Nazir 18a

דְּאִי סָלְקָא דַעְתָּךְ תִּגְלַחַת טוּמְאָה, יְמֵי חִלּוּטוֹ מִי לָא בָּעֵי תִּגְלַחַת? לָא, תִּגְלַחַת דִּנְזִירוּת קָתָנֵי.

as if it enters your mind to say that the baraita is discussing the shaving done as a result of the nazirite’s impurity, and contrasts a nazirite with a leper, do the end of a leper’s days of confirmed leprosy not require shaving? A leper must shave when he is purified from his condition, so how can he be described as unfit for shaving? Rather, the baraita must be referring to the nazirite’s shaving of purity, as suggested above (17b). The Gemara rejects this: No, it could be that the baraita is discussing the shaving done as a result of the nazirite’s impurity, and when it states that a leper is unfit for shaving, the baraita is teaching about the shaving of naziriteship, and the baraita is stating that a leper is unfit for any shaving of a nazirite, since he must first shave for his leprosy.

תָּא שְׁמַע: ״וְטִמֵּא רֹאשׁ נִזְרוֹ״, בְּטָהוֹר שֶׁנִּטְמָא הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר, שֶׁהוּא טָעוּן הַעֲבָרַת שֵׂעָר וַהֲבָאַת צִיפֳּרִין. וְלִפְטוֹר אֶת הַנָּזִיר בְּקֶבֶר — שֶׁאֵין טָעוּן הַעֲבָרַת שֵׂעָר וַהֲבָאַת צִיפֳּרִין.

The Gemara suggests another proof to answer the question of whether one who vows naziriteship while in a cemetery must shave upon undergoing purification. Come and hear a baraita : The verse states: “And he defiles his consecrated head, he shall shave his head on the day of his purification, on the seventh day shall he shave it” (Numbers 6:9). The baraita explains: The verse is speaking of a ritually pure nazirite who became impure, who requires hair removal and the bringing of birds as offerings. And this verse comes to exempt a nazirite who vowed while in the grave, i.e., a cemetery, that he does not require hair removal and the bringing of birds.

וַהֲלֹא דְּבָרִים קַל וָחוֹמֶר: וּמָה טָהוֹר שֶׁנִּטְמָא — טָעוּן הַעֲבָרַת שֵׂעָר וַהֲבָאַת צִיפֳּרִין, מִי שֶׁהָיָה טָמֵא מִתְּחִלָּה — אֵינוֹ דִּין שֶׁיְּהֵא טָעוּן הַעֲבָרַת שֵׂעָר וַהֲבָאַת צִיפֳּרִין?

The baraita continues its analysis of this halakha . For one might have explained differently: And are these matters, the ruling that such a nazirite is exempt, not inferred with an a fortiori inference to reach the opposite conclusion: Just as a nazirite who was pure from the outset and who subsequently became impure requires hair removal and the bringing of birds, if one was impure from the outset, as he took a vow of naziriteship while in a cemetery, is it not logical that he should require hair removal and the bringing of birds?

תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וְטִמֵּא רֹאשׁ נִזְרוֹ״, בְּמִי שֶׁהָיָה טָהוֹר וְנִטְמָא הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר, שֶׁיְּהֵא טָעוּן הַעֲבָרַת שֵׂעָר וַהֲבָאַת צִיפֳּרִין, וְלִפְטוֹר אֶת הַנָּזִיר בְּקֶבֶר. שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ.

Therefore the verse states: “And he defiles his consecrated head,” indicating that the verse speaks only of one who was a pure nazirite and later became impure, and that only he requires hair removal and the bringing of birds. And the verse serves to exempt the nazirite who vowed while in a place of a grave, who was ritually impure from the outset. The Gemara concludes: Learn from this that a nazirite who was ritually impure from the outset does not have to shave; this answers the question of Rav Ashi.

מַאן תְּנָא הָא דְּתָנוּ רַבָּנַן: אֵין בֵּין טָמֵא שֶׁנָּזַר לְנָזִיר טָהוֹר שֶׁנִּטְמָא, אֶלָּא שֶׁטָּמֵא שֶׁנָּזַר — שְׁבִיעִי שֶׁלּוֹ עוֹלֶה לוֹ מִן הַמִּנְיָן, וְנָזִיר טָהוֹר שֶׁנִּטְמָא — אֵין שְׁבִיעִי שֶׁלּוֹ עוֹלֶה לוֹ מִן הַמִּנְיָן?

§ After resolving the question, the Gemara discusses additional halakhot involving a ritually impure person who took a vow of naziriteship. Who is the tanna who taught this baraita that the Sages taught in the previous discussion: The difference between an impure person who took a vow of naziriteship and a pure nazirite who became ritually impure is only the following halakha : That with regard to an impure person who took a vow of naziriteship, his seventh day of purification counts as part of his tally of the term of naziriteship. But with regard to a pure nazirite who became impure, his seventh day of purification does not count as part of his tally.

אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: רַבִּי הִיא, דְּאָמַר רַבִּי: אֵין נְזִירוּת טׇהֳרָה חָלָה אֶלָּא עַד שְׁמִינִי. דְּאִי תֵּימָא רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה הִיא, הָאָמַר נְזִירוּת דְּטׇהֳרָה מִשְּׁבִיעִי הוּא דְּחָיְילָא.

Rav Ḥisda said: It is the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, as Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: Naziriteship of purity takes effect only from the eighth day. When a nazirite becomes impure during his term, he begins to count his term of observing naziriteship in purity only on the day following his purification. For if you say it follows the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, didn’t he say that the naziriteship of purity takes effect from the seventh day of his purification process?

מַאי רַבִּי וּמַאי רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה — דְּתַנְיָא: ״וְקִדַּשׁ אֶת רֹאשׁוֹ בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא״ — בְּיוֹם הֲבָאַת קׇרְבְּנוֹתָיו, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: בְּיוֹם תִּגְלַחְתּוֹ.

The Gemara clarifies: What is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, and what is the statement of Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, that Rav Ḥisda referred to? As it is taught in a baraita : The verse states with regard to a ritually impure nazirite who underwent the purification rite: “And he shall sanctify his head on that day” (Numbers 6:11). This means that he renews the sanctity of his hair growth, i.e., begins observing his naziriteship in purity, on the day of the bringing of his offerings, the eighth day of his purification. This is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says: This means that he renews the sanctity of his hair growth on the day of his shaving, the seventh day of his purification.

וְהָא דִּתְנַן: נָזִיר שֶׁנִּטְמָא טוּמְאוֹת הַרְבֵּה — אֵינוֹ מֵבִיא אֶלָּא קׇרְבָּן אֶחָד, מַאן תַּנָּא? אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה הִיא, דְּאָמַר: נְזִירוּת טׇהֳרָה מִשְּׁבִיעִי חָיְילָא. וּמַשְׁכַּחַתְּ לַהּ כְּגוֹן שֶׁנִּטְמָא בַּשְּׁבִיעִי, וְחָזַר וְנִטְמָא בַּשְּׁבִיעִי. (וּמַנִּי, רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה הִיא) כֵּיוָן דְּלֹא יָצָא שָׁעָה הָרְאוּיָה לְהָבִיא קׇרְבָּן — אֵינוֹ חַיָּיב אֶלָּא קׇרְבָּן אֶחָד.

§ The Gemara cites a related halakha : And that which we learned in a mishna ( Karetot 9a): If a nazirite became impure by contracting many consecutive impurities, he brings only one set of offerings. Who taught that? Rav Ḥisda said: It is Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, who said the naziriteship of purity takes effect from the seventh day of his purification process. And you find this, that he contracts ritual impurity several times consecutively, in a case where he became ritually impure on the seventh day and, after undergoing the purification process, again became ritually impure on the seventh day. And whose opinion is it? It is that of Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda. Since the appropriate time to bring an offering had not yet arrived, as all agree that his offerings are only brought on the eighth day, if he became ritually impure a second time he is obligated to bring only one set of offerings.

דְּאִי תֵּימָא רַבִּי הִיא, אִי דְּנִטְמָא בַּשְּׁבִיעִי, וְחָזַר וְנִטְמָא בַּשְּׁבִיעִי (וְחָזַר וְנִטְמָא בַּשְּׁבִיעִי) — כּוּלְּהוּ טוּמְאָה אֲרִיכְתָּא הִיא. וְאִי דְּנִטְמָא בַּשְּׁמִינִי, וְחָזַר וְנִטְמָא בַּשְּׁמִינִי — הֲרֵי יָצְתָה שָׁעָה שֶׁרְאוּיָה לְהָבִיא קׇרְבָּן.

For if you say it follows the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, how can this mishna be explained? If it deals with a nazirite who became ritually impure on the seventh day, and, after undergoing the purification process, again became ritually impure on the seventh day, and, after undergoing the purification process, again became ritually impure on the seventh day, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi would hold that all these impurities are in fact one long ritual impurity, because he never reached the eighth day, which would renew his observance of naziriteship in ritual purity, so the mishna would not refer to this as a case of multiple impurities. And if the mishna is referring to a nazirite who became ritually impure on the eighth day and, after undergoing the purification process, again became ritually impure on the eighth day, the appropriate time to bring an offering had already arrived, and if he becomes ritually impure at that stage, it is not viewed as a continuation of the previous ritual impurity, and he is obligated to bring another set of offerings.

מַאי טַעְמָא דְּרַבִּי? אָמַר קְרָא ״וְכִפֶּר עָלָיו מֵאֲשֶׁר חָטָא עַל הַנָּפֶשׁ״, וַהֲדַר ״וְקִדַּשׁ אֶת רֹאשׁוֹ״. וְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה: אִם כֵּן — לֵימָא קְרָא: ״וְקִדַּשׁ אֶת רֹאשׁוֹ״.

The Gemara clarifies the dispute between Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda: What is the reason for Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s ruling that he begins counting only from the eighth day? The Gemara answers: The verse states: “And the priest shall prepare one for a sin-offering, and the other for a burnt-offering, and make atonement for him, for he sinned by the soul” (Numbers 6:11), and the same verse again states immediately afterward: “And he shall sanctify his head.” This shows that the naziriteship of purity commences only after he has brought his offerings. And Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says in response: If so, if the verse intended to teach us that his naziriteship starts only on the eighth day, let the verse merely state: “And he shall sanctify his head,” since that phrase addresses the bringing of his offerings, which is on the eighth.