The Gemara on 57b asks by the top why are the 2 nezirim shaving if maybe they are not tamei and they could be transgressing the issur against rounding the corners of the head? Shmuel answers the mishna is referring to an " ISHA VIKATAN"=A WOMAN AN A MINOR in which the issur does not apply to them.Then the Mefaresh explains isha vikatan as "for example 2 woman or 2 ketanim that are not michyav in hakafa."
My Question is why can't the gemara refer to the case of 1 woman and 1 minor togethor and sheretz was thrown betwen them. What is forcing the mefaresh to explain it with specifically 2 woman or 2 minors? Not only that but the pashut translation of shmuel is "isha vikatan" a "woman and a minor" which is 1 woman with 1 minor and especially if shmuel really held its a case of 2 minors or 2 woman why didnt he say those words kigon 2 woman or 2 minors it sounds not like that ??
Daniel Fishman, Lawrence, America
Dear Daniel,
Hello there and thanks for your question. First let me point out that we are not talking about the case of Tumas Sheretz as you mentioned, but rather Tumas Mes. Regarding your question, I agree with you that the Halachah would be the same in the case of one woman and one minor. In our Mishnah we however are discussing a case where the observer was not able to discern between the two people involved. The likelihood of this happening in case where one was a woman and the other a minor, is really slim. Realistically it would happen where the people are similar in shape and size. The Mefaresh thus prefers the term "b'Ishah v'Katan" to mean that our Mishnah is dealing with cases where there is no problem of shaving such as a woman or a minor.
All the best.
Y. Landy
I understand a case of actuality being with a woman and minor togethor are slim so the mefaresh explains it to a more actual case such as 2 woman or 2 minors.But if so, why did Shmuel then say "bisha vikatan" why did he not say what he means to say according to the mefaresh-why did shmuel not say a case with 2 woman or 2 minors after all a case of 1 woman and minor is very slim so why state isha vikatan.Not only this but it appears from the Mefaresh that he is limiting the case to those instances when he states "kgon 2 women or 2 minors why doesn't he add the case of 1 minor + 1 woman?
Dear Daniel,
Hello again. Shmuel made a concise statement "B'Isah v"Katan". The Mefaresh elaborates that it means either or. In other words the Din of our Mishnah applies in these cases. The Mefaresh goes on to explain that it can be in one of two possibilities. But as I replied earlier, the likelihood of such an event occurring with one woman and one minor is slim. Thus the Mefaresh felt compelled to explain it the way he did.
All the best.
Y. Landy