Jerusalem Talmud Nazir 6:3:5-6:2

Sugya Map

• Issue: Defining the scope and consequences of gehilach (shaving/hair removal) for a nazir, specifically differentiating between acts incurring malkot (lashes) and those necessitating stirat nezirut (nullification and restart of the Nazirite period). A secondary issue concerns the precise moment an impure nazir resumes his vow after undergoing purification.
• Nafka Mina(s):
  • What instruments (razor, scissors, tearing, cropping) and shiurim (quantities of hair) trigger malkot for a nazir?
  • What constitutes an act of gehilach severe enough to cause stirat nezirut for a nazir tahor (pure nazir) or stirat shiv'ah/shloshim for a nazir tamei (impure nazir)?
  • When does the nazir tamei begin recounting his nezirut in purity: immediately after shaving, or only after bringing his sacrifices?
  • The halakhic status of p'sik reisha (unavoidable consequence) in the context of hair removal (e.g., washing with powder, combing).
• Primary Sources:
  • Mishnah Nazir 6:3:5-6; 6:1:1
  • Jerusalem Talmud Nazir 6:3:5-6:2 (Halakhah)
  • Numbers 6:5 ("תער לא יעבור על ראשו")
  • Numbers 6:9 ("ביום טהרתו יגלח")
  • Numbers 6:12 ("יקדיש לה' ימי נזרו והביא")
  • Leviticus 14:9 (Metzora shaving)
  • Mishnah Nega'im 14:4
  • Tosefta Nazir 4:3, 4:8
  • Pnei Moshe on JT Nazir 6:3:1:1-8

Text Snapshot

The sugya opens with a Mishnah that broadly defines prohibited hair removal for a nazir, then delves into the nuances in the Halakhah:

1. Mishnah, Nazir 6:3:5:

   נזיר שגלח כל שהוא בין במספרים בין בתער ובין שסיפסף חייב. (A nazir who shaved any [hair], whether with scissors or razor knife, or cropped, is guilty.)

   • Dikduk/Leshon Nuance: The phrase "כל שהוא" (any [amount]) is critical, implying even a minimal removal. "סיפסף" (cropped/torn out) is understood by the Arukh as "tearing off part of the hair," contrasting with full removal, but the Rashi/Maimonides school explain it as "tore out" entirely.¹ This breadth of prohibition (any amount, any method) is the initial premise.

2. Halakhah, Nazir 6:3:5:

   תער לא יעבור על ראשו. לא תער בלבד. מנין לרבות הסיפסף והמספרים כתער. תלמוד לומר לא יעבור על ראשו. הא לא תער בלבד. אלא כל המעבירין במשמע. (A shaving knife shall not pass over his head. Not only a shaving knife; from where to treat a cropper and scissors like a shaving knife? The verse says, "shall not pass over his head." That means not only a shaving knife; all methods of removal are understood.)

   • Dikduk/Leshon Nuance: The derashah on "לא יעבור על ראשו" (shall not pass over his head) expands the prohibition beyond just a ta'ar (razor) to all methods that remove hair, indicating the Torah's intent to forbid any such action.

3. Halakhah, Nazir 6:3:5:

   מכאן שאינו סותר אלא בתער. (From here that he starts again only for a [shaving knife].)

   • Dikduk/Leshon Nuance: This statement, which Sefaria notes as potentially missing text from the Bavli/Sifrei attributed to R. Jonathan,² introduces a crucial distinction: while malkot might apply broadly, stirat nezirut is restricted to a ta'ar. This is a pivotal point of friction.

4. Halakhah, Nazir 6:3:5:

   למלקות אחת, לסתירה שתים, להתחיל שלש. (For whipping one, for hindering two, to start again three.)

   • Dikduk/Leshon Nuance: This baraita provides specific shiurim (quantities) for different consequences: malkot for one hair, "hindering" (likely referring to the invalidation of a shave for a metzora or nazir tamei) for two hairs, and stirat nezirut for three hairs. This contrasts with the Mishnah's "כל שהוא" for chiyuv.

5. Halakhah, Nazir 6:3:6:

   רבי אומר מיום שהביא קרבנותיו. רבי יוסי בן רבי יהודה אומר משעת גילוחו. (Rebbi says, from the day he brings his sacrifices. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Yehudah says, from the time of his shaving.)

   • Dikduk/Leshon Nuance: This machloket (dispute) concerns the hefsek (interruption) for an impure nazir. Does the pure count restart after the physical act of shaving and immersion, or only after the kapara (atonement) of the sacrifices? This hinges on the interpretation of "יקדיש לה' ימי נזרו והביא" (Numbers 6:12).

Readings

Pnei Moshe on Yerushalmi Nazir 6:3:5-6:2

The Pnei Moshe, the foundational commentary on the Yerushalmi, masterfully navigates the apparent contradictions within the sugya. His chiddush lies in clearly delineating the different shiurim and actions required for various halakhic consequences.

1. Reconciling "כל שהוא" with "מכאן שאינו סותר אלא בתער": The Mishnah states that a nazir is chayav (guilty) for shaving "כל שהוא" (any amount) with "מספרים בין בתער ובין שסיפסף." Pnei Moshe explains that this refers to malkot (lashes), and indeed, the Yerushalmi Halakhah derives from "תער לא יעבור" that all hair-removing methods are prohibited. However, when the Yerushalmi later states "מכאן שאינו סותר אלא בתער," Pnei Moshe clarifies this applies specifically to stirat nezirut – the nullification of the previous days of nezirut requiring a restart. He writes: "ואע"ג דהמשיר אפילו שער אחד לוקה מכל מקום אינו סותר שלשים יום עד שיגלח רוב שערו בתער כדאמר בגמרא או במספרים כעין תער שמגלח בצד עקרו של שער."³ This means that while removing even one hair with any method incurs malkot, only shaving most of one's hair with a ta'ar (razor) or masparayim k'ein ta'ar (scissors that cut like a razor) causes the nezirut to be nullified and restarted. This provides a crucial hermeneutical key to understanding the sugya's internal logic.

2. Clarifying "למלקות אחת, לסתירה שתים, להתחיל שלש": Pnei Moshe interprets this baraita as further refining the shiurim. "למלקות אחת" (for whipping one) aligns with the idea that even one hair removed by any method incurs malkot. "לסתירה שתים" (for hindering two) refers to the halakha that if an impure nazir (or metzora) leaves two hairs, his giluach (shaving) is invalid for the purpose of purification. "להתחיל שלש" (to start again three) refers to the requirement for a nazir tahor to have three hairs for the stirat nezirut to take effect. This also connects to the discussion of R. Jeremiah's query about partially shaved hairs. Pnei Moshe thus synthesizes these seemingly disparate statements into a coherent system.

Rambam, Hilchot Nezirut 5:1-3, 6:1

Rambam, in his Mishneh Torah, largely adopts the Yerushalmi's distinctions, providing a clear psak that reflects this nuanced understanding. His chiddush is in codifying these fine points, clarifying the practical halakha.

1. Distinction between Malkot and Stira: Rambam rules consistently with Pnei Moshe's interpretation. He states: "נזיר שגלח כל שהוא, בין בתער בין במספרים בין שסיפסף, הרי זה לוקה מן התורה."⁴ This confirms that any hair removal by any method incurs malkot. However, for stirat nezirut, he differentiates: "ואינו סותר את ימי נזירותו אלא אם גילח רוב שער ראשו בתער, או במספרים כעין תער."⁵ This explicitly requires both a specific tool (razor or razor-like scissors) and a specific shiur (most of the head's hair) for the Nazirite period to be nullified. This is a direct echo of the Yerushalmi's distinction.

2. Moment of Restart for Nazir Tamei: On the machloket between Rebbi and R. Yose ben R. Yehudah, Rambam rules in favor of R. Yose ben R. Yehudah: "נזיר טמא שגילח ביום שביעי, משיטבול ויעריב שמשו יתחיל למנות ימי טהרתו."⁶ He clarifies that the impure nazir begins counting his days of purity immediately after shaving and immersion, even before bringing his sacrifices. This means the completion of the ritual purification (shaving, immersion, sunset) is sufficient to resume the vow, and the korbanot are for atonement for the impurity, not a prerequisite for restarting the nezirut count itself. The Yerushalmi here seems to prefer Rebbi's view, as the Bavli attributes R. Yose b. R. Yehudah's view to R. Yochanan b. Baroka and Rebbi's view to "the rabbis."⁷ Rambam's psak here, leaning toward R. Yose b. R. Yehudah, highlights a divergence from what might be perceived as the Yerushalmi's prevailing opinion, or at least a specific interpretation of its flow.

Friction

The most potent kushya (difficulty) in this sugya arises from the tension between the Mishnah's initial broad prohibition and the subsequent halakhic distinctions.

The Kushya: "כל שהוא" vs. "אינו סותר אלא בתער"

The Mishnah unequivocally states: "נזיר שגלח כל שהוא בין במספרים בין בתער ובין שסיפסף חייב."⁸ This implies that any hair removal, by any means, makes the nazir "guilty." The Yerushalmi Halakhah then reinforces this by deriving from "תער לא יעבור על ראשו"⁹ that "כל המעבירין במשמע" – all methods of hair removal are included in the prohibition. This strongly suggests that any such act incurs malkot and potentially stirat nezirut.

However, immediately following this, the Yerushalmi states: "מכאן שאינו סותר אלא בתער."¹⁰ This introduces a categorical distinction: while the prohibition (and thus malkot) applies broadly, the consequence of nullification (stirat nezirut) is limited to shaving with a ta'ar (razor). This creates a direct friction point: if "כל שהוא" by any means makes one chayav, why would the nullification of the vow be restricted only to a ta'ar? Furthermore, the baraita "למלקות אחת, לסתירה שתים, להתחיל שלש"¹¹ further complicates matters by introducing specific shiurim (one, two, or three hairs) for different consequences, seemingly contradicting the "כל שהוא" for malkot and raising questions about the threshold for stira.

The Terutz: Differentiated Consequences and Shiurim

The most effective terutz (resolution) is found in the commentaries, particularly Pnei Moshe and Rambam, who posit that the Torah differentiates between the issur (prohibition, incurring malkot) and the stira (nullification of the vow).

1. Issur vs. Stira: The phrase "תער לא יעבור על ראשו" (A shaving knife shall not pass over his head) is interpreted by the Yerushalmi to mean that the prohibition extends to any hair removal, regardless of tool. Thus, removing even "כל שהוא" (any amount) with scissors or by tearing is an issur for which one is chayav malkot. However, the restarting of the nezirut count (stirat nezirut) is a more severe consequence, requiring a specific type of desecration that involves a ta'ar or something functionally equivalent, and a substantial removal of hair. As Pnei Moshe explains, "אינו סותר שלשים יום עד שיגלח רוב שערו בתער... או במספרים כעין תער."¹² This suggests that only a significant, razor-like shave constitutes a fundamental breach that invalidates the prior days of nezirut, while lesser forms of hair removal are prohibited but do not carry this specific consequence.

2. The Baraita's Shiurim: The baraita "למלקות אחת, לסתירה שתים, להתחיל שלש"¹³ can be understood as clarifying the minimum shiurim for each category, rather than contradicting the "כל שהוא" for malkot. For malkot, removing even one hair is enough to be guilty of the issur. "לסתירה שתים" refers to invalidating a shaving that should be done for purification (e.g., nazir tamei, metzora) if two hairs are left. "להתחיל שלש" refers to the shiur required for a nazir tahor to restart his nezirut due to a prohibited shave. This implies that while one hair is enough for malkot, a more substantial act (three hairs) is needed for stira for a nazir tahor. This baraita may also relate to the specific shiurim that R. Jeremiah raises a query about. The differing shiurim highlight the nuanced way the Torah legislates various levels of transgression and their corresponding penalties or effects on the Nazirite status.

Intertext

Metzora's Shaving: A Parallel in Purification

The sugya explicitly draws a parallel between the impure nazir and the metzora (leper) regarding shaving and purification. The Mishnah in Nazir 6:3:6 records a dispute between R. Akiva and R. Tarfon: R. Tarfon asks, "מה בין זה למצורע" (what is the difference between this one [impure nazir] and the metzora)?¹⁴ The purification process for a metzora involves two shavings: one on the day he is declared pure, and another on the seventh day, followed by immersion and sacrifices.¹⁵

This comparison is crucial for understanding the concept of giluach mitzvah (commanded shaving). For both the metzora and the impure nazir, shaving is a mitzvah that facilitates purification. The Yerushalmi (and Bavli) discuss the shiur of giluach for these commanded shaves – specifically, whether "כל שערו" (all his hair) literally means all hair or if leaving two hairs invalidates it. Mishnah Nega'im 14:4 states: "שלשה מגלחין וגילוחן מצוה: הנזיר והמצורע והלוים. וכולן אם לא גילחו בתער או שהותירו שתי שערות לא עשו כלום."¹⁶ This reinforces that for giluach mitzvah, leaving even two hairs is a disqualifying factor, underscoring the severity and precision required for these specific ritual acts. The nazir's prohibited shaving, while seemingly a mirror image, is understood by comparing its requirements to these commanded shaves.

The Leviim's Induction: A Razor Requirement

The mitzvah of shaving for the Leviim upon their induction into service (Numbers 8:7) serves as another significant intertextual parallel. The verse states: "וְהֶעֱבִירוּ תַעַר עַל כָּל בְּשָׂרָם" (And they shall pass a razor over all their flesh).¹⁷ This explicit mention of a ta'ar (razor) for the Leviim's commanded shave is often contrasted with the Nazir's prohibition, "תער לא יעבור על ראשו." The contrast highlights that for the Leviim, the ta'ar is required, emphasizing the completeness and thoroughness of their purification. For the nazir, the ta'ar is forbidden.

The Yerushalmi's interpretation that "תער לא יעבור" extends the issur for malkot to all hair removers, yet restricts stirat nezirut to a ta'ar, draws a subtle distinction. It suggests that the ta'ar carries a unique significance – for the Leviim, it's a tool of ultimate purification; for the nazir, it's the tool of ultimate desecration that truly severs his prior Nazirite status, beyond just incurring a prohibition. This allows for a deeper understanding of the symbolic and halakhic weight of the ta'ar in these contexts.

Psak/Practice

The halakhic rulings largely follow the nuanced distinctions articulated in the Yerushalmi and elucidated by Rishonim like Rambam.

1. For Malkot: The psak is that a nazir who removes even one hair ("כל שהוא") by any means (razor, scissors, tearing, cropping) is liable for malkot. This is the clear implication of the Mishnah and the Halakhah's derashah on "לא יעבור" to include "כל המעבירין." The Shulchan Aruch, echoing Rambam, states: "נזיר שגלח כל שהוא, בין במספרים בין בתער בין שסיפסף, הרי זה לוקה מן התורה."¹⁸

2. For Stirat Nezirut (Nullification and Restart): The psak differentiates based on the tool and shiur. For a nazir tahor who desecrates his vow by shaving, his previous days of nezirut are nullified, and he must restart a 30-day count. This stira occurs only if he shaves rov rosho (most of his head) with a ta'ar or masparayim k'ein ta'ar.¹⁹ Lesser acts, while incurring malkot, do not nullify the period.

3. For the Nazir Tamei's Restart: Regarding the machloket between Rebbi and R. Yose ben R. Yehudah, Rambam rules that the impure nazir begins counting his pure nezirut immediately after his shaving and immersion on the seventh day ("משעת גילוחו"), even before bringing his sacrifices on the eighth day.²⁰ This is the widely accepted psak.

4. Meta-Psak Heuristics: This sugya exemplifies a common meta-psak heuristic where a broad scriptural prohibition (like "תער לא יעבור") is applied expansively for issur and malkot, but a more specific, stringent interpretation is reserved for a higher-stakes consequence like stirat nezirut. The Yerushalmi's careful dissection of the verb "יעבור" and its scope for different halakhic outcomes showcases a sophisticated legal methodology that balances textual breadth with contextual severity. This approach prevents a one-size-fits-all application of a pasuk, instead allowing for a graded response to transgression.

Takeaway

The Yerushalmi meticulously dissects the concept of "shaving" for a nazir, demonstrating that the Torah imposes a hierarchy of consequences – from malkot for any forbidden hair removal to stirat nezirut only for a significant, razor-like shave. This rigorous analysis underscores that even seemingly simple prohibitions contain layers of nuance, demanding precise interpretation to differentiate between types of transgressions and their specific halakhic repercussions.

---

¹ Jerusalem Talmud Nazir 6:3:5 footnote 130. ² Jerusalem Talmud Nazir 6:3:5 footnote 140. ³ Pnei Moshe on Jerusalem Talmud Nazir 6:3:1:6. ⁴ Rambam, Hilchot Nezirut 5:1. ⁵ Rambam, Hilchot Nezirut 5:2. ⁶ Rambam, Hilchot Nezirut 6:1. ⁷ Nazir 18b-19a. ⁸ Mishnah Nazir 6:3:5. ⁹ Numbers 6:5. ¹⁰ Jerusalem Talmud Nazir 6:3:5 Halakhah. ¹¹ Jerusalem Talmud Nazir 6:3:5 Halakhah. ¹² Pnei Moshe on Jerusalem Talmud Nazir 6:3:1:6. ¹³ Jerusalem Talmud Nazir 6:3:5 Halakhah. ¹⁴ Mishnah Nazir 6:3:6. ¹⁵ Leviticus 14:8-9. ¹⁶ Mishnah Nega'im 14:4. ¹⁷ Numbers 8:7. ¹⁸ Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 309:1. ¹⁹ Rambam, Hilchot Nezirut 5:2. ²⁰ Rambam, Hilchot Nezirut 6:1.