1)

(a)Rava concludes that since the prohibition of wine of Mitzvah like that of Reshus (that Rebbi Shimon learns from "mi'Yayin v'Shechar Yazir") cannot come to include wine of Kidush and Havdalah (as we just explained) - it must come to include a case where someone makes a Shevu'ah that he will drink wine, and then declares that he is a Nazir.

(b)The Rabanan learn that Nezirus takes effect on a Shevu'ah - from the superfluous word "v'Shechar".

(c)Rebbi Shimon uses "Shechar" to Darshen a 'Gezeirah Shavah from Nazir to Mikdash - to teach us that, just as the prohibition of a Nazir is confined to wine (but not to other intoxicating beverages), so too is that of entering the Beis ha'Mikdash.

(d)Rebbi Yehudah disagrees with Rebbi Shimon. He says in a Beraisa that someone who eats a preserved fig from Ke'ilah (which has an intoxicating effect), or drinks honey or milk and then enters the Beis ha'Mikdash - will receive Malkus (d'Oraisa).

2)

(a)According to Rebbi Shimon, someone who eats Neveilah on Yom Kippur is not Chayav Malkus (for eating Neveilah) - because he holds 'Ein Isur Chal al Isur.

(b)This provides us with an alternative way to interpret Rebbi Shimon's statement 'Le'esor Yein Mitzvah k'Yein Reshus' - which can now speak when the Noder first made a Shevu'ah that he would not drink wine, and then he became a Nazir. Should he then drink wine, he will receive two sets of Malkus (due to the Gezeiras ha'Kasuv of "mi'Yayin ... Yazir").

(c)The Rabanan learn from "mi'Kol Asher Ye'aseh mi'Gefen ha'Yayin" (from which Rebbi Shimon learns 'Eino Chayav ad she'Yador mi'Kulan') - that the various commodities which the Torah forbids by a Nazir combine to make up the Shi'ur for Malkus.

3)

(a)Rebbi Shimon disagrees with the Rabanan's previous Derashah. When we say 'v'Rebbi Shimon Leis Leih Tziruf' - we mean that he does not require a Derashah for Tziruf, seeing as in his opinion, Malkus does not require a Shi'ur anyway, since one is Chayav for even a Kolshehu.

(b)He will concede however that a Shi'ur k'Zayis is necessary - wherever a Korban is required.

4)

(a)When the Tana of our Mishnah says ...

1. ... 'Hareini k'Shimshon, k'Ven Mano'ach, k'Ba'al Delilah' - he means that all three are necessary (to ensure that the Noder is really referring to Shimshon ha'Gibor, and not to a different Shimshon).

2. ... 'Hareini k'Mi she'Akar Dalsos Azah, k'Mi she'Nakru Pelishtim es Einav' - he means either one will suffice, since neither of them are subject to misunderstanding.

(b)A regular Nezir Olam (a permanent Nazir) is permitted to trim his hair when it becomes too long, whereas a Nezir Shimshon may not - and he is also Chayav to bring a Korban should he become Tamei Mes, whereas a Nezir Shimshon is not.

(c)We do not include the third distinction: that a regular Nezir Olam can have his Nezirus revoked, whereas a Nezir Shimshon cannot - because we are only concerned with a Nazir who remains a Nazir in spite of the circumstances under discussion, whereas a Nazir who has his Neder revoked is no longer a Nazir.

5)

(a)To answer the Kashya how the Tana can ask 'Mah Bein Nezir Olam li'Nezir Shimshon' before having explained what a Nezir Olam is - we amend the Mishnah, which now commences with 'ha'Omer Hareini Nezir Olam, Harei Zeh Nezir Olam'.

(b)We learn the concession of a Nezir Olam trimming his hair from Avshalom, who we know did not have a regular haircut when his hair became too long - because in the war against his father, his long hair became entangled in the branches of a tree as he rode past, and his horse rode on, leaving him dangling from the tree by his hair.

(c)After trimming his hair - a Nezir Olam has to bring a Chatas, an Olah and a Shelamim.

(d)The source for this Halachah is - 'Halachah l'Moshe mi'Sinai'.

6)

(a)Upon becoming Tamei Mes - a Nazir has to bring two pigeons or doves (one an Olah and one a Chatas) and a lamb for an Asham.

7)

(a)We can extrapolate from the Lashon 've'Eino Meivi Korban' that our Mishnah presents regarding a Nezir Shimshon - that he is forbidden to become Tamei Mes.

(b)According to Rebbi Yehudah in a Beraisa, a Nezir Shimshon is permitted to render himself a Tamei Mes. Rebbi Shimon maintains 'ha'Omer Nezir Shimshon, Lo Amar Klum' - because Shimshon did not accept his Nezirus personally, in which case it was not a Davar ha'Nadur. And one can only be Matfis a Neder on a Davar ha'Nadur.

(c)Clearly the author of our Mishnah cannot be Rebbi Shimon (in whose opinion there is no such thing as a Nezir Shimshon. The author could however be Rebbi Yehudah, who permits a Nezir Shimshon to make himself Tamei l'Chatchilah. This is because, even though our Mishnah seems to imply otherwise, as we just saw, this is not in fact correct - because the Tana only said 've'Eino Meivi Korban' in order to be able to say 'Meivi Korban Tum'ah' in the case of a Nezir Olam (but not necessarily to make any inferences from it).

8)

(a)We learned in a Beraisa 'Harei Alai k'Bechor, Rebbi Yakov Oser' - v'Rebbi Yosi Matir'.

(b)We try to connect the Machlokes between Rebbi Yehudah and Rebbi Shimon with that of Rebbi Yakov and Rebbi Yosi - by pairing Rebbi Yehudah with Rebbi Yakov, both of whom seemingly do not require a Davar ha'Nadur, and Rebbi Shimon with Rebbi Yosi, who do.

(c)We reconcile Rebbi Yakov (who validates 'Harei Alai k'Bechor) with Rebbi Shimon (who invalidates 'Harei Alai Nezirus Shimshon') - by deriving Bechor from the extra word "Ish Ki Yidor Neder la'Hashem" (to include a Bechor, despite the fact that it is not a Davar ha'Nadur (and not because Rebbi Yakov does not require a Davar ha'Nadur).

(d)We conclude d'Kuli Alma Bainan Davar ha'Nidar' - because even Rebbi Yehudah only validates Nezirus Shimshon, either because it is similar to other Nezirim (like we included a Bechor because it is similar to other Korbanos), or because according to Rebbi Yehudah, either Shimshon later accepted Nezirus upon himself or because his father accepted it on his behalf (which is valid, as we shall see later - Rosh).

9)

(a)Rebbi Yosi, who invalidates 'Harei Alai k'Bechor' - learns from 'la'Hashem' to include 'Harei Alai k'Chatas' or 'k'Asham'.

(b)Despite the fact that one cannot volunteer a Chatas or an Asham any more than one can a Bechor, Rebbi Yosi nevertheless includes the former and precludes the latter - because someone who is Chayav to bring one, can designate whichever animal he chooses, whereas a Bechor is already designated by the Torah.

(c)Rebbi Yakov however, does not differentiate between them - because in his opinion, we learn from the Pasuk in Re'eh "ha'Zachar Takdish" that one performs a Mitzvah by declaring it Hekdesh. Rebbi Yosi counters this - by pointing out that (unlike that of a Chatas and an Asham) the designation of a Bechor is no more than a formality, since it is Kadosh whether one designates it or not.

10)

(a)By a Nazir too, the Torah writes "Lehazir Nazir la'Hashem", yet Rebbi Yakov does not include a Nezir Shimshon from there - because he learns from there that one's Nezirus should be for the sake of Hash-m, and not for any other ulterior motive (like the story of the man from the south and Shimon ha'Tzadik).

11)

(a)The man from the south who came before Shimon ha'Tzadik explained to him that he undertook to become a Nazir (and shave off all his beautiful hair), after he saw his reflection in a well and thought to himself how handsome he was. In that case, he decided, he had to shave off all his hair to combat the Yetzer ha'Ra of pride (a statement which deeply impressed Shimon ha'Tzadik).

(b)The Korban that Shimon ha'Tzadik ate on that unique occasion - was the Korban Asham of a Nazir who became Tamei.

(c)He quoted the Pasuk "Ish Ki Yafli ... Lehazir la'Hashem" - because he was convinced that that Nazir had truly undertaken his Nezirus for the sake of Hash-m, and not for any ulterior motive.

(d)He declined to eat the Korban Asham of other Nezirim who became Tamei - because presuming their motives for adopting Nezirus as being self-motivated, once they became Tamei, they were probably remorseful for having accepted it in the first place. Consequently, the ensuing Korbanos were 'Chulin la'Azarah'.

12)

(a)Nezirus Shimshon is not a Davar ha'Nadur - and Shimshon himself become a Nazir through the command of an angel (through a 'Hora'as Sha'ah').

(b)We said above that Shimshon willingly became Tamei Mes. We do not know this from the fact that he killed ...

1. ... a thousand men with the jawbone of a donkey - because he could have killed them by throwing it at them, in which case he would not have become Tamei.

2. ... thirty men and took their clothes - because he may have taken their clothes first and killed them afterwards.

(c)Despite the Pasuk, which first says "Vayach" and then "Vayikach" - he might have rendered them Gosesin (about to die) and then taken their clothes.

(d)We know that Shimshon willingly became Tamei Mes - from a tradition (that he killed the men first, before taking their clothes).

13)

(a)Rebbi learns the concept of a Nezir Olam (being allowed to trim his hair) - from Avshalom, by whom the Pasuk specifically writes that he did so.

(b)There is a Machlokes Tana'im as to how often he is permitted to shave. Rebbi learns from the Gezeirah Shavah "Vayehi mi'Ketz Shenasayim Yamim" from "Yamim Tiheyeh Ge'ulaso" (written in connection with Batei Arei Chomah) - that a Nezir Olam is permitted to trim his hair once a year.

(c)Rebbi Nahara'i says, once every thirty days - and Rebbi Yosi, once a week.