answer as he understands Beit Hillel in the opposite way as before, that one needs to shave but cannot and a bald nazir has no way to get out of being a nazir and likewise, one who has hair but doesn't shave does not end his nezirut. The same can be said for one without hands, thus reinstating the question against the rabbis. Since the nazir can only shave after at least one sacrifice is brought, what happens if one brought a sacrifice, shaved, brought the other sacrifices, and then the first sacrifice was disqualified? What if all the sacrifices were brought, then the nazir shaved and then one was disqualified?

Nazir 45 - March 9, 16 Adar Mar 09, 2023

Show notes

Today's daf is sponsored by Amy Goldstein in loving memory of her dear mother, Carolyn Barnett-Goldstein, Chayah bat Modechai ve-Chanah, on her fourth yahrzeit. "I love you and miss you, Your love of Judaism, art and music lives on in all of your family."

Today's daf is sponsored by Yiska and Shaul Weisband in memory of Menachem Yunitzman HaKohen ben Esther V'Tzvi.

Today's daf is sponsored by Medinah Korn in memory of Mrs. Devorah Cohn, Devorah Breina bat Harav Yaakov Zundel ve-Toibe Alta, whose 10th yahrzeit was this week. "Mrs. Cohn was a student of Sarah Schenirer in Poland, as well as a beloved and revered teacher in Boston's Maimonides School for over 40 years. Her warmth and wisdom inspired generations of children and endeared her to all who knew her. Yehi Zichrah Baruch."

Abaye explains that a zav tvul yom (the sun hasn't yet set on the day he purified himself) can't go into the Levite camp (Temple mount) since he is both a tvul yom and he is mechusar kipurim, as he did yet bring his sacrifices. If, however, it is only one of those issues, he can enter into the Levite camp (up until the Nicanor gate) but not into the Shechina camp, the azara. From where does Abaye derive this? After which sacrifice does the nazir do the shaving of the hair - there is a debate about whether it is after the peace offering or the sin offering. The verse says that the nazir shaves at the entrance to the ohel moed (tent of meeting). Is this to be understood literally does this mean something else, as how can the nazir shave there - is it not an embarrassment? Only according to one opinion does a male nazir shave there (not a female nazir) but the others explain the verse is referring to something else. The hair of the nazir goes in the fire under the pot where the peace offering is cooking. However, if it was put under the sin or guilt offering, it would be valid as well. Also, some of the gravy from the peace offering is put on the hair before burning. These two laws are derived from the same word in the verse - how can that be? At what point in the process is the nazir permitted to drink wine and become impure to dead people? There is a debate between the rabbis and Rabbi Shimon.

Nazir 44 - Shushan Purim - March 8, 15 Adar Mar 08, 2023

Show notes

Study Guide Nazir 44

Today's daf is dedicated in memory of our fellow Hadran learner, Miriam Kerzner. In her eighties, Miriam was drawn into the world of Gemara's intricacies and excitements, enchanted by Rabbanit Michelle's teachings and enthralled with the intellectual challenges. Talmud became an integral and vibrant part of her life during the long days of Corona and nurtured her during her illness. She joined us in learning up to her last days. Yehi Zichra Baruch, with much comfort to her family from the Hadran Zoom family.

Today's daf is sponsored by Amy Goldstein in memory of her grandmother, Ann Barnett. "Eishet Chayil who embodied qualities from each of the 4 Imahot. Your legacy lives on in your great-granddaughter."

Today's daf is sponsored anonymously in memory of Shmaryahu Yosef Chaim ben Yaakov Yisrael, Rav Chaim Kanievsky.

Of the three prohibitions of nazir, there are stringencies in some that don't exist in the other(s). Impurity and shaving are strict as they cancel the previous days, whereas drinking wine does not. The prohibition to drink wine is stricter than the others as there is no situation in which drinking wine is permitted, whereas a nazir who becomes a leper can shave and if there is a met mitzva, the nazir can become impure. Another stringency of impurity over shaving is that impurity cancels all the days and requires a sacrifice, whereas shaving only cancels thirty days and there is no sacrifice. There is a long discussion in the Gemara full of many suggestions of why we wouldn't learn laws from one to the other, in the style of: "If this one is more lenient than this one in this way and yet more stringent in another, why isn't the other one that is stringent in the first way, also stringent in the second way!" Or the reverse. Each answer provides is either based on a verse or some other clear explanation as to why the logical inference is not followed. The Mishna explains what is the process for a nazir who becomes impure to a dead body. The shaving is to be done on the seventh day. But is it part of the purification process and therefore one can only bring the sacrifices on the following day, even if one pushed off the shaving to the eighth day, or not? Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Tarfon disagree. After Rabbi Akiva's explanation that it is different from the leper, does Rabbi Tarfon concede? A zav cannot go into the Levite camp on the seventh day or purification even after going to the mikveh (status of a tvul yom) as is derived from a verse. Abaye questions this drasha as the same thing appears by nazir and yet the halacha is not the same.

Nazir 43 - Purim - March 7, 14 Adar Mar 07, 2023

Show notes

Today's daf is sponsored by Betsy Mehlman in memory of her father, Zvi Menachem Mendel ben Shlomo z"l, Harold Mondshein, on his 39th yahrzeit that was on the 11th of Adar.

Today's daf is sponsored in memory of Shael Bellows who passed away this week.

Today's daf is sponsored by Amy Cohn in memory of her sister Cindy Navah whose yahrzeit is today. "I can't believe it's been 18 years since your passing. I remember you learning Gemera with Abba zichrono livracha with just so much zest! Love you and miss you so much!"

Raba had said that one could be liable twice only if after becoming impure one went into a tent with a dead body as there are two negative prohibitions - one to not become impure and another not to go into a tent. But this goes against Raba's approach that if one is already impure, how can they be liable for another contraction of impurity, as here too, one was already impure before entering the tent! Rabbi Yochanan distinguishes between a house and a field. In the house, one was pure when they went in but became impure and also entered at the same time - therefore they are liable twice. But one who became impure in a field and then entered an enclosure would not be liable twice for the reason stated above. However, this answer is problematic and several questions are raised one after another, such as, when one enters the house, doesn't one's hand enter first or one's nose, etc. thereby having the impurity come first and not at the same time as most of the body entering. Eventually, Rav Papa answers that if one came in while inside an enclosure and then another person opened it (presumably with the nazir's instructions, consent or help) while they were inside the house with impurity, then the impurity and entering would happen at the same time. Mar bar Rav Ashi gives a different answer - that the nazir entered when the person was about to die but was not yet dead. Tanna Kama and Rebbi disagree about which verse teaches that a kohen gadol and nazir can be with someone until they actually die. Rabbi Yochanan thinks their debate is only about semantics - from where in the verses is it derived. But Reish Lakish holds that one holds actual death and the other holds it is forbidden even as they dying, but not yet dead. Rav Chisda says in the name of Rav that a regular kohen can become impure to his relatives but not if a limb was severed. This is derived from the word "to his father" - only if he is whole. The Gemara raises a question from two braitot that indicate that a son can become impure to relatives whose bodies are not whole. The resolution is that the braitot follow Rabbi Yehuda's opinion and Rav does not follow that opinion.

Nazir 42 - Taanit Esther - March 6, 13 Adar Mar 06, 2023

Show notes

This month's learning is sponsored by Jon and Yael Cohen in memory of Dr. Robert Van Amerongen. A doctor who has healed thousands of people with his medical expertise, providing endless care and love at all hours of the day and night. May his memory be blessed.

This week's learning is sponsored by Jon and Yael Cohen for a refuah shleima for their daughter (and my niece) Naama bat Yael Esther who is having surgery today. May Hashem grant her a full and speedy recovery.

In the spirit of לך כנוס את כל היהודים, "go and gather all the Jews" our global Hadran Zoom Family dedicates today's learning to Carol Robinson and Art Gould. Carol, your beautiful smile, kind heart and gentle determination inspire us in our daily learning. We send you love, strength and courage. Art, we send you continued strength, wisdom, and clarity, as we admire the loving way you care for Carol. Our hearts and tefillot are with you both.

A nazir who did not shave off all their hair and left two hairs did nothing. From this, we learn that this is a unique law for a nazir, but in other cases in the Torah, the majority is sufficient. Abaye and Raba ask questions about the issue of the two hairs, by raising "What if..." scenarios? Is a nazir allowed to wash, straighten out and brush their hair, and if so, how? How does this fit with Rabbi Shimon's opinion that one is not liable for something if that was not one's intent? If the nazir was warned every time before he went to do one of the prohibitions of a nazir, he can receive lashes several times - for each and every forbidden action. Is it possible to be liable for two sets of lashes if became impure to a dead body twice - after all, he has already become impure and has not defiled anything any more than he had from the first instance! There is a dispute between Rabba and Rav Yosef who both disagree about what Rav Huna held. Abaye raised a difficulty against Rav Yosef from a braita to show that it is impossible that one would get two sets of lashes as one is already defiled. Rav Yosef responds by saying that the braita he quoted contradicts our Mishna where one does get two sets of lashes for two instances of coming in contact with the dead. Rav Yosef resolves the contradiction by establishing each case in a different way of impurity - the braita is where one is still attached to the first dead body and the Mishna is where one is not. The Gemara questions his answer but resolves it as well.

Nazir 41 - March 5, 12 Adar Mar 05, 2023

Show notes

Today's daf is sponsored anonymously in memory of Moshe ben David, Rav Moshe Feinstein, zt"l.

After having suggested that according to the rabbis, one could still possibly not conclude from the word "his beard" that the only way for the leper to shave is with a razor, they reject this suggestion on two counts. Rabbi Eliezer derives from the word "his head," mentioned in a verse regarding the shaving of the leper, that a razor needs to be used for the shaving of the leper. What do the rabbis derive from that verse? They derive from it that the commandment to shave all his hair overrides the prohibition to remove (round) the corners of his head. Why can't that be derived from the word "his beard" which overrides the prohibition to remove the corners of his beard? Why are both necessary? From "the head" we learn both that the prohibition to remove (round) the corners of his head applies even to one who is removing all the hair on one's head and that a positive commandment overrides a negative commandment (shaving of leper overrides removing the corners). From "the beard" we learn that a razor must be used for the leper's shaving. Rabbi Eliezer learns that a positive commandment overrides a negative commandment from the juxtaposition of tzitzit and shaatnez.

Nazir 40 - Shabbat March 4, 11 Adar Mar 03, 2023

Show notes

Study Guide Nazir 40

Today's daf is sponsored by Abby Flamholz in honor of Sigal Spitzer Flamholz on her birthday. "An inspirational mom, wife, daughter, businesswoman, and daf learner."

From where do we derive that the shaving of a nazir needs to be performed with a razor? Rav Chisda brings a number of rulings regarding shaving of a nazir at the end of the term and cutting hair during the term (regarding when one receives lashes and when one needs to restart the count). A Mishna in Negaim 14:4 lists three people who need to shave their hair with a razor - a nazir, leper and the levites in the desert (a one-time action - not for future generations). From where is derived that a razor is needed? Regarding the nazir and levites, there are verses that show this. Regarding the leper, they attempt to derive it from a logical inference from either nazir, or the levites, or both together, but they are unsuccessful. Rava bar Mesharshia asked Rava about this as in a braita quoted earlier (Nazir 39b) they unsuccessfully tried to derive the razor from the leper to the nazir and here it is the opposite. Rava answers the question by explaining that the braita followed the rabbis' opinion and the Gemara here followed Rabbi Eliezer regarding a debate they have about whether the prohibition on men to remove the corners of their beard is only with a razor or with other implements as well. The Gemara explains how the rabbis' opinion there that it is only forbidden with a razor proves that a leper needs to shave with a razor as his obligation overrides the Torah law.

Nazir 39 - March 3, 10 Adar Mar 03, 2023

Show notes

Today's daf is sponsored in honor of the birthday of Audrey Mondrow, a daf yomi learner, by her children and grandchildren. "Thank you for modeling for us how to always grow and learn."

Today's daf is sponsored in honor of the bat mitzvah of Avigayil bat Yonatan v'Ilana this weekend in Riverdale. "Avigayil, your whole family is so proud of you, of your love of Torah and your dedication to learning (including learning Talmud with your Ima). With love from your bubbe and aunts, uncles, and cousins."

Today's daf is sponsored by the Hadran zoom family in honor of the bar mitzva of Amitai, son of our fellow learner Devorah Kessner Bader. "We're inspired by your dedication to learning, Amitai!"

Today's daf is sponsored by Sara Berelowitz in loving memory of her mother-in-law Sarah Berelowitz on her yahrzeit on 11 of Adar. "It's wonderful when your mother-in-law is also your friend. Missing you lots."

Rav Papa retracts his difficulty against Abaye's opinion and admits that he added the word "five" from the braita to see if Abaye would back down from his opinion or not as he wanted to see if Abaye's opinion was based on a tradition or not. Does hair from the root or from the end? The relevance of this question is if a nazir gets their hair shaved on by bandits, but they leave enough to fold the hair over, would they be able to complete the process (from the end - as what was cut was the new growth) or does there need to be growth that was there from the beginning of the term and they would therefore need to wait until more hair grew (from the root)? The Gemara brings five attempts to get to an answer. Three are rejected but two are accepted and they prove that it grows from the roots. A difficulty is raised with this explanation in light of a braita, but it is resolved. Is it forbidden for a nazir to shave one's hair only with a razor or in other ways as well? A number of ways of extrapolating the verse "a razor shall not pass over his head" are brought.

Nazir 38 - March 2, 9 Adar Mar 02, 2023

Show notes

Today's daf is sponsored by Sylvia Klein in memory of her father, Sherman Israel Klein, Shnayor Yisroel ben Yerachmiel v'Sara, on his 11th yahrzeit, z''l. "He loved Torah, learning, and the Jewish people."

There is a debate about whether the different types of items from the grapes join together for a requisite amount to make a nazir liable for eating them. How does each side understand what can be derived from the verse "anything that is made of the grapevine?" Rabbi Abahu quotes Rabbi Elazar saying that heiter mitztaref l'issur is only by the quarter-log of wine that the nazir is forbidden to drink. Rabbi Elazar himself says that there are ten issues for which a quarter-log is the relevant requisite amount. Rav Kahana gives it a mnemonic - 5 red and 5 white - and provides a sentence for each by which to remember the cases. Why aren't there others on his list that also have the same requisite amount? The Gemara assumes that he included only ones that were agreed upon by all. What is the root of the debate in the Mishna between Rabbi Akiva and the rabbis regarding whether or not the requisite amount for wine for a nazir is a quarter-log or an olive bulk? We learn from nazir to all other forbidden items that have different names, such as dried and fresh grapes, one is liable for each one independently. Abaye and Rava disagree about whether one gets an additional set of lashes when eating grape peels or any of the forbidden items that a nazir can't eat as one is also violating the verse "anything that is made of the grapevine" or since that is a lav shebiklalot, a general term that includes the specific cases, one does not receive lashes for it. Rav Papa raises a difficulty against Abaye's position but Abaye is able to resolve it.

Our TOPPODCAST Picks

Follow Us

Stay Connected

Daf Yomi for Women – Hadran

Related Podcasts

Links

Stay Connected