1)

(a)Although Nochrim are permitted to bring Nedarim and Nedavos, they are not subject to Nezirus, based on the opening Pasuk of Nezirus - "Daber el B'nei Yisrael", 've'Lo Nochrim'.

(b)Consequently, if a Nochri does declare Nezirus - he is permitted to continue drinking wine and to render himself Tamei Meis.

(c)On the other hand, the Tana rules - that a woman and an Eved are subject to Nezirus.

2)

(a)The distinction that the Tana draws between a woman and an Eved who declare Nezirus against their husband/master's wishes is - that the master can force the latter to drink wine and render himself Tamei Meis (See Tos. Yom-Tov), but the husband cannot force his wife to do so (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

(b)This latter ruling differs from other Nedarim which constitute Inuy Nefesh (affliction) or Bitul Melachah (loss of work [with regard to the Eved]) - inasmuch as they do not take effect at all (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

(c)We learn this laytter Din from the words "al Nafsho" (in the Pasuk "Le'esor Isur al Nafsho") which teaches us that - a Neder only takes effect on someone whose 'soul belongs to himself' (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

(d)The equivalent Din regarding the Shevu'os that an Eved makes is that - they do not take effect at all (See Tos. Yom-Tov), even if they do not constitute Inuy Nefesh.

3)

(a)The Tana considers the Neder of one's Eved more stringent than that of one's wife - inasmuch as one is permitted to annul the latter but not the former, even if they do not constitute Inuy Nefesh and Bitul Melachah.

(b)Although he rules that if a man annuls the his wife's Nedarim, the Nedarim are permanently annulled, if he annuls the Nedarim of his Eved, once the Eved goes free, he is obligated to complete them.

(c)'Heifer le' Avdo' in this context really means that - he forces him to break it.

(d)In that case what the Mishnah really means is that - whereas on the one hand, once he has annulled his wife's Neder, he no longer has the authority to force her to uphold it, on the other, after he has forced his Eved to drink wine, he can subsequently force him to uphold it (See Tos.Yom-Tov).

4)

(a)The Rambam explains 'Heifer le'Avdo, Yatza le'Cheirus Mashlim Neziruso' - by reading 'Yatza le'Cheirus' as 'Yeitzei le'Cheirus' (See also Tos.Yom-Tov), and what the Mishnah therefore means is that, if the master annuls his Eved's Nezirus, the latter goes free, and remains obligated to fulfill his Nezirus ...

(b)... because when a master annuls the Nezirus of his Eved, he loses his rights over him.

(c)The Bartenura comments - that he is doubtful as to the veracity of the Rambam's explanation.

5)

(a)If the Eved runs away, Rebbi Meir forbids him to drink wine (despite the element of danger involved) - in order to force him to return to his master, who will force him to drink wine anyway.

(b)Rebbi Yossi permits him to drink wine - for fear that he will otherwise become ill and die (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

(c)Assuming the last statement to be La'av Davka (See also Tiferes Yisrael), we allow the Eved to drink wine - because, since at the end of the day, his master will find him and bring him back, it is as if he is still in his master's domain (and it is to his master's advantage that he drinks wine and remains healthy).

6)

(a)In a case where a Nazir who has already shaved - his Gilu'ach Taharah, after bringing his Korbanos discovers that he is Tamei Meis, the Mishnah draws a distinction between whether it is a Tum'ah Yedu'ah or Tum'as ha'Tehom.

(b)The definition of ...

1. ... Tum'as ha'Tehom is - a corpse that is buried in a location which nobody in the world recognized (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

2. ... Tum'ah Yedu'ah is - any Tum'as Meis that is not Tum'as ha'Tehom (i.e. of which at least one person is probably aware).

7)

(a)The Tana now rules that - 'Tum'ah Yedu'ah' loses all his days, and is obligated to begin counting all over again, whereas Tum'as ha'Tehom does not.

(b)The source of the Din of Tum'as ha'Tehom is - Halachah le'Moshe mi'Sinai.

(c)If the Nazir makes the discovery before having shaved (the Gilu'ach Taharah) - then either way, he is obligated to begin counting all over again (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

8)

(a)To illustrate the difference, the Mishnah cites a case where the Nazir went into a cave to Tovel - for any Tum'ah other than Tum'as Meis, and found there a k'Zayis Meis and is not sure whether he touched it or not.

(b)The k'Zayis Meis is classified as 'Tum'ah Yedu'ah' - if the Nazir found it floating on the water, but 'Tum'as ha'Tehom'if it was buried in the floor of the cave.

(c)The reason for the former ruling is - because it was found in a location where people are likely to have seen it (see also Tos. Yom-Tov DH 'Nimtza Meshuka' & 've'Nimtza Meis').

(d)We reconcile it with the Din that a Safek Tum'ah that is floating on the water is Tahor - by confining the latter ruling to a Tum'ah which is not Tum'as Meis.

(e)And the Tana presents the case of a Nazir who is Toveling for another Tum'ah - to teach us that by Tum'ah Yedu'ah, he is Soser, in spite of the fact that a Nazir who Tovels is careful to avoid contact with any Tum'ah.

9)

(a)In the case of Tum'as ha'Tehom, where the Nazir entered the water to cool himself, the Mishnah rules - that he is Tahor ...

(b)... even though he is not as careful about not having contact with Tum'ah as someone who enters the water to Tovel (as we explained).

(c)If however, he entered the water to Tovel from Tum'as Meis even in the case of Tum'as ha'Tehom he will be Tamei, based on the principle - 'Chezkas Tamei Tamei'.

(d)When the Tana concludes 'she'Raglayim le'Davar' (a strong indication), he means that - this is good reason to confine the Halachah of Tum'as ha'Tehom to where he has a Chezkas Taharah (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

10)

(a)The Mishnah now discusses a case where someone finds a Meis lying normally. 'ba'Techilaht' - where it was not previously known that there is a grave there (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

(b)We learn this from the word 'ha'Motzei' - which implies 'Motzei', ve'Lo Matzuy ('He finds', but not where it was known to be there).

(c)And from the word 'Meis' we learn that - it only applies to a man who died but to one who was been murdered (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

11)

(a)From the word ...

1. ... 'lying'- we preclude a Meis that one finds sitting, and from ...

2. ... 'normally' - one whose head is placed between his thighs.

(b)These Meisim are not subject to the current Dinim - because Jews do not bury their dead in this manner, so we assume that they are Nochrim (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

12)

(a)The Tana rules that - the finder of the above corpse is permitted to re-inter him, provided he takes some earth together with the Meis.

(b)We learn this from the word 'mi'Mitzrayim (in the Pasuk in Vay'chi "u'Nesasani mi'Mitzrayim", said by Ya'akov to his sons) - which is otherwise superfluous, and which we therefore Darshen to mean 'Carry me together with some soil from Egypt' (See Tos. Yom-Tov DH 'Tevusasan').

(c)Together with the Meis one must take - three finger-breadths of virgin soil (See Tos. Yom-Tov, Ibid.).

13)

(a)If one finds ...

1. ... two corpses lying in this manner - the same Din applies as when one finds one.

2. ... three corpses that are between four (See Tos. Yom-Tov) and eight Amos apart - it is a 'Shechunas Kevaros' (a district of graves), which may not be moved.

(b)By 'between four and eight Amos apart', the Tana mean that - the distance between the first and the third graves is not less than four Amos and not more than eight.

(c)The reason for the difference between a single grave and a 'Shechunas Kevaros' is that - whereas we assume the former to have only been placed there temporarily, the latter were buried permanently, and cannot therefore be moved.

(d)Consequently, may one not move even a single Meis - if it is obvious that it was buried there permanently.

14)

(a)One must then examine - twenty Amos (at each end) to see whether there are any more graves.

(b)Despite the fact that each cave measures six by four Amos, the Tana say 'between four and eight Amos apart' (and not 'four and six') - because sometimes, one measures the cave diagonally (and the diagonal of four by six Amos is eight Amos).

(c)A Shechunas Kevaros comprises two such caves with a Chatzer in the middle - which measures four by four Amos.

(d)The total length of the two caves plus the Chatzer is therefore eighteen Amos. Nevertheless, the Tana requires a search of twenty Amos at either end (A total of forty Amos) - because, as we already explained, people sometimes measure the diagonal.

(e)The Mishnah nevertheless requires only twenty Amos and not twenty-two (corresponding to the diagonals of both caves) - because we only contend with one diagonal and not two.

15)

(a)In the event that the searcher finds another grave at the end of twenty Amos, the Tana requires him - to search another twenty Amos beyond that ...

(b)... since, as the Tana explains there are 'Raglayim le'Davar' - that this area is designated for graves, and the grave that he found therefore belongs to a 'Shechumas Kevaros'.

(c)The Mishnah concludes that - had he originally discovered the single Meis only, he would have been permitted to move it together with the three Tefachim of soil.

16)

(a)'Nega'im ...

1. ... ba'Techilah' means - where there has been no Tum'ah.

2. ... mi'she'Nizkak le'Tum'ah' - once there has.

(b)- The Tana rules that whereas Safek Nega'im 'ba'Techilah' - is Tahor, Safek Nega'im 'mi'she'Nizkak le'Tum'ah' - is Tamei.

(c)The minimum size of a Baheres that is Tamei is - a 'G'ris' (a species of large bean).

17)

(a)Both cases begin where two people (See Tos. Yom-Tov) come to the Kohen, one with a Baheres the size of a G'ris and the other, the size of a Sela (which is larger than a G'ris). In the case of ...

1. ... 'ba'Techilah ... ', the Tana declares them both Tahor if they return seven days later - and both measure a Sela, but the Kohen is not sure which is the one that spread.

2. ... 'mi'she'Nizkak le'Tum'ah' the Tana declares them both Tamei, assuming that after seven days, both marks had initially grown - where seven days later, both marks were reduced to a Sela.

(b)The Chidush in ...

1. ... the former case is that - although one of them is definitely Tamei, the Kohen declares them both Tahor.

2. ... the latter case is that - although one of them is definitely Tahor, the Kohen declares them both Tamei.

(c)In the latter case, the Kohen will declare them both Tahor - if both marks revert to the size of a G'ris.

18)

(a)When the Tana says that a Zav is examined in seven ways, he means - that a sighting following one of the seven listed things will not render him a Zav.

(b)This is based on the principle that - a sighting that comes through an Oneis is not considered Zivus (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

(c)We learn it from the Pasuk in Shemini "Zav mi'Besaro" - which implies - "mi'Besaro", 've'Lo machmas Onso'.

(d)The examination will no longer be effective - once he is 'Nizkak le'Tum'ah' (he has already had his second sighting, since then he is already a Zav [See Tos. Yom-Tov DH 'Ad she'Lo Nizkak ... ']).

19)

(a)The first two items on the current list are food and drink. Two of the three foods listed are juicy meat and cheese. The third is - eggs.

(b)One of the two drinks listed is milk. The other - vintage wine.

(c)The third item is carrying a heavy load, the fourth, jumping, and the fifth, illness. The sixth and seventh items are - seeing a woman and thinking about a woman (even without actually seeing her).

20)

(a)Assuming that the Zav did indulge in one of these 'activities' - then any sighting that follows will not combine with the sighting before it or after it to render him a Zav.

(b)If he indulged in one of them between the second and third sightings however - then his next sighting will render him a Zavah Gedolah (obligating him to bring a Korban).

21)

(a)When the Tana says, with reference to the latter period 'S'feiko ve'Shichvas Zar'o Teme'in', he means - a safek that comes about through his seeing 'Shichvas Zera'

(b)Based on this statement, if the 'Zav sees Keri ...

1. ... within the twenty-four hours prior to the second sighting - he will not be a Zav.

2. ... between the second and third sightings - then he will be a full-fledged Zav ...

(c)... since we assume that the Zivus was not the result of the Keri ...

(d)... based on the principle of 'Raglayim le'Davar'.

22)

(a)In a case where Reuven struck Shimon and Beis-Din assessed that he would die, which he did, but only after his situation had improved the Tana Kama rules that - he is Chayav.

(b)Rebbi Nechemyah rules that Reuven is Patur - based on the principle 'Raglayim le'Davar' (seeing as his situation improved before he died).

(c)The Halachah is - like the Tana Kama.

23)

(a)The Mishnah, quoting Rebbi Nehorai, explains the Pasuk (in connection with Shmuel) "u'Morah (a razor) Lo Ya'aleh al Rosho" to mean that - Shmuel was a Nazir.

(b)He learns it from a Gezeirah-Shavah "Morah" "Morah" - from Shimshon (whom we know was a Nazir [See Tos. Yom-Tov]).

(c)The Halachic ramifications of this ruling are that - if somebody undertakes to be like Shmuel or like Ben Mano'ach (Shimshon's father [See Tos. Yom-Tov]), he will be a Nazir.

24)

(a)Rebbi Yossi disagrees with Rebbi Nehorai's translation of "Morah". Despite the 'Hey' ('instead of an 'Alef') he translates it as - 'fear' (See Tiferes Yisrael).

(b)He therefore explains the Pasuk to mean that - throughout his life, Shmuel will be afraid of no man (See Tos. Yom-Tov).

(c)Rebbi Nehorai refutes Rebbi Yossi's explanation - based on his fear to anoint David, out of fear that Shaul would find out and kill him.

(d)The Halachah is - like Rebbi Nehorai.