{"id":11673,"date":"2008-04-10T14:57:00","date_gmt":"2008-04-10T14:57:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/production.ou.org\/life\/other\/masechet_nazir_2228\/"},"modified":"2015-10-28T11:35:31","modified_gmt":"2015-10-28T16:35:31","slug":"masechet_nazir_2228","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.ou.org\/life\/torah\/masechet_nazir_2228\/","title":{"rendered":"Masechet Nazir 22a-28b"},"content":{"rendered":"

The Coming Week’s Daf Yomi by Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz<\/em><\/p>\n

This essay is based upon the insights and chidushim (original ideas) of Talmudic scholar Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz, as published in the Hebrew version of the Steinsaltz Edition of the Talmud.<\/em><\/p>\n

This month\u2019s Steinsaltz Daf Yomi is sponsored by Dr. and Mrs. Alan Harris, The Lewy Family Foundation, and Marilyn and Edward Kaplan<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

Nazir 22a-b<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n

The Mishnah<\/a> (20b<\/a>) teaches that if a man says hareini nazir<\/em> and his wife agrees, saying va-ani<\/em> \u2013 “I am, as well,” the husband can choose to be mefer<\/em> (annul) her acceptance of the status of nezirut<\/a><\/em>, even though his own commitment remains intact. If, however, a woman says hareini nezirah<\/em> \u2013 “I accept upon myself the rules of a nazir<\/em>” \u2013 and her husband says in response va-ani<\/em> \u2013 “I am, as well,” the husband can no longer annul his wife’s vow of nezirut<\/em>, and they will both become nezirim<\/em>.<\/p>\n

At first, the Gemara<\/a> tries to use this ruling to conclude that once such a neder<\/em> (vow) has been approved by the husband, he cannot change his mind because he would essentially be annulling his own neder<\/em>. That is to say, once he erases the neder<\/em> made by his wife, it will become clear that his own statement of va<\/em>–ani<\/em> no longer refers to a meaningful commitment and his commitment to nezirut<\/em> will disappear, as well. After some discussion, however, the Gemara explains that there is a different rule that is applicable in this case. In fact, we do not consider the husband’s statement as merely accepting nezirut<\/em> himself, rather we understand it to be an emphatic approval of his wife’s statement \u2013 so emphatic that it cannot be undone.<\/p>\n

The Ran<\/a> in Masechet<\/a> Nedarim<\/a><\/em> (21b<\/a>) explains that the statement that he made \u2013 va-ani<\/em> \u2013 is seen as a statement of emphatic approval, as if he said “I approve of your neder<\/em> forever<\/u>.” By accepting personal nezirut<\/em> we understand him to be saying that he is so comfortable with the idea of nezirut<\/em> that he is willing to accept it upon himself. Had he, in fact, desired to reject his wife’s vow, we would have anticipated that he would have clearly said that he was accepting nezirut<\/em> upon himself even as he was forbidding his wife from keeping her vow.<\/p>\n

\n

Nazir 23a-b<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n

The Mishnah<\/a> on our daf <\/em>introduces a case where a woman accepts the laws of nezirut<\/a><\/em> on herself, and then proceeds to perform acts that are forbidden to a nazir<\/em> (drinking wine, coming into contact with the dead). According to the Mishnah, if her husband is mefer<\/em> (annuls) her vow \u2013 based on his powers as described in Bamidbar<\/a> (30:9<\/a>) and throughout Masechet<\/a> Nedarim<\/a><\/em> \u2013 she will not be punished, although Rabbi Yehuda<\/a> rules that she will receive makkat mardut<\/em> \u2013 Rabbinic lashes.<\/p>\n

Just as someone who transgresses a biblical prohibition is liable to receive malkot<\/em> \u2013 lashes \u2013 as punishment, the Sages instituted malkot<\/em> for a variety of transgressions, as well. The Talmud Yerushalmi<\/a><\/em> and the Geonim<\/a><\/em> list a number of practical differences between these two punishments –<\/p>\n