## Nazir Daf 59a

###### Nazir 59a:1
[Nazir 59a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/59a:1)

אִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי: אָמַר רַבִּי חִיָּיא בַּר אַבָּא אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: הַמַּעֲבִיר בֵּית הַשֶּׁחִי וּבֵית הָעֶרְוָה לוֹקֶה מִשּׁוּם ״לֹא יִלְבַּשׁ גֶּבֶר שִׂמְלַת אִשָּׁה״. מֵיתִיבִי: הַעֲבָרַת שֵׂיעָר אֵינָהּ מִדִּבְרֵי תוֹרָה אֶלָּא מִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים. הוּא דְּאָמַר כִּי הַאי תַּנָּא, דְּתַנְיָא: הַמַּעֲבִיר בֵּית הַשֶּׁחִי וּבֵית הָעֶרְוָה הֲרֵי זֶה עוֹבֵר מִשּׁוּם ״לֹא יִלְבַּשׁ גֶּבֶר שִׂמְלַת אִשָּׁה״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Some say** a different version of this statement: **Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan said:** A man **who removes** the hair **of the armpit or the pubic** hair **is flogged, due to** the prohibition: **“A man shall not put on a woman’s garment”** (Deuteronomy 22:5). The Gemara **raises an objection** from a *baraita*: **The removal of hair is not** prohibited **by Torah law but by rabbinic law.** How then does Rabbi Yoḥanan say that he is flogged, which by definition is a punishment for individuals who have transgressed a Torah law? The Gemara answers: It was **he who said** this *halakha* **in accordance with** the opinion of **that *tanna*, as it is taught** in a *baraita*: A man **who removes** the hair **of the armpit or the pubic** hair **violates** the prohibition **of: “A man shall not put on a woman’s garment.”**


###### Nazir 59a:2
[Nazir 59a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/59a:2)

וְתַנָּא קַמָּא, הַאי ״לֹא יִלְבַּשׁ גֶּבֶר״, מַאי דָּרֵישׁ בֵּיהּ? מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ לְכִדְתַנְיָא: ״לֹא יִהְיֶה כְלִי גֶבֶר עַל אִשָּׁה״. מַאי תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר? אִם שֶׁלֹּא יִלְבַּשׁ אִישׁ שִׂמְלַת אִשָּׁה וְאִשָּׁה שִׂמְלַת אִישׁ, הֲרֵי כְּבָר נֶאֱמַר ״תּוֹעֵבָה הִיא״, וְאֵין כָּאן תּוֹעֵבָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And what** does **the first *tanna*,** who holds that the prohibition is by rabbinic law, **learn from this** verse: **“A man shall not put on** a woman’s garment”? The Gemara answers: **He requires it for that which is taught** in the *baraita*, where it states: **“A woman shall not wear that which pertains to a man,** and a man shall not put on a woman’s garment, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord your God” (Deuteronomy 22:5). **What** is the meaning when **the verse states** this? **If** it teaches only **that a man may not put on a woman’s garment, and a woman** may not wear **a man’s garment, it is already stated** in explanation of this prohibition that **“it is an abomination** to the Lord your God,” **and there is no abomination here** in the mere act of wearing a garment.


###### Nazir 59a:3
[Nazir 59a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/59a:3)

אֶלָּא שֶׁלֹּא יִלְבַּשׁ אִישׁ שִׂמְלַת אִשָּׁה וְיֵשֵׁב בֵּין הַנָּשִׁים, וְאִשָּׁה שִׂמְלַת אִישׁ וְתֵשֵׁב בֵּין הָאֲנָשִׁים. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר: מִנַּיִן שֶׁלֹּא תֵּצֵא אִשָּׁה בִּכְלֵי זַיִין לְמִלְחָמָה — תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״לֹא יִהְיֶה כְלִי גֶבֶר עַל אִשָּׁה וְלֹא יִלְבַּשׁ גֶּבֶר שִׂמְלַת אִשָּׁה״, שֶׁלֹּא יִתַּקֵּן אִישׁ בְּתִיקּוּנֵי אִשָּׁה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** it means **that a man may not wear a woman’s garment** and thereby go **and sit among the women; and a woman** may not wear **a man’s garment and sit among the men. Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov says: From where** is it derived **that a woman may not go out with weapons to war? The verse states: “A woman shall not wear that which pertains to a man, and a man shall not put on a woman’s garment,”** which indicates **that a man may not adorn himself with the cosmetics** and ornaments **of a woman,** and similarly a woman may not go out with weapons to war, as those are for the use of males. Rabbi Yoḥanan’s ruling follows this opinion.


###### Nazir 59a:4
[Nazir 59a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/59a:4)

אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן: בְּנָזִיר מוּתָּר. וְלֵית הִילְכְתָא כְּווֹתֵיהּ. אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ רַבָּנַן לְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בַּר אַבָּא: חֲזֵינָא לֵיהּ לְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן דְּלֵית לֵיהּ! אֲמַר לְהוֹן: מֵחֲמַת זִקְנָה נָשְׁרוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Rav Naḥman said: For a nazirite,** it is **permitted** to shave armpit hair. The Gemara comments: **And the *halakha* is not in accordance with his** opinion. The Gemara reports that **the Sages said to Rabbi Shimon bar Abba: We** have **observed that Rabbi Yoḥanan does not have** armpit hairs, despite his own ruling that it is prohibited to shave them. **He said to them: They fell out due to old age.**


###### Nazir 59a:5
[Nazir 59a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/59a:5)

הָהוּא דְּאִיתְחַיַּיב נְגִידָא קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי אַמֵּי. אִיגַּלַּאי בֵּית הַשֶּׁחִי, חַזְיֵיהּ דְּלָא מְגַלַּח, אֲמַר לְהוֹן רַבִּי אַמֵּי: שִׁיבְקוּהּ, דֵּין מִן חַבְרַיָּא הוּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates: There was **a certain** person who committed a transgression and **was** found **liable to receive lashes before Rabbi Ami.** When they removed his clothes to flog him, his **armpit was exposed,** and Rabbi Ami **saw that he had not shaved** his armpit hair. **Rabbi Ami said to** his attendants: **Leave him; this is one of those who are meticulous in observance of mitzvot.** We can see this is so, as he is particular about prohibitions that ordinary people do not observe.


###### Nazir 59a:6
[Nazir 59a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/59a:6)

בְּעָא מִינֵּיהּ רַב מֵרַבִּי חִיָּיא: מַהוּ לְגַלֵּחַ? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אָסוּר. אֲמַר לֵיהּ וְהָא קָא גָדֵל! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: בַּר פַּחֲתֵי, זְמַן יֵשׁ לוֹ, כׇּל זְמַן שֶׁהוּא גָּדֵל — נוֹשֵׁר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav raised a dilemma before Rabbi Ḥiyya: What is** the *halakha* with regard **to shaving** armpit hair? **He said to him:** It is **prohibited.** Rav **said to him: But it grows** and is uncomfortable. Rabbi Ḥiyya **said to him: Son of nobles [*bar paḥtei*],** this hair **has a** limited **time. Whenever** a hair **grows** too long **it falls out,** and therefore there is no concern that one’s armpit hair will become too long.


###### Nazir 59a:7
[Nazir 59a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/59a:7)

בְּעָא מִינֵּיהּ רַב מֵרַבִּי חִיָּיא: מַהוּ לָחוֹךְ? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אָסוּר. בְּבִגְדוֹ, מַהוּ? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: מוּתָּר. אִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי, בְּעָא מִינֵּיהּ: בִּתְפִלָּה בְּבִגְדוֹ, מַאי? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אָסוּר. וְלֵית הִילְכְתָא כְּווֹתֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav raised** another **dilemma before Rabbi Ḥiyya: What is** the *halakha* with regard **to rubbing** armpit hair and thereby removing it manually? Rabbi Ḥiyya **said to him:** It is **prohibited.** Rav continued to ask: **What is** the *halakha* with regard to rubbing armpit hair indirectly **with one’s garment?** Rabbi Ḥiyya **said to him:** It is **permitted. Some say** that this was not Rav’s question; rather, **he raised** the following **dilemma before him: What** is the *halakha* with regard to rubbing the armpit with **one’s garment during prayer?** Rabbi Ḥiyya **said to him:** It is **prohibited.** The Gemara comments: **And the *halakha* is not in accordance with his** opinion in this case.