Nazir 59a — the Talmud in English

There are those who say:

so

said Rabbi Hiyya bar Abba in the name of Rabbi Yohanan:

One who removes

the hair of

the armpit and

the hair of

the pubic area—

behold, he

is flogged because of “

A man shall not wear a woman’s garment.”

And this is how we ask the question: Since Rabbi Yohanan said explicitly, “He is flogged because of ‘A man shall not wear a woman’s garment,’” it follows that he transgresses this prohibition and is flogged for it by Torah law; therefore we ask:

We raise an objection: Removing the hair

in the armpit and in the pubic area

is not from words of Torah, but from words of the Scribes!?

And this is how we answer:

He—

Rabbi Yohanan, who holds that he is flogged by Torah law—

said in accordance with this tanna, as it was taught:

One who removes

the hair of

the armpit and

the hair of

the pubic area, behold, he transgresses because of “A man shall not wear a woman’s garment”,

and this wording indicates that it is by Torah law.

The Gemara asks:

And the first tanna,

that is, the tanna of the previous beraita, who permits the removal of hair by Torah law:

This “

A man shall not wear

a woman’s garment”

what does he expound from it,

that is: What does the Torah come to prohibit if not arranging oneself with women’s adornments!?

And the Gemara explains: The verse “A man shall not wear” does not come to prohibit a man from arranging himself with women’s adornments, but rather

it is needed for that which was taught:

It is stated in the Torah: “

There shall not be a man’s article upon a woman

and a man shall not wear a woman’s garment.”

What does it come to teach?

If

in its simple sense,

that a man should not wear a woman’s garment, and a woman a man’s garment,

it is impossible to say so, for

it has already been stated

in the Torah concerning this:

It is an abomination [“

for everyone who does these things is an abomination of the Lord your God”],

and here there is no abomination.

Rather, that a man should not wear a woman’s garment

to be like a woman

and sit among women

in order to fornicate with them,

and a woman

should not wear

a man’s garment and sit among men.

Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov

disagrees and

says:

From where is it established that a woman should not go out with weapons to war? The verse says: “

There shall not be a man’s article upon a woman.” “

And a man shall not wear a woman’s garment”—

what does it come to teach?

That a man should not arrange himself with women’s adornments,

that he should not apply eye paint, nor rouge himself, nor remove the hair of the armpit and the pubic area.

Rav Nahman said: In the case of a Nazir,

when he shaves as a shaving of a mitzva—since he also shaves his head—he is

permitted

to shave even the hair in those places, because this is not considered adornment and arrangement.

The Gemara disagrees with his words:

And the halakha is not in accordance with him

of Rav Nahman, and even a Nazir is forbidden to shave in those places.

The Rabbis said to Rabbi Shimon bar Abba:

We saw [

we saw ]

that Rabbi Yohanan does not have

the hair of the armpit and the pubic area; yet Rabbi Yohanan himself said that it is forbidden to remove it!?

He said to them

Rabbi Shimon bar Abba to those Rabbis:

His hairs fell out because of old age,

and he did not shave them with his hands.

A certain man who was liable for flogging [

was liable for lashes ]

before him [

before ]

Rabbi Ami

in the court of Rabbi Ami:

And when they stripped his garments from him in order to flog him,

his armpit was revealed,

and

he saw him

Rabbi Ami

not shaving [

his armpit was revealed, and Rabbi Ami observed that he did not shave his hairs ]. “

Rabbi Ami said to them

to those who were about to flog him:

Leave him; he is one of the scholars” [

leave him, for he is one of the associates ].

Rav asked Rabbi Hiyya: What is the ruling on shaving

the hair of the armpit and the pubic area?

He said

Rabbi Hiyya gave the ruling

to him

to Rav:

It is forbidden.

He said

Rav wondered

to him

to Rabbi Hiyya:

But it grows

the hair continues growing, and in the end it will cause him pain, and this is not called arrangement and adornment, since he shaves only to escape the pain.

He said to him

Rabbi Hiyya to Rav:

Son of distinguished ones [

son of great men ]!

It has a limit

for the hair in those places, and it does not continue growing like the hair of the head, but rather

as long as it grows [

when the hair reaches the limit at which it causes a person pain ] it

falls out,

and it will not ultimately come to cause pain.

Further,

Rav asked Rabbi Hiyya:

What is the ruling on rubbing and rubbing oneself

in those places in order to remove the hair?

He said to him

Rabbi Hiyya to Rav:

It is forbidden.

Rav continued and asked: To rub

with his garment

in those places in order to remove the hair,

what is the ruling?

He said to him

Rabbi Hiyya to Rav:

It is permitted,

since he does not touch the hair, but rather his garment.

There are those who say:

thus

Rav asked him

Rabbi Hiyya:

While praying, with his garment—

what is the ruling?

When he is praying, what is the ruling on rubbing with his garment so that the lice will fall from him, since he does not touch his flesh?

He said to him

Rabbi Hiyya to Rav:

It is forbidden.

The Gemara disagrees with Rabbi Hiyya:

And the halakha is not in accordance with him

of Rabbi Hiyya.