shaving

MISHNAH: If he shaved for one of the sacrifices and it turned out to be invalid, his shaving is invalid and his sacrifices are not counted for him. If he shaved for the purification offering not in its name but brought the other sacrifices in their names, his shaving is invalid and his sacrifices are not counted for him. If he shaved for the elevation or well-being offerings not in their names but then brought his sacrifices in their names, his shaving is invalid and his sacrifices are not counted for him. Rebbi Simeon says, that sacrifice is not counted for him but the others are counted for him. But if he shaved for all three and one of them is valid, his shaving is valid and he has to repeat the other sacrifices.

MISHNAH: If he shaved for one of the sacrifices and it turned out to be invalid, his shaving is invalid and his sacrifices are not counted for him. If he shaved for the purification offering not in its name but brought the other sacrifices in their names, his shaving is invalid and his sacrifices are not counted for him. If he shaved for the elevation or well-being offerings not in their names but then brought his sacrifices in their names, his shaving is invalid and his sacrifices are not counted for him. Rebbi Simeon says, that sacrifice is not counted for him but the others are counted for him. But if he shaved for all three and one of them is valid, his shaving is valid and he has to repeat the other sacrifices.

MISHNAH: If he shaved for one of the sacrifices and it turned out to be invalid, his shaving is invalid and his sacrifices are not counted for him. If he shaved for the purification offering not in its name but brought the other sacrifices in their names, his shaving is invalid and his sacrifices are not counted for him. If he shaved for the elevation or well-being offerings not in their names but then brought his sacrifices in their names, his shaving is invalid and his sacrifices are not counted for him. Rebbi Simeon says, that sacrifice is not counted for him but the others are counted for him. But if he shaved for all three and one of them is valid, his shaving is valid and he has to repeat the other sacrifices.

HALAKHAH: Is it counted for him and his shaving? If you would say that it is not counted for him and his shaving, then his sacrifices count for nothing. Rebbi Joḥanan asked: Following Rebbi Simeon, may he shave for his holiday well-being offerings? Is that not the Mishnah? “Rebbi Simeon says, that sacrifice is not counted for him but the others are counted for him.” When he slaughtered them are they not like voluntary well-being offerings? This means that he may shave for voluntary well-being offerings following Rebbi Simeon. Rebbi Yose bar Abun said, Rav Ada bar Aḥawa and Rebbi Joḥanan. For Rav Ada bar Aḥawa it is problematic, but for Rebbi Joḥanan it is obvious.

HALAKHAH: Is it counted for him and his shaving? If you would say that it is not counted for him and his shaving, then his sacrifices count for nothing. Rebbi Joḥanan asked: Following Rebbi Simeon, may he shave for his holiday well-being offerings? Is that not the Mishnah? “Rebbi Simeon says, that sacrifice is not counted for him but the others are counted for him.” When he slaughtered them are they not like voluntary well-being offerings? This means that he may shave for voluntary well-being offerings following Rebbi Simeon. Rebbi Yose bar Abun said, Rav Ada bar Aḥawa and Rebbi Joḥanan. For Rav Ada bar Aḥawa it is problematic, but for Rebbi Joḥanan it is obvious.

HALAKHAH: The argument of Rebbi Eliezer seems inverted. There, he says: “he has to repeat only for 30,” and here, he says so? Rebbi Joḥanan says, he has to repeat all his sacrifices. It is obvious, if it would have been valid without him becoming impure, then why is it not valid if later he becomes impure? Rebbi Ḥinena said, is that not Rebbi Eliezer’s? And Rebbi Eliezer follows the Shammaites, as it was stated: Concerning a nazir who lost all his hair, the House of Shammai say, he has to move a shaving knife over his head; the House of Hillel say, he does not need to move a shaving knife over his head.

HALAKHAH: The argument of Rebbi Eliezer seems inverted. There, he says: “he has to repeat only for 30,” and here, he says so? Rebbi Joḥanan says, he has to repeat all his sacrifices. It is obvious, if it would have been valid without him becoming impure, then why is it not valid if later he becomes impure? Rebbi Ḥinena said, is that not Rebbi Eliezer’s? And Rebbi Eliezer follows the Shammaites, as it was stated: Concerning a nazir who lost all his hair, the House of Shammai say, he has to move a shaving knife over his head; the House of Hillel say, he does not need to move a shaving knife over his head.

“They shall fall away, for his vow of nazir is impure.” From here that the days of impurity fall away. Then should he invalidate? He invalidates only the days of [impurity of] the dead. Why should they not be counted? If you say that days in which he causes [impurity to] couch and seat are counted, days in which he does not cause [impurity to] couch and seat are certainly counted! What did you see to say that they are not counted? Rebbi [] said in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: “For a wild growth of his head’s hair”. Days of hair growth are counted, days preparing for shaving are not counted. So far in his days of counting; in the days of his definite status? Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Yannai: “Please do not let her be like a corpse.” Since the days of a corpse are not counted, the days of quarantine are not counted. A student quoted this saying cf Rebbi Joḥanan’s before Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, who did not accept it. He said to him: Here, you call it quarantine, but there, you want to call it absolute; you cannot do that. For Rebbi Joḥanan said in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: “Please do not let her be like a corpse; let her be quarantined.” Just as the days of the dead are seven, so the days of quarantine are seven.

“I made a vow of nazir but I forgot whether it was for now or for a later date.” They told him, this [warning] is for now, and that for the later date. If he drank wine within the first 30 days, he is [] whipped; within the last 30 days, he is (not) whipped. Should one not say that the first days may be within the period of his vow, the later ones are after the period of his vow? “All days of his status as nazir,” to make the days after he finished his term like the days before he finished his term with respect to wine, impurity, and shaving.

MISHNAH: A nazir who was doubtfully impure and doubtfully definitely [suffering from skin disease] may eat sacrificial meat after 60 days and drink wine and become impure by the dead after 120 days, since the shaving for skin disease supersedes the shaving of the nazir when it is certain, but when it is in doubt it does not supersede.

MISHNAH: A nazir who was doubtfully impure and doubtfully definitely [suffering from skin disease] may eat sacrificial meat after 60 days and drink wine and become impure by the dead after 120 days, since the shaving for skin disease supersedes the shaving of the nazir when it is certain, but when it is in doubt it does not supersede.

Does the obligatory shaving push aside the rules of voluntary shaving? Let us hear from the following: “He shaves his head, his beard, and his eyebrows in the way sufferers from skin disease shave.” But there one could say, maybe it was an obligatory shaving. Rebbi Ze‘ira in the name of Rebbi Yudan: The Mishnah says so; “for Rebbi Simeon says, when one of the bloods was sprinkled, the nazir is permitted to drink wine and to defile himself with the dead.” Is he not forbidden because of “do not destroy”? Samuel bar Abba said, explain it if he was a eunuch. But did we not state “the beard”? How can you say, a eunuch? You have only what Rebbi Jacob said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: If he removed it from bottom to top it is forbidden. Rebbi Yose bar Abin said, there is no difference between bottom to top or top to bottom.

Does the obligatory shaving push aside the rules of voluntary shaving? Let us hear from the following: “He shaves his head, his beard, and his eyebrows in the way sufferers from skin disease shave.” But there one could say, maybe it was an obligatory shaving. Rebbi Ze‘ira in the name of Rebbi Yudan: The Mishnah says so; “for Rebbi Simeon says, when one of the bloods was sprinkled, the nazir is permitted to drink wine and to defile himself with the dead.” Is he not forbidden because of “do not destroy”? Samuel bar Abba said, explain it if he was a eunuch. But did we not state “the beard”? How can you say, a eunuch? You have only what Rebbi Jacob said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: If he removed it from bottom to top it is forbidden. Rebbi Yose bar Abin said, there is no difference between bottom to top or top to bottom.

Does the obligatory shaving push aside the rules of voluntary shaving? Let us hear from the following: “He shaves his head, his beard, and his eyebrows in the way sufferers from skin disease shave.” But there one could say, maybe it was an obligatory shaving. Rebbi Ze‘ira in the name of Rebbi Yudan: The Mishnah says so; “for Rebbi Simeon says, when one of the bloods was sprinkled, the nazir is permitted to drink wine and to defile himself with the dead.” Is he not forbidden because of “do not destroy”? Samuel bar Abba said, explain it if he was a eunuch. But did we not state “the beard”? How can you say, a eunuch? You have only what Rebbi Jacob said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: If he removed it from bottom to top it is forbidden. Rebbi Yose bar Abin said, there is no difference between bottom to top or top to bottom.

Rebbi Abbamari, the brother of Rebbi Yose said, this shows that the shaving knife destroys seven for an impure nazir.

MISHNAH: Samuel was a nazir following the words of Rebbi Nahorai, as it is said: “A shaving knife shall not come on his head.” It is said about Samson “a shaving knife”, and it is said about Samuel “a shaving knife”. Since “a shaving knife” mentioned for Samson refers to nazir, so “a shaving knife” mentioned for Samuel refers to nazir. Rebbi Yose said, but fear is only of flesh and blood! Rebbi Nahorai answered him: Was it not said: “Samuel said, how can I go? Will not Saul hear of it and kill me?” The fear of flesh and blood already was on him.

MISHNAH: Samuel was a nazir following the words of Rebbi Nahorai, as it is said: “A shaving knife shall not come on his head.” It is said about Samson “a shaving knife”, and it is said about Samuel “a shaving knife”. Since “a shaving knife” mentioned for Samson refers to nazir, so “a shaving knife” mentioned for Samuel refers to nazir. Rebbi Yose said, but fear is only of flesh and blood! Rebbi Nahorai answered him: Was it not said: “Samuel said, how can I go? Will not Saul hear of it and kill me?” The fear of flesh and blood already was on him.

MISHNAH: Samuel was a nazir following the words of Rebbi Nahorai, as it is said: “A shaving knife shall not come on his head.” It is said about Samson “a shaving knife”, and it is said about Samuel “a shaving knife”. Since “a shaving knife” mentioned for Samson refers to nazir, so “a shaving knife” mentioned for Samuel refers to nazir. Rebbi Yose said, but fear is only of flesh and blood! Rebbi Nahorai answered him: Was it not said: “Samuel said, how can I go? Will not Saul hear of it and kill me?” The fear of flesh and blood already was on him.

MISHNAH: Samuel was a nazir following the words of Rebbi Nahorai, as it is said: “A shaving knife shall not come on his head.” It is said about Samson “a shaving knife”, and it is said about Samuel “a shaving knife”. Since “a shaving knife” mentioned for Samson refers to nazir, so “a shaving knife” mentioned for Samuel refers to nazir. Rebbi Yose said, but fear is only of flesh and blood! Rebbi Nahorai answered him: Was it not said: “Samuel said, how can I go? Will not Saul hear of it and kill me?” The fear of flesh and blood already was on him.

MISHNAH: Samuel was a nazir following the words of Rebbi Nahorai, as it is said: “A shaving knife shall not come on his head.” It is said about Samson “a shaving knife”, and it is said about Samuel “a shaving knife”. Since “a shaving knife” mentioned for Samson refers to nazir, so “a shaving knife” mentioned for Samuel refers to nazir. Rebbi Yose said, but fear is only of flesh and blood! Rebbi Nahorai answered him: Was it not said: “Samuel said, how can I go? Will not Saul hear of it and kill me?” The fear of flesh and blood already was on him.

MISHNAH: The day of the first shaving of his beard and his locks, the day he arrived from a trip at sea, the day he was freed from jail, or a Gentile wedding feast for his son, are forbidden only on the day itself and for this man.

HALAKHAH: “The day of the first shaving of his beard,” etc. What means “only on the day itself”; maybe the same day every year? Did we not state, his haircut and his son’s haircut is forbidden? Explain it that they had a haircut together. Did we not state, his wedding feast and his son’s wedding feast are forbidden? Explain it that they together had a haircut and married women. Did we not state, his birth and his son’s birth is forbidden? Could you say that they were born together? Explain it that he did not do it on his day, but after the son was born he did it with him.

MISHNAH: If a nazir was drinking wine a whole day long, he is liable only once. If one told him, do not drink, do not drink, if then he drinks he is liable for every single occasion. If he was defiling himself with corpses a whole day long, he is liable only once. If one told him, do not defile yourself, do not defile yourself, if then he defiles himself he is liable for every single occasion. If he was shaving a whole day long, he is liable only once. If one told him, do not shave, do not shave, if then he shaves he is liable for every single occasion. If he was dressed in kilaim a whole day long, he is liable only once. If one told him, do not dress, do not dress, and he took off and put on, he is liable for every single occasion.

Who dreams of shaving should on rising say, "And [Joseph] shaved himself and changed his raiment" (Gen. xli. 14), before another verse occurs to him, viz. : "If I be shaven, then my strength will go from me" (Judges xvi. 17). Who dreams of a well should on rising say, "A well of living waters" (Cant. iv. 15), before another verse occurs to him, viz. : "As a cistern welleth with her waters, so she welleth with her wickedness" (Jer. vi. 7). Who dreams of a reed should on rising say, "A bruised reed shall he not break" (Is. xlii. 3), before another verse occurs to him, viz. : "Behold, thou trustest upon the staff of this bruised reed" (ibid, xxxvi. 6).

[Who dreams] that he entered a town, his desires will be fulfilled for him ; as it is said, "And He led them unto their desired haven" (Ps. cvii. 30). Who dreams of shaving his head, it is a good omen for him; [of shaving] his head and beard, [it is a good omen] for him and all his family.

[Who dreams] that he entered a town, his desires will be fulfilled for him ; as it is said, "And He led them unto their desired haven" (Ps. cvii. 30). Who dreams of shaving his head, it is a good omen for him; [of shaving] his head and beard, [it is a good omen] for him and all his family.

Ten things cause an invalid to relapse and his sickness becomes worse, viz. : to eat the flesh of the ox, fat meat, roast meat, poultry, roasted egg ; also shaving, and partaking of cress, milk, cheese ; and bathing. Some add: Also nuts; others add: Also cucumbers.

There is no difference between a metzora who has been declared clean after being under observation and one who has been declared clean after having been a definite metzorah except shaving and [sacrificing] the birds.

If that is the case, what is the reason that he is not required to shave and offer birds, as it states: There is no difference between a metzora who has been declared clean after being under observation and one who has been declared clean after having been a definite metzora except shaving and [sacrificing] the birds.

For [shaving the entire] head, one would be liable twice, once on this side and once on that side. For [shaving the entire] beard, one would be liable twice on this side, twice on that side, and once below. Rebbi Eliezer says, If he removed all [of the five spots] simultaneously, he would only be liable once.

For [shaving the entire] head, one would be liable twice, once on this side and once on that side. For [shaving the entire] beard, one would be liable twice on this side, twice on that side, and once below. Rebbi Eliezer says, If he removed all [of the five spots] simultaneously, he would only be liable once.

How is this? A shaving that has in it destroying? I must say this is a razor.

Rebbi Elezar says, even if one removed them with wood planes or tweezer, he would be liable: Either way, if he learns the gezirah shava [linking "destroying" to "shaving"], then he should require a razor. If he does not learn the gezirah shava, then scissors also should be prohibited.

Actually, he learns the geziara shava, but he also holds that these [wood planes and tweezers] too are deemed shaving.

MISHNA: A Nazir who was drinking wine all day is only liable to one [set of malkus]. If they told him, "Don't drink", "Don't drink", and he nevertheless drunk, then he is liable for each every [warning]. If he was contaminating himself with corpses all day, he is only liable to one [set of malkus]. If they told him, "Don't contaminate yourself", "Don't contaminate yourself", and he nevertheless contaminated himself, then he is liable for each every [warning]. If he was shaving all day, he is only liable to one [set of malkus]. If they told him, "Don't shave", "Don't shave", and he nevertheless shaved, then he is liable for each every [warning].