hebrew
1)

Having said "Al Nefesh Mes Lo Yavo", why does the Torah see fit to add Aviv, Imo, Achiv and Achoso?

1.

Rashi (Berachos, 19b): The Torah adds 'Aviv', to preclude a Meis Mitzvah from the prohibition; 'Imo', [to permit a Meis Mitzvah] even when the Nazir is a Kohen; 'Achiv', even if he is a Kohen Gadol, whereas 'Achoso" comes to obligate someone who is going to slaughter his Korban Pesach or to perform B'ris Milah, to bury a Meis Mitzvah and to forego the Mitzvah he is on his way to perform.

2)

The Sifri and Gemara (Nazir 48b) learn from our verse that he may be Metamei for a Mes Mitzvah. We should know this from a Kal v'Chomer from a Kohen Gadol, whose Kedushah is permanent!

1.

Moshav Zekeinim: Shimshon refutes the Kal v'Chomer. His Kedushah was permanent [yet he was allowed to become Tamei Mes]. 1


1

This is like R. Yehudah (Nazir 4b). Seemingly, R. Eliezer (Nazir 47a) refutes the Kal v'Chomer. A Kohen Gadol does not bring a Korban for Tum'ah! Therefore if a Kohen Gadol and a Nazir found a Mes Mitzvah, the Kohen Gadol should be Mitamei, and not the Nazir! Chachamim disagree, but they should agree that the Kal v'Chomer is refuted! (PF)

Sefer: Perek: Pasuk:
Month: Day: Year:
Month: Day: Year:

KIH Logo
D.A.F. Home Page
Sponsorships & DonationsReaders' FeedbackMailing ListsTalmud ArchivesAsk the KollelDafyomi WeblinksDafyomi CalendarOther Yomi calendars