According to the following from Nazir, which explains why Nazir is in Nashim following Sotah, rather than in Kodshim, can you please explain to me if possible and not too much trouble, what the first Tosfos in Baba Basra kashya is, regarding why Shutfus is the first sugya in the Masechta. I totally don't understand the Tosfos; I don't understand what is problematic to Tosfos, I don't understand what difference it makes if the entire Nazikin is one masechta or not, and the Maharsha that I saw on it only confused me further. Could you please help?
Best wishes and continued success in the unbelievable job that you do.
A Guten Moed
From your Iyun HaDaf Review:
>>(a) We answer the Kashya what Nazir is in Seder Nashim rather than in Kodshim - by citing the Pasuk in Ki Setzei (in connection with Gitin) "Ki Matza Bah Ervas Davar". Now the root of adultery is wine and Chazal have said that 'Whoever saw a Sotah in her disgrace, should make a Neder to abstain from wine' (i.e. to become a Nazir).
(b) We did not ask the same Kashya with regard to Nedarim - because it is obvious that the Parshah of Nedarim belongs in Nashim, due to the fact that it is written in connection with women (in Parshas Matos).
(c) We do not just accept the explanation given in Sotah (that Nedarim follows Kesuvos, because it follows Perek Hamadir in Kesuvos, and Nazir follows Nedarim because it is a branch of Nedarim - because that would not be sufficient reason to take Nazir out of Kodshim, where it belongs (if anything, the Tana should rather have placed Nedarim next to Nazir, in Kodshim).
(d) We nevertheless need the answer in Sotah (not making do with the answer in our Sugya) - because then, the Tana should have placed Nazir after Gitin (where it is hinted in the Torah).<<
Tosfos is saying the following (according to the Maharsha). All of Nezikin is one Mesechta. This might be a reason why the Gemara in Shevuos (2b) asks about the order of Shevuos after Makos. The Gemara would want to know why Shevuos was ordered within Nezikin after Makos. [Tosfos here seems to at least entertain the possibility that Makos and Shevuos are included in Nezikin. This is indeed the opinion of the Ri Migash, quoted in the Zera Yitzchak on our Tosfos.] However, Tosfos rejects this as the reason for the Gemara's question in Shevuos, and says that the Gemara is certainly even asking its question if one holds that Nezikin is not one Mesechta. Tosfos therefore concludes that we always require a reason as to why one Mesechta is after another (or why one part of a Mesechta is after another according to the opinion that all of Nezikin is one Mesechta). Accordingly, just as the Gemara asks for a reason why Shevuos is after Makos, we can also ask why Bava Basra is after Bava Metzia.
All the best,
Yaakov Montrose