WHICH CHILDREN ARE LIKELY TO BECOME CHACHAMIM? [line 1]
Answer: R. Yosi holds that not laundering is worse than not bathing.
(Shmuel): Dirt that accumulates on an uncombed head leads to blindness. Dirt that accumulates on unwashed clothing leads to insanity. Dirt that accumulates when one does not bathe leads to boils.
(Sages of Eretz Yisrael): Beware of dirt (the three types mentioned above). Be careful to learn in a group. Be zealous to teach poor children, for they are likely to become great in Torah.
"Water (i.e. Torah) will drip mi'Dalyo (from its well)." We read this like 'mi'Dalim', from poor people.
Question: Why don't Chachamim usually descend from Chachamim?
Answer #1 (Rav Yosef): It is so they will not say that Torah is an inheritance to them.
Answer #2 (Rav Sheshes brei d'Rav Idi): It is so they will not become haughty over the congregation.
Answer #3 (Mar Zutra): Chachamim are punished that their children are not Chachamim because they put themselves over the congregation.
Answer #4 (Rav Ashi): It is because they call people 'donkeys'.
Answer #5 (Ravina): It is because they do not bless before learning Torah;
(Rav Yehudah): "Who is the Chacham who knows this (why Yisrael were exiled)?" Chachamim and Nevi'im (Bach - and angels) could not explain it, until Hash-m explained it - "Because they abandoned My Torah".
Question: "They did not listen to My voice" is the same as "they did not go in My way"!
Answer (Rav Yehudah): "They did not go in My way" means that they did not (appreciate Torah enough to) bless before learning.
NOT BATHING [line 22]
Isi bar Yehudah did not come to R. Yosi's Yeshivah for three days. R. Yosi's son Vardimus asked him why.
Isi: It is because I do not understand his reasoning.
Vardimus: What don't you understand? Perhaps I can explain it!
Question (Isi): R. Yosi taught that laundry of city dwellers overrides the lives of others. Which verse teaches this?!
Answer (Vardimus) Question: "The outskirts (of the cities of the Leviyim) will be for their animals, their possessions, and all Chayasam" - what does this mean?
It cannot mean 'their Chayos (wild animals)'. These are included in "all their animals"!
Answer #1: It means 'their Chiyusa' (livelihood).
Objection: This is obvious! (Surely, the verse teaches something else!)
Answer #2: Rather, it refers to laundering, so they should not suffer from the dirt.
VOWS BETWEEN THEM [line 33]
(Mishnah - R. Yosi): These are not vows of affliction.
Question: Does R. Yosi hold that they may be annulled, for they are between them?
Answer #1 (Beraisa - R. Yosi): These are not vows of affliction, but they are matters between them.
Objection: Perhaps R. Yosi himself does not hold that way. He merely addressed Chachamim according to their opinion:
R. Yosi: I hold that they are not even matters between them. You say they are vows of affliction. You should admit that they are not vows of affliction! (At most, they are matters between them.)
Answer #2 (Rav Ada bar Ahavah): They may be annulled.
Answer #3 (Rav Huna): They may not be annulled;
Since her husband is used to her, no damage will result if she does not bathe.
Support (for Rav Ada - Beraisa): The husband can annul vows of affliction, whether they affect him or others. He can annul vows not of affliction only what affects him, but not what affects others;
If she said 'Peros are forbidden to me', he can annul this;
If she said 'what I make is forbidden to my father or brother', or 'to your father or brother', or 'I will not put straw in front of your animal, or water in front of your cattle', he cannot annul these.
If she said 'I will not color my eyes, or Efkos (apply mudpacks to my face; some say - comb my hair) or have Bi'ah', he can annul, for these are between them;
If she said 'I will not make your bed, or mix your drink, or wash you face, hands and feet', he need not annul these. (She is obligated to do these, so her vow is invalid);
R. Gamliel says, he must annul (mid'Rabanan), due to (concern lest she become habituated to vowing, and come to transgress) "he will not revoke his word."
Also, "he will not revoke his word" teaches that a Chacham cannot permit his own vow.
(Summation of support): R. Yosi is the Tana who says that 'I will not color my eyes or Efkos' is a vow between them, and the Beraisa says that he can annul it!
(Beraisa): If she said 'I will not have Bi'ah', he can annul it, for this is between them.
Question: What was the exact text of the vow?
If she said 'you may not enjoy Bi'ah with me', since she is obligated to have Bi'ah with him, the vow is void. Why must he annul it?!
Answer: Rather, she said 'pleasure of Bi'ah with you is forbidden to me.' This is like Rav Kahana taught:
(Rav Kahana): If she said 'pleasure of Bi'ah with me is forbidden to you', he can force her to have Bi'ah;
If she said 'pleasure of Bi'ah with you is forbidden to me', he must annul this. (If he does not, he may not have Bi'ah with her, for she is forbidden, and) one may not cause another to transgress.
Question: Who taught the following?
(Beraisa): "He will not revoke his word" - if people consider something to be forbidden, and really it is permitted, you may not be lenient about it to abolish the custom;
This verse also teaches that a Chacham cannot permit his own vow.
Answer: R. Gamliel taught this.
Question (Rava): According to Chachamim, is a vow not to have Bi'ah a vow of affliction, or a vow between them?