QUESTIONS: The Beraisa cites three opinions concerning the details of the Nezirus of Avshalom, who was a Nazir Olam. Rebbi says that he cut his hair only once every twelve months. Rebbi Nehora'i says that he cut it once every thirty days. Rebbi Yosi says that he cut it once a week. The Gemara gives the sources for each opinion.

According the way TOSFOS and most Rishonim understand the Beraisa, the Beraisa discusses the general laws of any Nazir Olam. It addresses the issue of how frequently may a person, who accepted upon himself the oath of a Nazir Olam, lighten his load of hair.

The MEFARESH, in contrast, takes a different approach to the Beraisa. The Mefaresh explains that everyone agrees that an ordinary Nazir Olam may cut his hair once every thirty days. The dispute in the Beraisa involves the specific practice of Avshalom when he was a Nazir Olam.

Why, though, did Avshalom practice his Nezirus Olam differently from any other Nazir Olam?

The Mefaresh (4b, DH Hachi Garsinan, and 5a, DH Ika Beinaihu) explains that according to Rebbi, Avshalom waited longer to cut his hair than an ordinary Nazir Olam because of his exceptional strength. He did not feel that his hair was too cumbersome upon him until a year had passed. According to Rebbi Yosi, Avshalom cut his hair once a week because he was the son of the king, David ha'Melech. It was the manner of sons of kings not to grow hair for more than a week, and thus growth for more than a week would feel heavy to him. An ordinary Nazir Olam may cut his hair once every thirty days, because after thirty days his hair feels cumbersome and "heavy" enough to bother him.

The MISHNEH L'MELECH (Hilchos Nezirus 3:12) cites the Mefaresh and asks a number of questions on his explanation.

1. Why does the Mefaresh not explain the Gemara in its most straightforward sense, that the dispute between the Tana'im in the Beraisa involves the practice of every Nazir Olam?

2. Why did the Tana'im argue about Avshalom's Nezirus? What relevance does it have in practice? (See Yoma 5b and other places where the Gemara asks this type of question.)

Moreover, according to the Mefaresh, why does the Beraisa say, "Megale'ach" -- "he cuts his hair" (in the present tense), and not, "Hayah Megale'ach" -- "he used to cut his hair" (in the past tense), if the Beraisa discusses only a past event (the practice of Avshalom)?

3. The KEREN ORAH asks that according to the Mefaresh, why is the Beraisa cited as an answer to the question, "Where is the law of Nazir Olam written?" The Beraisa is not discussing the law of Nazir Olam but the specific practice of Avshalom!

ANSWERS: The SEMAG (cited by the Chafetz Chaim in LIKUTEI HALACHOS) explains the Mefaresh's source that the Beraisa discusses only the specific practice of Avshalom and not the practice of every Nazir Olam. Rebbi Yosi permits a Nazir Olam to cut his hair every seven days "because sons of kings cut their hair every seven days." What is the connection between the son of a king and a Nazir Olam, such that the practice of the former should determine the practice of the latter?

This is the question which motivates the Mefaresh to explain that Rebbi Yosi and the other Tana'im in the Beraisa discuss only the Nezirus of Avshalom and not the Nezirus of every Nazir Olam. (The SEMAG answers that Rebbi Yosi relies on the principle that "all Jews are like sons of kings," Shabbos 111a.) The KEREN ORAH and CHAFETZ CHAIM point out that when the Mishnah later (8a) rules that a Nazir Olam cuts his hair every thirty days and mentions no other opinion, it implies that no one argues about the law of a normal Nazir Olam.

With regard to the other questions, apparently the Mefaresh maintains that a Nazir Olam's haircuts are not limited to any specific interval of time. Rather, their frequency depends on the subjective experience of the individual. The Nazir must feel that his hair has become heavy upon him in order to be permitted to cut it. Hence, Rebbi says that if the person is strong and does not feel the load of the hair until a year has passed, he must wait a year before he cuts his hair.

Rebbi Nehora'i argues and says that even if he does not feel the load of his hair, since most people feel it after thirty days he may cut his hair after thirty days. Rebbi Nehora'i derives his ruling from the Halachah that all Kohanim must cut their hair every thirty days, even if it does not feel cumbersome to them. Both Rebbi and Rebbi Nehora'i agree that a particularly finicky Nazir Olam may not cut his hair until thirty days have passed.

Rebbi Yosi argues and says that the determining factor of whether one feels his hair to be a burden may even be a leniency (l'Kula) to permit a particularly finicky person to cut his hair in less than thirty days.

This explanation answers all of the other questions on the Mefaresh. The law of the Beraisa applies not only to Avshalom but to any Nazir who is in a similar position, such as the son of a king, or one who is especially strong. The Tana'im argue whether the interval is subjective and, if it is, whether it is subjective l'Kula as well. This explains why the Beraisa uses the present tense, "he cuts his hair," rather than the past tense. This also explains why this Beraisa is cited as the source for the law of a general Nazir Olam.

When the Mishnah later (8a) writes that a Nazir Olam cuts his hair every thirty days, it refers to the average person, while the Beraisa here refers to the exceptional person.

This approach also explains why the Mishnah (4a) states that a Nazir Olam "lightens his hair" and not that he "cuts his hair" as the Beraisa (4b) and Mishnah later (8a) state. (Tosfos infers from this wording that he may only lighten his hair and he may not shave it all off.) The Mefaresh perhaps understands that the Mishnah's change in wording is intended to emphasize that the haircut depends on a subjective feeling of heaviness.

This approach explains the words of the Mefaresh here. However, the Mefaresh earlier (4a, DH Hareini Nazir Olam) seems to have an entirely different understanding of the law of Nazir Olam. The Mefaresh there writes that when a person says, "I am a Nazir Olam," he implies that he is accepting upon himself to be a Nazir forever and, therefore, when thirty days pass and his hair is "heavy," he may cut and lighten it.

The Mefaresh seems to understand that a Nazir Olam does not care how long his hair grows, but he simply wants to have the laws of normal Nezirus apply to him at all times. If he cuts his hair every thirty days, the laws of Nezirus still apply to him all the time, since it is the law of every ordinary Nazir to cut his hair after thirty days. It is as if he accepted upon himself to renew his Nezirus of thirty days every time he finishes the old one. According to this explanation, the law of Nazir Olam is unrelated to the heaviness of his hair. How, then, does this explanation conform with what the Mefaresh himself writes later, and with the Gemara later which states that the source for the law that a Nazir Olam cuts his hair every thirty days is the Halachah of Kohanim, who cut their hair after thirty days, when their hair becomes heavy? Moreover, how does the Mefaresh earlier understand Rebbi Yosi's opinion, that a Nazir Olam may cut his hair after seven days even though he has not completed even one set of Nezirus? (MISHNEH L'MELECH, KEREN ORAH)

It seems that the Mefaresh does not intend to explain that a Nazir Olam accepts upon himself to renew his Nezirus every thirty days (as the Mishneh l'Melech understands). Rather, the Mefaresh's point is to explain the word "Olam." He points out that when one says, "I am a Nazir Olam," his statement does not mean "I am a Nazir [like other Nezirim who have lived] in the world," or "I am a Nazir for [the duration of] the world" (a Nazir forever but with the laws of a thirty-day Nezirus), but rather it means, "I am a Nazir forever" (the new form of Nezirus -- a Nazir Olam). Therefore, he should not be able to cut his hair at all, at any time. The Torah teaches that if a person accepts Nezirus forever he may lighten his hair whenever it gets heavy.

QUESTION: Rebbi Nehora'i says that a Nazir Olam may cut his hair every thirty days. The Gemara explains that he derives this from the law of haircuts of Kohanim, which requires that Kohanim cut their hair every thirty days. That Halachah implies that hair grown for thirty days becomes heavy and untidy, and thus it follows that a Nazir Olam -- who may cut his hair when it becomes heavy and untidy -- may cut his hair every thirty days.

Why must Rebbi Nehora'i derive the frequency of haircuts of a Nazir Olam from the laws of Kohanim? He should learn it directly from the laws of a normal Nazir, who cuts his hair after thirty days. TOSFOS (DH Mai Taima) points out that the source for the Halachah that a Kohen must cut his hair every thirty days is the Gezeirah Shavah of "Pera-Pera" from the laws of a normal Nazir. One verse (Bamidbar 6:5) says that a Nazir must let his hair grow "Pera" (uncut), and another verse (Yechezkel 44:20) says that a Kohen may not let his hair grow "Pera" (uncut). This Gezeirah Shavah teaches that just as a Nazir is not allowed to cut his hair for thirty days, a Kohen is not allowed to let his hair grow for thirty days.

Tosfos answers that Rebbi Nehora'i must learn the laws of Nazir Olam, which is a state of permanent Kedushah, from the laws of Kehunah, which is also a state of permanent Kedushah. He cannot learn the laws of Nazir Olam from a normal Nazir, because the latter's state of Kedushah is only temporary.

REBBI AKIVA EIGER (in Gilyon ha'Shas) is perplexed with Tosfos' question. There is no basis whatsoever to derive the laws of Nazir Olam from the laws of a normal Nazir. A normal Nazir shaves his hair after thirty days because his Nezirus has ended, while a Nazir Olam's Nezirus does not end after thirty days; his Nezirus has no end.

ANSWER: The BIRKAS ROSH explains that Tosfos understands that the reason why a Nazir must grow his hair for thirty days is also that it takes thirty days for hair to grow long and untidy. The Nazir will not have the experience of growing untidy hair until he grows it for thirty days. (Although his hair might have been long at the time he accepted the Nezirus, the Torah gives a single duration of time for all Nezirim, even for one who already has long hair, and even for one whose hair no longer grows.) Tosfos derives this from the wording of the verse that says that a Nazir must grow his hair "Pera" (literally, wild, unruly) (Bamidbar 6:5). Just as the "Pera" which a Kohen must shave (Yechezkel 44:20) is an unruly, thirty-day growth of hair, so, too, the "Pera" which a Nazir must let grow is an unruly, thirty-day growth of hair. Tosfos' question is that Rebbi Nehora'i should learn directly from a normal Nazir that hair is considered heavy and unruly after thirty days, and consequently a Nazir Olam -- who may cut his hair when it becomes cumbersome -- should be permitted to cut it after thirty days.

Tosfos answers that there are many degrees of unruly hair. Although a normal Nazir cuts his hair after thirty days because it is unruly, a Nazir who has a permanent Kedushah might be required to wait until his hair is very unruly (such as after a year). The Gemara proves from the laws of Kohanim that one whose Kedushah is permanent (a Kohen) may cut his hair after thirty days when it is only moderately unruly, and the same applies to a Nazir Olam.

However, the SHITAH MEKUBETZES and the ME'IRI follow the view of Rebbi Akiva Eiger. They explain that the laws of a Nazir Olam cannot be learned from the laws of a normal Nazir because the reason a normal Nazir cuts his hair after thirty days has nothing to do with his hair being heavy and unruly. They prove this from the fact that a person who accepts upon himself to observe a Nezirus for more than thirty days (such as fifty or a hundred days) may not cut his hair until the end of his Nezirus, even though his hair is unruly. This might be Rebbi Akiva Eiger's intention as well.

How does Tosfos answer this question? Perhaps Tosfos understands that when a person accepts a Nezirus for a longer period of time, he agrees to tolerate his hair becoming more unruly because he wants to bring a more severe affliction upon himself, just as he accepts not to drink wine for a longer period of time.

Alternatively, Tosfos maintains that the law that a Nazir may not shave and the law that a Nazir must grow his hair "Pera" are two separate Halachos. A normal Nazir may not cut his hair not because he must let his hair grow heavy, but in order that he feel like an animal whose hair grows unchecked. There is no minimum time needed; once he knows that he cannot cut his hair, he feels less human. In addition to the requirement not to cut his hair, the Torah requires that he grow his hair "Pera" so that he should suffer by having heavy and uncomfortable hair. This requirement, to grow his hair "Pera," prevents a person from accepting Nezirus for less than thirty days because it takes thirty days for hair to grow long enough that the person experiences "Pera."