Jerusalem Talmud Nazir Chapter 2

הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר מִן הַגְּרוֹגְרוֹת וּמִן הַדְּבֵילָה בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים נָזִיר וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים אֵינוֹ נָזִיר. אָמַר רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אַף כְּשֶׁאָמְרוּ בֵית שַׁמַּאי לֹא אָמְרוּ אֶלָּא בְאוֹמֵר הֲרֵי הֵן עָלַי קָרְבָּן. הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר מִן הַגְּרוֹגְרוֹת כול׳. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. טַעֲמָא דְבֵית שַׁמַּי מִשּׁוּם שֶׁהוֹצִיא נְזִירוּת מִפִּיו. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַר. מִשּׁוּם כִּינּוּיֵי כִינּוּיִין. אָמַר רִבִּי יוּדָה בֶּן פָּזִי. קִרְיָיא מְסַיֵּיעַ לְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. כֹּה אָמַר יי כַּאֲשֶׁר יִמָּצֵא הַתִּירוֹשׁ בָּאֶשְׁכּוֹל וגו׳. תּוֹרָה קָרָאת לָאֶשְׁכּוֹל תִּירוֹשׁ. וּבְנֵי אָדָם קוֹרִין לַגְּרוֹגֶרֶת תִּירוֹשׁ. מִשּׁוּם כִּינּוּיֵי כִינּוּיִין. מַה נְפַק מִבֵּינֵיהוֹן. אָמַר. הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר מִן הַגְּרוֹגְרוֹת וּמִן הַדְּבֵילָה. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן נָזִיר. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרֵישׁ לָקִישׁ אֵינוֹ נָזִיר. הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר מִן הַכִּכָּר. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן נָזִיר. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אֵינוֹ נָזִיר. מִן הַכִּכָּר. לֹא אָמַר כְּלוּם. רִבִּי עוּקְבָא בְעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי מָנָא. מִחְלְפָה שִיטָּתֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. דְּתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן. הֲרֵי עָלַי מִנְחָה מִן הַשְּׂעוֹרִין. יָבִיא מִן הַחִיטִּים. וָמַר רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. שֶׁהוֹצִיא מִנְחָה מִתּוֹךְ פִּיו. וָכָא הוּא אָמַר אָכֵן. אִית לֵיהּ הָכֵין וְאִית לֵיהּ הָכֵין. אִית לֵיהּ מִשּׁוּם שֶׁהוֹצִיא נְזִירוּת מִפִּיו. וְאִית לֵיהּ מִשּׁוּם כִּינּוּיֵי כִינּוּיִין. תֵּדַע לָךְ שֶׁהוּא כֵן. דְּתַנִּינָן. אָמַר. אָמְרָה פָרָה זוֹ. כְּלוּם אָמְרָת. לֹא מִשּׁוּם שֶׁהוֹצִיא נְזִירוּת מִתּוֹךְ פִּיו. וָכָא. מִשּׁוּם שֶׁהוֹצִיא נְזִירוּת מִתּוֹךְ פִּיו. כָּל הַלְּשׁוֹנוֹת מְשַׁמְּשִׁין לְשׁוֹן נְזִירוּת חוּץ מִלְּשׁוֹן קָרְבָּן. כָּל הַלְּשׁוֹנוֹת מְשַׁמְּשִׁין לְשׁוֹן קָרְבָּן חוּץ מִלְּשׁוֹן נְזִירוּת. אָמַר לָאֶשְׁכֹּל. [כָּלוּי] אֲנִי מִמְּךָ. פָּרוּשׁ אֲנִי מִמְּךָ. מָנוּעַ אֲנִי מִמֶּנּוּ. הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר מִמֶּנּוּ. הֲרֵי זֶה נָזִיר. הֲרֵי עָלַי קָרְבָּן. לֹא אֲסָרוֹ עָלָיו אֶלָּא לְשֵׁם קָרְבָּן. אָמַר לַכִּכָּר. כָּלוּי אֲנִי מִמֶּנּוּ. פָּרוּשׁ אֲנִי מִמֶּנּוּ. מָנוּעַ אֲנִי מִמֶנּוּ. הֲרֵי הוּא עָלַי קָרְבָּן. לֹא אֲסָרוֹ עָלָיו אֶלָּא לְשֵׁם קָרְבָּן. הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר מִמֶּנּוּ. הֲרֵי הוּא נָזִיר. אָהֵן מָנוּעִ מְשַׁמֵּשׁ לְשׁוֹן נְזִירוּת וּלְשׁוֹן קָרְבָּן. אָהֵן אֶשְׁכּוֹל אִית בֵּיהּ נְזִירוּת וְאִית בֵּיהּ קָרְבָּן. אָמַר לָאֶשְׁכּוֹל. כָּלוּי אֲנִי מִמֶּנּוּ. בָּא לְאוֹכְלוֹ אוֹמֵר לוֹ. לְדָמִים קָדוֹשׁ. פריו וּבָא לְאוֹכְלוֹ אוֹמֵר לוֹ. לֹא נָזִיר אַתָּה. כָּל הַלְּשׁוֹנוֹת מְשַׁמְּשִׁין לְשׁוֹן חִילּוּל חוּץ מִלְּשׁוֹן תְּמוּרָה. כָּל הַלְּשׁוֹנוֹת מְשַׁמְּשִׁין לְשׁוֹן תְּמוּרָה חוּץ מִלְּשׁוֹן חִילּוּל. אָמַר לְקָדְשֵׁי מִזְבֵּחַ. הֲרֵי זֶה תַּחַת זֶה. תְּמוּרַת זוֹ. חֲלִיפֵי זוֹ. הֲרֵי זוֹ תְּמוּרָה. זוֹ מְחוּלֶּלֶת עַל זוֹ. אֵינָהּ תְּמוּרָה. אָמַר לְקָדְשֵׁי בֶּדֶק הַבַּיִת. הֲרֵי זוֹ תַּחַת זוֹ. חֲלִיפֵי זוֹ. נִתְפְּשָׂה בְדָמִים. תְּמוּרַת זוֹ. לֹא נִתְפְּסָה בְדָמִים. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָה. חֲלִיפֵּי זוֹ. תְּמוּרַת זוֹ. לֹא אָמַר כְּלוּם. אָהֵן מְשַׁמֵּשׁ לְשׁוֹן חִילּוּל וּלְשׁוֹן תְּמוּרָה. אִילֵּין קָדְשֵׁי מִזְבֵּחַ אִית בָּהוּ חִילּוּל וְאִית בָּהוּ תְּמוּרָה. קָדְשֵׁי בֶּדֶק הַבַּיִת שֶׁקָּדַם הֶקְדֵּישָׁן אֶת מוּמָן הֲרֵי זוֹ תַּחַת זוֹ. בָּא לְהַקְרִיב תְּמִימָה אוֹמְרִים לוֹ. לְדָמִים קָדְשָׁה. בָּא לוֹכַל בַּעַל מוּם אוֹמְרִים לוֹ. לִתְמוּרָה קָדְשָׁה. וְהָיָה הוּא וּתְמוּרָתוֹ יִהְיֶה קוֹדֶשׁ. אָמַר רִבִּי יִצְחָק בַּר לָעְזָר. מִכֵּיוָן שֶהוּא יוֹדֵעַ שֶׁכָּל הַמֵּימַר לוֹקֶה אַף הוּא לֹא עָלַת עַל דַּעְתּוֹ לְהָמִיר. כָּל הַלְּשׁוֹנוֹת מְשַׁמְּשִׁין לְשׁוֹן עֲרָכִין חוּץ מִלְּשׁוֹן דָּמִים. כָּל הַלְּשׁוֹנוֹת מְשַׁמְּשִׁין לְשׁוֹן דָּמִים חוּץ מִלְּשׁוֹן עֲרָכִין. אָמַר לְאָדָם. עִילּוּיִין עָלַי. סִידּוּרוֹ עָלַי. שׁוּמוֹ עָלַי. עֶרְכּוֹ עָלַי. נוֹתֵן אֶת עֶרְכּוֹ. דָּמָיו עָלַי. נוֹתֵן אֶת דָּמָיו. אָהֵן שׁוּם מְשַׁמֵּשׁ לְשׁוֹן עֲרָכִים וּלְשׁוֹן דָּמִים. אָהֵן אָדָם אִית בֵּיהּ עֲרָכִים וְאִית בֵּיהּ דָּמִים. אָמַר לְאָדָם. שׁוּמוֹ עָלַי. אִם הָיָה נָאֶה נוֹתֵן אֶת דָּמָיו. אִם הָיָה כָאוּר נוֹתֵן אֶת עֶרְכּוֹ. בֵּית שַׁמַּי אוֹמְרִים. נָדוּר וְנָזוּר. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים. אֵינוֹ נָדוּר וְאֵינוֹ נָזוּר.

MISHNAH: “I shall be a nazir [abstaining] from dried figs and fig cake. ,” the House of Shammai say, he is a nazir ”, he became a nazir . The qualification he appended is irrelevant. (In the Babli, 9a , this argument is attributed to R. Meïr, who thinks that “people do not say nonsensical things.”) , but the House of Hillel say, he is no nazir is permitted figs, his statement makes no sense and nobody can become a nazir by a nonsensical statement since Num . 6:2 requires that the vow of nezirut be “clearly stated.” . Rebbi Jehudah said, when the House of Shammai expressed an opinion, it was about one who said, they are qorban for me by vowing to abstain from figs and fig products. But anybody can make a vow to abstain from figs by declaring them qorban for himself (cf. Introduction to Tractate Nedarim .) . HALAKHAH: “I shall be a nazir [abstaining] from dried figs and fig cake,” etc. Rebbi Joḥanan said, the reason of the House of Shammai: because he mentioned the state of nazir ”, he became a nazir . The qualification he appended is irrelevant. (In the Babli, 9a , this argument is attributed to R. Meïr, who thinks that “people do not say nonsensical things.”) . Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, because of substitutes of substitutes; cf. Chapter 1, Note 19 . In the Tosephta, 2:1 , this is explicitly given as the reason of the House of Shammai. The Tosephta must have been unknown to the editors of the Yerushalmi. . Rebbi Jehudah ben Pazi said, a verse supports Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: “So says the Eternal, as cider is found in the grape bunch, etc. 65:8 . .” The Torah called a grape bunch “cider”. And people call a dried fig cider, because of substitutes of substitutes. What is the difference between them? If he said, “I shall be a nazir [abstaining] from dried figs and fig cake.” In Rebbi Joḥanan’s opinion he is a nazir , in Rebbi Simeon’s opinion he is not a nazir and the entire discussion only proceeds according to the House of Shammai. One has to assume that the person making the vow was asked what he understood by “dried figs.” If he answered, dried figs, R. Simeon ben Laqish cannot consider this as substitutes of substitutes, but for R. Joḥanan he still pronounced the word nazir . (This interpretation is that of Tosaphot Menaḥot 103a, s.v. הריני in the name of Rabbenu Tam.) . “I shall be a nazir [abstaining] from a loaf of bread,” in Rebbi Joḥanan’s opinion he is a nazir , in Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish’s opinion he is not a nazir . “From a loaf of bread,” he did not say anything was not used. One has to assume that the expression הֲרֵינִי was used, since הֲרֵי עָלַי כִכָּר would be a vow to abstain from bread as qorban ( Chapter 1, Notes 44–45 ). . Rebbi Uqba asked before Rebbi Mana: The opinion of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish seems to be inverted, as we have stated there 12:3 . A voluntary flour offering is prescribed as an offering of fine wheat flour. Barley is prescribed only for some purification offerings which cannot be voluntary. : “ ‘I take upon myself the obligation to bring a flour offering from barley.’ He shall bring from wheat.” And Rebbi Abbahu said in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, because he mentioned “flour offering.” And here, he says so? He accepts one and he accepts the other. He accepts because he mentioned the state of nazir , and he accepts because of substitutes of substitutes. You should know that it is so since we have stated: “If he said, the cow said.” She did not say anything; it is because he mentioned the state of nazir , and here he mentioned the state of nazir . Any expressions can be used for nezirut except the expression qorban . Any expressions can be used for qorban except the expression nezirut . If he said about a bunch of grapes, “I am locked away from you, I am separated from you, I am prevented from you, I am nazir from you,” he is a nazir . “It is for me qorban ,” he only forbade it for himself as qorban for me,” he is forbidden all grapes and their derivates but is not a nazir . . If he said about a loaf of bread, “I am locked away from it, I am separated from it, I am prevented from it, it is qorban for me,” he only forbade it for himself as qorban ., any restriction must be interpretated as a vow of qorban . “I am nazir from it,” he is a nazir , not because of any connection with the loaf. . “Prevented” implies both nezirut and qorban . If somebody said about a bunch of grapes, “I am prevented from it,” if he wanted to eat it, one tells him, is it not holy for its money’s worth? If he redeemed it, one tells him, are you not a nazir or nazir , it is both (and, in fact, is a triple vow since qorban may mean either a prohibition “as if it were a qorban ” or an offering to the Temple.) Therefore, when the bunch of grapes was redeemed and its value given to the Temple, the person making the vow still cannot eat it since he might be a nazir (even though one vow cannot be both qorban and nazir .) ? Any expressions can be used for redemption except the expression “exchange”. 27:10 ). While any attempt to redeem the animal while unblemished, i. e., to subtract it to profane status, is simply impossible, the substitution of one unblemished animal for another, while sinful, nevertheless is possible and results in both animals being dedicated to the altar. If an altar animal develops a blemish, its bodily sanctity is reduced to קְדֻשַּׁת דָּמִים “holiness of monetary value.” The animal must be redeemed, i. e., its sanctity transferred to the money paid for it, and the money then used to buy a replacement animal. In this case, a substitution is impossible; there is no shortcut to avoid the redemption process. Anything donated to the Temple treasury has only קְדֻשַּׁת דָּמִים from the start; it can be redeemed but not substituted. . Any expressions can be used for exchange except the expression “redemption.” If he said about dedications to the altar: “this one is for that one, exchange for that one, barter for that one,” it is an exchange. “This is redeemed for that one,” it is no exchange. If he said about dedications for the upkeep of the Temple: “this one is for that one, barter for that one,” its money’s worth is engaged 5:5 ). . “Exchange for that one,” he did not say anything. The other [expressions] serve for redemption and exchange. Dedications to the altar are subject both to redemption and to exchange. [Animals] dedicated for the upkeep of the Temple who were dedicated before developing a defect, “this one is for that one,” if he wants to sacrifice a perfect animal, one tells him that its sanctity is for its money’s worth. If he wants to eat it after it developed a blemish, one tells him that it is holy as exchange: “Itself and its exchange shall be holy. 27:10 . .” Rebbi Isaac ben Eleazar said, since he knows that anybody who exchanges is whipped, it never occured to him to exchange. Any expressions can be used for valuation. 27:1–8 ). The valuation depends on age and gender; it is fixed by the Biblical text (assuming a known ratio of the Biblical šeqel to the local currency.) “Money’s worth” of a person is the value he would fetch if sold as a slave. This worth can be promised by a vow, but not by a valuation. except the expression “money’s worth”. Any expressions can be used for money’s worth except the expression “valuation.” If he said about a human, “I shall pay his cost, I shall pay his settlement, I shall pay his estimate, I shall pay his valuation,” he has to pay his valuation. “I shall pay his money’s worth,” he has to pay his money’s worth. “Estimate” is used as an expression both for valuation and money’s worth. A human has both valuation and money’s worth. If he said about a human, “I shall pay his estimate,” if he was good looking, he pays his money’s worth; if he was ugly, he pays his valuation. The House of Shammai say, he is bound by a vow and is a nazir , but the House of Hillel say, he is neither bound by a vow nor is he a nazir , referring to food permitted to a nazir . The House of Shammai hold that he is forbidden all kinds of dried figs because of his vow, and he is a nazir since he used the word nazir . The House of Hillel hold that an inappropriate choice of words invalidates both vow and nezirut . This rejects R. Jehudah’s interpretation. The parallel in the Babli, 9b , shows that this is a baraita . There, it is given in two versions (of which the Yerushalmi text is a combination). In one, the House of Shammai say, he is bound by a vow and is a nazir , but the House of Hillel say, he is bound by a vow but not a nazir . In the other, the House of Shammai say, he is bound by a vow but not a nazir , but the House of Hillel say, he is neither bound by a vow nor is he a nazir . .

אָמַר אָמְרָה פָרָה זוֹ הֲרֵינִי נְזִירָה אִם עוֹמֶדֶת אֲנִי. אָמַר הַדֶּלֶת הַזֶּה הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר אִם נִפְתָּח אֲנִי. בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים נָזִיר וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים אֵינוֹ נָזִיר. אָמַר רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אַף כְּשֶׁאָמְרוּ בֵית שַׁמַּאי לֹא אָמְרוּ אֶלָּא בְאוֹמֵר הֲרֵי פָרָה זוֹ קָרְבָּן אִם עוֹמֶדֶת הִיא. אָמַר אָמְרָה פָרָה זוֹ כול׳. רָאָה גוֹי עוֹבֵר אָמַר. רְאוּ מָה אָמַר הַגּוֹי הַזֶּה. הֲרֵי זֶה נָזִיר. הֲוָה דָמַר. מֵאַחַר שֶׁאֵין גוֹיִם נוֹזְרִין נָזִיר. לֹא אָמַר. נִשְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא. אָמַר. אָמְרָה פָרָה זֶה. כְּלוּם אָמַרְתָּ. אֶלָּא מִשּׁוּם שֶׁהוֹצִיא נְזִירוּת מִפִּיו. וָכָא שֶׁהוֹצִיא נְזִירוּת מִתּוֹךְ פִּיו. רָאָה יִשְׂרָאֵל עוֹבֵר אָמַר. רָאָה מָה אָמַר יִשְׂרָאֵל זֶה. הֲרֵי זֶה נָזִיר. לֹא אָמַר. מֵאַחַר שֶׁיִשְׂרָאֵל נוֹזְרִין נָזִיר. הֲוָה דָמַר אֲפִילוּ כֵן בְּנָזִיר אוֹ אֵינוֹ אֶלָּא כְשׁוֹנֶה דְבָרוֹ. כָּךְ אֶנִי אוֹמֵר. הָיָה קוֹרֵא בַתּוֹרָה וְהִזְכִּיר נָזִיר נָזִיק. אִישׁ מָהוּ לְהַתְפִּישׂ לוֹ נְזִירוּת בִּלְשׁוֹן אִשָּׁה. תַּמָּן אָמְרִין. הָא נְזִירָה אִי עֲבַר. אִשָּׁה מָהוּ לְהַתְפִּישׂ לָהּ נְזִירוּת בִּלְשׁוֹן אִישׁ. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. כָּל עַצְמוֹ אֵינוֹ קָרוּי נְזִירוּת אֶלָּא בִּלְשׁוֹן אִישׁ. אוֹ אִשָּׁה כִּי יַפְלִיא לִנְדּוֹר נֶדֶר. עַד שֶׁתַּעֲמוֹד הַפָּרָה עַד שֶׁתִּפְתַּח הַדֶּלֶת. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא. בֵּית שַׁמַּי אוֹמְרִים. כּוּלָּן נְזִירִין. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים. אֵינָן נְזִירִין אֶלָּא מִי שֶׁלֹּא נִתְקַיְימוּ דְבָרָיו. כֵּינִי מַתְנִיתָא. מִי שֶׁלֹּא נִתְקַיְימוּ דְבָרָיו. לָשׁוֹן הֶפֶר הוּא. דְּלָהּ מִלָּה קָבְרָת בְּרָהּ. אֲפִילוּ לֹא עָמְדָה פָּרָה. אֶפִילוּ לֹא נִפְתָּח הַדֶּלֶת. בֵּית שַׁמַּי אוֹמְרִים. נָדוּר וְנָזוּר. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים. אֵינוֹ נָדוּר וְנָזוּר.

MISHNAH: If he said: “this cow said, I shall be a nezirah if I be standing up, if she be standing up. For the House of Shammai, he used the word nazir ; for the House of Hillel what he said was meaningless. ” or “this door said, I shall be a nazir if I be open,” the House of Shammai say, he is a nazir , but the House of Hillel say, he is no nazir . Rebbi Jehudah said, when the House of Shammai expressed an opinion, it was only about one who said, this cow shall be qorban for me if she gets up, but he is no nazir . . HALAKHAH: “If he said: ‘this cow said,’ ” etc. If he saw a Gentile passing by and said, “look what this Gentile said..” ” Then he is a nazir . Does this mean that he is a nazir because Gentiles cannot make a vow of nazir must be the Jew’s. ? He has not said anything! Let us hear from the following: “If he said: ‘this cow said’ ”. You said this only because he spoke the word nezirut . And here, he spoke the word nezirut if she be standing up. For the House of Shammai, he used the word nazir ; for the House of Hillel what he said was meaningless. . If he saw a Jew passing by and said, “look what this Jew said.. ” Then he is a nazir . He had not said anything. Does this mean that he is a nazir because Jews make a vow of nazir ? Should we say that nevertheless he is a nazir or is he studying the case? So I am saying, “for example, if he was reading the Torah and mentioned nazir , naziq ., he cannot be a nazir in the present case. ” Can a man be taken to nezirut by language appropriate for a woman? There, they say, “a nezirah was passing by איעבר “passed by” (m.) for אי עבר “did not pass”. This refers to the case discussed in Halakhah 1:1 (Notes 2 ,23) that a person points to a nazir and indicates that he wants to be like him. It is admitted that he can point to a female. ”. Can a man be taken to nezirut by masculine language? Rebbi Yose said, the notion of nezirut is defined in the masculine: “… or a woman if he clearly makes a vow.. 6:2 : “A man or a woman, if he clearly makes a vow”. Since a verb referring both to a male and a female is used in the masculine by traditional grammatical rules, he infers that the masculine can be used in all cases. ” Unless the cow stood up, unless the door was opened? If the cow does stand up or if she never stands up? ? Let us hear from the following if a fact is true, B says that he will be nazir if it is not true, C says that he will be nazir if both A and B are wrong. The House of Shammai say, …” : “The House of Shammai say, they are all nezirim . But the House of Hillel say, only those are nezirim whose words turned out not to be true.” So is the Mishnah if I be standing up”, for the House of Shammai has to be interpreted as a vow of nazir if the cow never stands up, since the cow standing up is the desired outcome; just as a woman who is afraid her son might die will formulate it saying her son certainly will not die. (It is possible to read a similar interpretation into the text of the Babli, 10b .) : “Whose words turned out not to be true;” it is formulated in the opposite, as not to say that she should not bury her son. Even if the cow did not stand up, even if the door was not opened in any case. . The House of Shammai say, he is bound by a vow and is a nazir , but the House of Hillel say, he is neither bound by a vow nor is he a nazir , referring to food permitted to a nazir . The House of Shammai hold that he is forbidden all kinds of dried figs because of his vow, and he is a nazir since he used the word nazir . The House of Hillel hold that an inappropriate choice of words invalidates both vow and nezirut . This rejects R. Jehudah’s interpretation. The parallel in the Babli, 9b , shows that this is a baraita . There, it is given in two versions (of which the Yerushalmi text is a combination). In one, the House of Shammai say, he is bound by a vow and is a nazir , but the House of Hillel say, he is bound by a vow but not a nazir . In the other, the House of Shammai say, he is bound by a vow but not a nazir , but the House of Hillel say, he is neither bound by a vow nor is he a nazir . .

מָזְגוּ לוֹ אֶת הַכּוֹס אָמַר הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר מִמֶּנּוּ הֲרֵי זֶה נָזִיר. מַעֲשֶׂה בְאִשָּׁה אַחַת שֶׁהָיְתָה שִׁכּוֹרָה. מָזְגוּ לָהּ אֶת הַכּוֹס וְאָמְרָה הֲרֵינִי נְזִירָה מִמֶּנּוּ אָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים לֹא נִתְכַוְונָה אֶלָּא כְלוֹמַר הֲרֵי הוּא עָלַי קָרְבָּן. מָזְגוּ לוֹ אֶת הַכּוֹס כול׳. מַתְנִיתָא בְּשֶׁאֵינוֹ יָכוֹל. אֲבָל אִם יָכוֹל הָדָא דְתַנִּינָן. מַעֲשֶׂה בְאִשָּׁה אַחַת שֶׁהָיְתָה שִׁכּוֹרֶת. מָזְגוּ לָהּ אֶת הַכּוֹס. אָמְרָה. הֲרֵינִי נְזִירָה מִמֶּנּוּ. וְאָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים. לֹא נִתְכַוְונָה זוֹ אֶלָּא כְלוֹמַר. הֲרֵי הוּא עָלַי קָרְבָּן. רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי זְעִירָה. אֲפִילוּ לְשׁוֹן קָרְבָּן אֵינוֹ. לָמָּה. שֶׁאֵינוֹ קוֹבֵעַ עָלָיו לֹא נְזִירוּת בִּלְשׁוֹן קָרְבָּן וְלֹא קָרְבָּן בִּלְשׁוֹן נְזִירוּת.

MISHNAH: If a cup of wine was prepared for somebody who then said, “I am a nazir [abstaining] from it”, he is a nazir cannot be partial. Once he mentions nezirut for one cup of wine, he is forbidden all wine, all grapes, all haircuts, and any impurity of the dead. . It happened that a cup of wine was prepared for a woman who already was drunk, when she said, “I am a nazir [abstaining] from it”. The Sages said that she only intended to say, “it shall be qorban for me.” HALAKHAH: “If a cup of wine was prepared,” etc. The Mishnah applies if he is not used to it for one cup is actually a nazir applies only to people who are not used to getting drunk. ; but if he is used to it, that is what we have stated: “It happened that a cup of wine was prepared for a woman who already was drunk when she said, “I am a nazir [abstaining] from it”. The Sages said that she only intended to say, “it shall be qorban for me.” Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rebbi Ze‘ira: It is not even an expression of qorban . Why? Because one can neither use an expression of nezirut for qorban nor an expression of qorban for nezirut .

הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר עַל מְנָת שֶׁאֱהֵא שׁוֹתֶה בַיַּיִן וּמִיטַּמֵּא לַמֵּתִים הֲרֵי זֶה נָזִיר וְאָסוּר בְּכוּלָּן. יוֹדֵעַ אֶנִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ נְזִירִים אֲבָל אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ שֶׁהַנָּזִיר אָסוּר בַּיַּיִן הֲרֵי זֶה אָסוּר בַּיַּיִן וְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מַתִּיר. יוֹדֵעַ אֶנִי שֶׁהַנָּזִיר אָסוּר בַּיַּיִן אֲבָל סָבוּר הָיִיתִי שֶׁחֲכָמִים מַתִּירִין לִי מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵינִי יָכוֹל לִחְיוֹת בְּלֹא יַּיִן אוֹ מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֲנִי קוֹבֵר אֶת הַמֵּתִים הֲרֵי זֶה מוּתָּר וְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹסֵר. מַתְנִיתָא דְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר. דְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר. צָרִיךְ לִכְפּוֹל תמן. דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל הִיא. אָמַר לוֹ. שְׁמוֹר וְשָׁמַעְתָּ. מַתְנִיתָא דְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר וְרִבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן תֵּימָא. דְּתַנֵּי. הֲרֵי זֶה גִיטֵּיךְ עַל מְנָת שֶׁלֹּא תִפְרְחִי בָאֲוֵיר. שֶׁלֹּא תַעַבְרִי אֶת הַיָּם הַגָּדוֹל בְּרַגְלַיִיךְ. הֲרֵי זֶה גֵט. עַל מְנָת שֶׁתִּפְרְחִי בָאֲוֵיר. עַל מְנָת שֶׁתַּעַבְרִי הַיָּם הַגָּדוֹל בְּרַגְלַיִיךְ. אֵינוֹ גֵט. רִבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶֶּן תֵּימָא אוֹמֵר. גֵּט. אָמַר רִבִּי זְעִירָא. תֵּדַע לָךְ שֶׁעִילָּה הָיָה רוֹצֶה לְגָרְשָׁהּ. שֶׁתְּלָאָהּ בִּדְבָרִים שֶׁאֵינָהּ יְכוֹלָה לַעֲמוֹד. מַה טַעֲמָה דְּרִבִּי יוּדָה בֶּן תֵּימָא. מִכֵּיוָן שֶׁתְּלָאָהּ בִּדְבָרִים שֶׁאֵינָהּ יְכוֹלָה לַעֲמוֹד כְּמִי שֶׁנִּתְקַיֵים הַתְּנַאי בַּגֵּט הוּא. מַתְנִיתָא דְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. דְּרִבִּי שִמְעוֹן פּוֹטֶר. שֶׁלֹּא הִתְנַדֵּב כְּדֶרֶךְ הַמִּתְנַדְּבִים. וְאָמַר רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי. שַׁנְיָיא הִיא. שֶׁשִּׁיֵיר תִּגְלַחַת. רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה בָעֵי. אִם בְּשֶׁשִּׁיֵיר תִּגְלַחַת אֱמוֹר דְּבַתְרָהּ. הֲרֵי זֶה אָסוּר וְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מַתִּיר. הֲרֵי שֶׁשִּׁיֵיר תִּגְלַחַת טוּמְאָה רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן פּוֹטֵר. שַׁנְיָיא הִיא. מִשּׁוּם פְּתִיחַת נֵדֶר. אִם מִשּׁוּם פְּתִיחַת נֵדֶר אֱמוֹר דְּבַתְרָהּ. הֲרֵי זֶה מוּתָּר וְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹסֵר. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר. אֵינוֹ פְּתִיחַת נֵדֶר. וְרַבָּנִין אָמְרִין. פְּתִיחַת נֵדֶר הוּא. לָמָּה. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא כְּתוֹלֶה נִדְרוֹ בְּחַיָּו. נִיחָא לִשֳׁתּוֹת יַיִן. לְטַמֵּא לַמֵּתִים. אוּמְנוּתוֹ קוֹבֵר מֵתִים.

MISHNAH: “I am a nazir on condition that I may drink wine or become impure for the dead,” he is a nazir and forbidden everything is defined in the Torah and any stipulation contradicting a biblical law is void ( Ketubot 9:1, Note 5 ). . “I knew that there are nezirim but I did not know that wine is forbidden to the nazir , and when told that wine was forbidden to him declares that at the moment of the vow he was ignorant of its implications. ”; wine is forbidden to him, but Rebbi Simeon permits. 6:2 ). . “I knew that wine was forbidden to the nazir but I thought that the Sages would permit me because I cannot live without wine, or because I am an undertaker;” he is permitted but Rebbi Simeon forbids. HALAKHAH: The Mishnah follows Rebbi Meïr, since Rebbi Meïr says, one has to double one’s stipulation 3:3. A legal stipulation must follow the example of the stipulation between Moses and the tribes of Gad and Reuben ( Num . 32 ), which covers both the positive (if they fulfill the stipulation, they will acquire the land in Transjordan), and the negative (if they fail to fulfill the stipulation, they will be given land in Cisjordan). Since in Mishnah 4 the person declaring himself a nazir failed to state that if he could not be a nazir on his terms, he would not be a nazir , his stipulation is invalid and he is a nazir . . It follows everybody’s opinion; one tells him: Watch and keep discipline. 12:28 ; a poetic formulation of the principle of Note 51 . . The Mishnah follows Rebbi Meïr or Rebbi Jehudah ben Tema, as it was stated 5:12 ; Babli Giṭṭin 84a . : “This is your bill of divorce, on condition that you not fly in the air, that you not cross the Sea on your feet, that is a bill of divorce. On condition that you fly in the air, that you cross the Sea on your feet, that is no bill of divorce; Rebbi Jehudah ben Tema said, it is a bill of divorce.” Rebbi Ze‘ira said, you should realize that he seeks a subterfuge for the bill of divorce, since he may claim that he is waiting for her to satisfy the stipulation. By declaring the stipulation invalid, the court will permit her to remarry and force him to pay. , since he attached conditions that cannot be satisfied. What is Rebbi Jehudah ben Tema’s reason? Since he attached conditions that cannot be satisfied, it is as if the condition attached to the bill of divorce were satisfied. Does the Mishnah follow Rebbi Simeon? For “Rebbi Simeon declares him free, because his offering was not according to the way of offerers. 12:3 . If somebody vows an offering of barley flour (which cannot be a voluntary offering), the rabbis require him to bring an offering of wheat flour but “R. Simeon declares him free, because his offering was not according to the way of offerers.” One should assume that R. Simeon declares a person who wants to be nazir on condition that he may drink wine as “offering not according to the way of offerers.” Why does he not disagree in the first case? ” And Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, there is a difference because he reserved shaving. Rebbi Jeremiah asked: If it is because he reserved shaving, does not the following state “it is forbidden to him, but Rebbi Simeon permits.” Did he not reserve shaving [and] impurity but Rebbi Simeon frees him? There is a difference, because of an opening for the vow Chapter 9), the vow is automatically revoked. In the Babli, 11b , this argument is attributed to Rav Assi. In the Tosephta, 2:3 , it is explicitly attributed to R. Simeon. . If it was because of an opening for the vow, does not the following state “he is permitted but Rebbi Simeon forbids”? Rebbi Simeon does not recognize it as an opening for the vow but the rabbis recognize it as an opening for the vow. Why? Because he connects his vow with his life. One understands, to drink wine. The defile oneself for the dead? It is his profession to bury the dead annulled because he has to defile himself for the dead is the undertaker. .

הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר וְעָלַי לְגַלַּח נָזִיר וְשָׁמַע חֲבֵירוֹ וְאָמַר וַאֲנִי עָלַי לְגַלַּח נָזִיר אִם הָיוּ פִקְחִין מְגַלְּחִין זֶה אֶת זֶה וְאִם לָאו מְגַלְּחִין לִנְזִירִים אֲחֵרִים. הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר וְעָלַי לְגַלַּח נָזִיר כול׳. אָהֵן וַאֲנִי מִתְעַבֵּר לָהּ. וַאֲנִי עַל כָּל דִּיבּוּרוֹ אוֹ וַאֲנִי עַל חֲצִי דִיבּוּרוֹ. אִין תַּעַבְדִּינָהּ וַאֲנִי עַל כָּל דִּיבּוּרוֹ אָמַר. וַאֲנִי נָזִיר. אִין תַּעַבְדִּינָהּ וַאֲנִי עַל חֲצִי דִיבּוּרוֹ וְאָמַר. הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר. תַּנֵּי דְבֵית רִבִּי. וַאֲנִי עַל כָּל דִּיבּוּרוֹ. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. הָדָא אָמְרָה. אַחֵר שֶׁאָמַר. הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר מֵאָה יוֹם. וְשָׁמַע חֲבֵירוֹ וְאָמַר. וַאֲנִי. זֶה נָזִיר מֵאָה יוֹם וְזֶה נָזִיר לִשְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם. עַד שֶׁיֹּאמַר. הֲרֵינִי כְמוֹתוֹ. הֲרֵינִי כָיוֹצֵא בוֹ. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי חִיָיה. הֲרֵי עָלַי לְגַלַּח חֵצִי. וְחָזַר וְאָמַר. הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר. אִם גִּילַּח יוֹם שְׁלֹשִׁים יָצָא. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵה. מַתְנִיתָא אָמְרָה כֵן. הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר וְעָלַי לְגַלַּח נָזִיר. וְשָׁמַע חֲבֵירוֹ וְאָמַר וַאֲנִי. וְאָמַר וְעָלַי לְגַלַּח נָזִיר. אִם הָיוּ פִיקְחִין מְגַלְּחִין זֶה אֶת זֶה. הָא לְעַצְמָן לֹא. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאָמַר. הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר וְעָלַי לְגַלַּח נָזִיר. אֲבָל אָמַר. הֲרֵי עָלַי לְגַלַּח חֲצִי נָזִיר. וְחָזַר וְאָמַר. הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר. אִם גִּילַּח לְעַצְמוֹ יָצָא. נִיחָא שֵׁינִי לְגַלַּח אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹן. רִאשׁוֹן מְגַלֵּחַ אֶת הַשֵּׁינִי. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי זְעִירָא. זֹאת אוֹמֶרֶת שֶׁאָדָם קוֹבֵעַ עָלָיו קָרְבָּן נָזִיר וְעָתִיד לִיזוֹר. רִבִּי חִינְנָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי זְעִירָא אָמַר תְּלַת. הָדָא אָמְרָה. אִם גִּילַּח לְעַצְמוֹ יָצָא. הָדָא אָמְרָה. שֶׁאָדָם קוֹבֵעַ לַחֲבֵירוֹ קָרְבָּן נְזִירוּת לִיזוֹר. הָדָא אָמְרָה. שֶׁאָדָם קוֹבֵעַ לַחֲבֵירוֹ קָרְבָּן נְזִירוּת שֶׁלֹֹּא מִדַּעְתּוֹ. אֲבָל אֵינוֹ מַפְרִישׁוֹ אֶלָּא מִדַּעְתּוֹ. רִבִִּי מָנָא בָּעֵי קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יוּדָן. אָמַר. הֲרֵי עָלַי קָרְבַּן נָזִיר. וְעָתִיד לִיזוֹר בְּשָׁעָה שָׁנָּזַר סְתָם. מְגַלֵּח בֵּין נָזִיר שֶׁכְּבָר נָזִיר בֵּין נָזִיר שֶׁעָתִיד לִיזוֹר. פֵּירַשׁ. יָיבֹא כְהָדָא. רִבִּי לֵוִי בַּר חַיָיתָה בָעֵי. כָּתַב לָהּ. דִּין וּדְבָרִים אֵין לִי בְנִכְסַיִיךְ הָעֲתִידִין לִיפּוֹל לָךְ. מָה הֵן. וְיֵשׁ אָדָם מַתְנֶה עַל דָּבָר שֶׁלֹּא בָא לָעוֹלָם.

MISHNAH: “I shall be a nazir and obligate myself to shave” means to pay for the three required sacrifices which enable a nazir to shave his head. It seems that most nezirim were poor and depended on charity to pay for their sacrifices; cf. Berakhot 7:3, Notes 78–89 . a nazir ,” if another heard him and said: “I also shall be and I obligate myself to shave another nazir ,” if they are clever, they will shave one another; otherwise they have to shave other nezirim . HALAKHAH: “I shall be a nazir and obligate myself to shave a nazir ,” etc. This “I also”, what do you subsume under it? Does “I also” refer to the entire sentence and of paying for another person’s sacrifices. If then he adds a vow to pay for another person’s sacrifices, he should be held liable for two sets of sacrifices. , or does “I also” only refer to part of the sentence? If “I also” refers to the entire sentence, he says “I also am a nazir .” If “I also” only refers to part of the sentence, he said “I am a nazir .” It was stated in the House of Rebbi: “ ‘I also’ refers to the entire sentence.” Rebbi Yose said, this implies that if some person said, I am a nazir for 100 days, and another person heard him and said, “I also”; the first one is a nazir for 100 days, the other is a nazir for 30 days, not to the added term. unless he says, “I am like him, I am the same as he is.” Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: “I am obligated to shave half [a nazir ]. Then he said, I am a nazir . If he shaved after 30 days he has fulfilled his obligation, he can fulfill his obligation by applying the sacrifices to himself. .” Rebbi Yose said, the Mishnah implies this: “ ‘I shall be a nazir and obligate myself to shave a nazir ,’ if another heard him and said: ‘I also shall be and I obligate myself to shave another nazir ,’ if they are clever, they will shave one another.” But not themselves implies the obligation of the sacrifices, a later vow to pay for sacrifices establishes a separate obligation; it cannot be used retroactively for his own obligation. . Because he said, “I shall be a nazir and obligate myself to shave a nazir ”. But if he said, “I obligate myself to shave half a nazir ” and then he said, “I shall be a nazir ,” if he shaved himself he has acquitted himself of his obligation, he can fulfill his obligation by applying the sacrifices to himself. . One understands that the second one can shave the first, but can the first shave the second, not for earlier ones. ? Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Ze‘ira: This means that a person can take upon himself the sacrifice of a nazir who only in the future will make his vow. Rebbi Ḥinena in the name of Rebbi Ze‘ira inferred three [statements]: It implies that if he shaved himself he acquitted himself. It implies that a person obligates himself for another’s nezirut sacrifices of a future vow. It implies that a person chooses another’s nezirut sacrifices without the other’s knowledge. But he cannot dedicate [the animals] without the other’s knowledge whose sacrifices are paid for must be informed of the dedication for it to be valid. The same statement is in Pesaḥim 8:1(35d 1.13), but is denied in the Babli, Nedarim 36a . . Rebbi Mana asked before Rebbi Yudan: If he said “I am obligated for the sacrifices of a nazir ,” might he make the vow of nazir in the future?If he made the vow without explaining whose sacrifices are due on that day. , he may shave any nazir , whether he already made the vow or whether he would make it in the future. If he explained who was not yet a nazir at the time of his vow? ? It can be compared to the following, as Rebbi Levi ben Ḥayyata asked: If he wrote to her 9:1, Notes 22–23 . , “I shall have nothing to do with the properties which you might inherit in the future.” May a person make a condition on things not yet in existence?

הֲרֵי עָלַי לְגַלַּח חֲצִי נָזִיר וְשָׁמַע חֲבֵירוֹ וְאָמַר וַאֲנִי עָלַי לְגַלַּח חֲצִי נָזִיר זֶה מְגַלֵּחַ נָזִיר שָׁלֵם וְזֶה מֶגַלֵּחַ נָזִיר שָׁלֵם דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי מֵאִיר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים זֶה מְגַלֵּחַ חֲצִי נָזִיר וְזֶה מְגַלֵּחַ חֲצִי נָזִיר. הֲרֵי עָלַי לְגַלַּח חֲצִי נָזִיר כול׳. רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן וְרַב חִסְדָּא תְּרַוֵּיהוֹן אָמְרִין. בִּסְתָם חֲלוּקִין. מַה מְקַיְימִין. אִם בְּאוֹמֵר. כָּל חֲצִי רֹאשׁ. כָּל עַמָּא מוֹדוֹי שֶׁהוּא מְגַלֵּחַ נָזִיר שָׁלַם. אִם בְּאוֹמֵר. חֲצִי חוֹבָה. כָּל עַמָּא מוֹדֵיי שֶׁהוּא מְגַלֵּחַ חֲצִי נָזִיר. אָלָּא כֵּן אֲנָן קַיְימִין בְּאוֹמֵר. חֲצִי. רִבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר בְּאוֹמֵר. חֲצִי רֹאשׁ. וְרַבָּנִין אָמְרִין. בָּאוֹמֵר חֲצִי חוֹבָה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוּדָן. אַשְׁכַּח אָמַר קַלָּת וְחוּמְרָת. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר דּוּ אָמַר. חֲצִי רֹאשׁ. מֵבִיא קָרְבָּן אֶחָד. שֶׁכֵּן הַנָּזִיר מְגַלֵּחַ עָלָיו קָרְבָּן שָׁלֵם. עַל דַּעְתּוֹן דְּרַבָּנִין דְּאִינּוּן אָמְרִין. חֲצִי חוֹבָה. מֵבִיא קָרְבָּן וּמֶחֱצָה חֲצִי חוֹבַת יָחִיד.

MISHNAH: “I am taking upon myself to shave half a nazir ,” and his neighbor heard it and said, “I also am taking upon myself to shave half a nazir ,” each one of them shaves an entire nazir , the words of Rebbi Meïr must either be brought whole or not at all; the vow for half the sacrifices (which would be 1½ animals) is impossible. Since he made the vow, it has to be interpreted as a vow for a whole set of animals. . But the Sages say, each of them shaves half a nazir . . HALAKHAH: “I am taking upon myself to shave half a nazir ,” etc. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan and Rav Ḥisda both say that they disagree if it was not spelled out. What are we dealing with? If he said, every half head, everybody agrees that he completely shaves a nazir . If he says, half of the obligation, everybody agrees that he shaves half a nazir . But we are dealing with the case that he says: “half”. Rebbi Meïr says, as if he said half a head, but the rabbis said, as if he said, half of the obligation. Rebbi Yudan said, it turns our that leniency is a restriction. In the opinion of Rebbi Meïr who said, as if he had said half a head, he brings one sacrifice since the nazir can shave on one sacrifice can shave even if he brings only one sacrifice. (Note that the vow is interpreted as meaning “half a head”, not “every half head”). . In the opinion of the rabbis who said, half of the obligation, he has to pay for a sacrifice and a half, half of the obligation of a person.

הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר כְּשֶׁיְהֵא לִי בֶן וְנוֹלַד לוֹ בֵן הֲרֵי זֶה נָזִיר. בַּת טוּמְטוּם וְאַנְדְרוֹגֵינֹס אֵינוֹ נָזִיר. אִם אָמַר כְּשֶׁאֶרְאֶה לִי וְולָד אֲפִילוּ נוֹלַד לוֹ בַת טוּמְטוּם וְאַנְדְרוֹגֵינֹס הֲרֵי זֶה נָזִיר. הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר כְּשֶׁיְהֵא לִי בֶן כול׳. בַּת לֹא כְּלוּם. טוּמְטוּם וְאנְדְרוֹגֵינֹס צְרִיכָה.

MISHNAH: “I shall be a nazir if I have a son,” when a son is born to him, he is a nazir ; if a daughter, a sexless, or a hermaphrodite 8:6 ; Notes 224–237; Niddah 1:1, Notes 27,28. , he is not a nazir . If he said, “when I see a child of mine,” even if a daughter, a sexless, or a hermaphrodite were born to him he is a nazir . HALAKHAH: “I shall be a nazir if I have a son,” etc. A daughter counts for nothing, a sexless or a hermaphrodite are questionable whose validity is in doubt must be kept. There is no problem for the majority who hold that a vow of nazir whose validity is in doubt is void. The Babli, 13a , disagrees and accepts the Mishnah as everybody’s opinion. .

הִפִּילָה אִשְׁתּוֹ אֵינוֹ נָזִיר. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר יֹאמַר אִם הָיָה בֶּן קַיָימָא הֲרֵינִי נְזִיר חוֹבָה וְאִם לָאו הֲרֵינִי נְזִיר נְדָבָה. חָזְרָה וְיָלְדָה הֲרֵי זֶה נָזִיר. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר יֹאמַר אִם הָרִאשׁוֹן בֶּן קַיָימָא הָרִאשׁוֹנָה חוֹבָה וְזוֹ נְדָבָה וְאִם לָאו הָרִאשׁוֹנָה נְדָבָה וְזוֹ חוֹבָה. הִפִּילָה אִשְׁתּוֹ אֵינוֹ נָזִיר כול׳. וְחָשׁ לוֹמַר שֶׁמָּא בֶּן קַיָימָה הוּא. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. דְּרִבִּי יוּדָה הִיא. דְּרִבִּי יוּדָה אָמַר. סְפֵק נְזִירוּת מוּתָּר. אָמַר לֵיהּ. לֹא אָמַר רִבִּי יוּדָה אֶלָּא לְבַסּוֹף. אֲבָל לְכַתְּחִילָּה אוֹף רִבִּי יוּדָה מוֹדֵיי. אֵי זֶהוּ בַּתְּחִילָּה וְאֵי זֶהוּ בַסּוֹף. אָמַר רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר רַב יִצְחָק. כָּל עַמָּא מוֹדֵיי. אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ אִם נָזַרְתִּי וְאִם לֹא נָזַרְתִּי. אָהֵן הוּא בַּתְּחִילָּה. אִם מ̇ וְאִם נֹ. אָהֵן הוּא בַּסּוֹף. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן אָמַר. אִיתְפַּלְּגוֹן רִבִּי חִיָיה בַּר בָּא וְרִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר רַב יִצְחָק. כָּל עַמָּא מוֹדֵיי. אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ אִם נָזַרְתִּי וְאִם לֹא נָזַרְתִּי. אָהֵן הוּא בַּתְּחִילָּה. אִם מ̇ וְאִם נֹ. הָהֵנּוּ בַּסּוֹף. מַה פְלִיגִין. אִם אַחַת אִם שְׁתַּיִם. רִבִּי חִיָיה בַּר בָּא עֲבַד לֵיהּ כְּבַסּוֹף. רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל עֲבַד לֵיהּ כְּבַתְּחִילָּה. רִבִּי מָנָא. אִם אַחַת אִם שְׁתַּיִם צְרִיכָה לְרִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר רַב יִצְחָק. הוּא כְּבַתְּחִילָּה הוּא כְּבַסּוּף.

MISHNAH: If his wife had a miscarriage, he is not a nazir . Rebbi Simeon says, he should say: If it was a viable child, I am a nazir as an obligation, if not, I am a nazir voluntarily in doubt must be kept. . If afterwards she had a child, he is a nazir after the stillbirth. . Rebbi Simeon says, he should say: If the earlier one was a viable child, I earlier was a nazir as an obligation, and now I am a nazir voluntarily; otherwise, I earlier was a nazir voluntarily, and now I am a nazir as an obligation. HALAKHAH: “If his wife had a miscarriage,” etc. Should one not be afraid that he might have been viable? Rebbi Joḥanan said, [the Mishnah] is Rebbi Jehudah’s, since Rebbi Jehudah said, any doubt of nezirut is permitted if I have a son,’ and there was a son born to him but it is doubtful whether he is viable or not. R. Jehudah frees him since a doubt of nezirut is permitted. R. Simeon obligates him since a doubt of nezirut is forbidden.” . It was said to him that Rebbi Jehudah said so only for the end; but for the start even Rebbi Jehudah will agree has to be kept. . What is beginning and what is end? Rebbi Samuel ben Rav Isaac said, everybody agrees that “I do not know whether I made a vow of nazir or not,” is at the beginning, “whether it was for 30 or 50 days”, is at the end had to precede the statement of duration. . Rebbi Yose ben Rebbu Abun said: Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba and Rebbi Samuel ben Rav Isaac disagreed: Everybody agrees that “I do not know whether I made a vow of nazir or not,” is at the beginning, “whether it was for 30 or 50 days”, is at the end. Where do they disagree? If it was once or twice. . Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba considered it the end, Rebbi Samuel considered it the beginning. Rebbi Mana: The problem for Rebbi Samuel ben Rav Isaac about one or two times is whether it is the beginning or the end.

הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר וְנָזִיר כְּשֶׁיִּהְיֶה לִי בֶן הִתְחִיל מוֹנֶה אֶת שֶׁלּוֹ וְאַחַר כָּךְ נוֹלַד לוֹ בֵן מַשְׁלִים אֶת שֶׁלּוֹ אַחַר כָּךְ מוֹנֶה אֶת שֶׁל בְּנוֹ. הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר כְּשֶׁיְּהֵא לִי בֶן וְנָזִיר הִתְחִיל מוֹנֶה אֶת שֶׁלּוֹ וְאַחַר כָּךְ נוֹלַד לוֹ בֵן מַנִּיחַ אֶת שֶׁלּוֹ וּמוֹנֶה אֶת שֶׁל בְּנוֹ וְאַחַר כָּךְ מַשְׁלִים אֶת שֶׁלּוֹ. הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר וְנָזִיר כְּשֶׁיִּהְיֶה לִי בֶן כול׳. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בָעֵי. אָמַר. הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר לִשְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם אֵילּוּ וְלִשְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם אֵילּוּ. אָמַר רִבִּי זְעִירָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי מָנָא. וְלֹא מַתְנִיתָא הִיא. מַנִּיחַ אֶת שֶׁלּוֹ וּמוֹנֶה אֶת שֶׁלִּבְנוֹ. לֹא אֲפִילוּ אִשְׁתּוֹ יוֹשֶׁבֶת עַל הַמַּשְׁבֵּר. אָמַר לֵיהּ. נְזִירוּתוֹ לִנְזִירוּת בְּנוֹ לֹא דַמְיָא. אֶלָּא אָמַר. הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר מִכְּבָר וְנָזִיר לְאַחַר עֶשְׂרִים יוֹם. רִבִּי לָעְזָר וְרִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֶּן חֲנִינָה תְּרֵיהוֹן אָמְרִין. הִשְׁלִים נְזִירוּתוֹ לְעוֹלָם אֵין נְזִירוּת בְּנוֹ חָלָה עָלָיו עַד שֶׁתְּהֵא קָרְבַּן מְגַלֵּחַ. נָזִיר שֶׁנִּיטְמָא. מִחְלְפָה שִׁיטָּתֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֶּן חֲנִינָה. תַּמָּן הוּא אָמַר. טָמֵא מֵת שֶׁנָּזַר שְׁבִיעִי שֶׁלּוֹ עוֹלֶה מִן הַמִּינְיָין. נָזִיר שֶׁנִּיטְמָא אֵין שְׁבִיעִי שֶׁלּוֹ עוֹלֶה מִן הַמִּינְיָין. וָכָא לֹא כְטָמֵא מֵת שֶׁנָּזַר הוּא. וְלֹא טָמֵא מֵת שֶׁנָּזַר שְׁבִיעִי שֶׁלּוֹ עוֹלֶה מִן הַמִּינְיָין. שֶׁהוּא זָקוּק לוֹ לְהָבִיא קָרְבָּן טוּמְאָה. וְלֹא נָזִיר שֶׁנִּיטְמָא אֵין שְׁבִיעִי שֶׁלּוֹ עוֹלֶה לוֹ מִן הַמִּינְיָין. שֶׁאֵינוֹ זָקוּק לְהָבִיא קָרְבָּן טוּמְאָה. וָכָא הוֹאִיל וְהוּא זָקוּק לְהָבִיא קָרְבָּן טוּמְאָה הַשְּׁבִיעִי שֶׁלּוֹ עוֹלֶה מִן הַמִּינְיָין. שִׁמְעוֹן בַּר אַבָּא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. נִיטְמָא בִנְזִירוּת בְּנוֹ וְהִתְרוּ בוֹ מִשּׁוּם נְזִירוּתוֹ לוֹקֶה. הִפְרִישׁ קָרְבְּנוֹתָיו קָדְשׁוּ. לֹא חָשִׁין לְהָדָא דְתַנֵּי רִבִּי חִיָיה. קָרְבָּנוֹ לַיי עַל נִזְרוֹ. שֶׁיִּקְדּוֹם נִזְרוֹ לְקָרְבָּנוֹ. לֹא שֶׁיִּקְדּוֹם קָרְבָּנוֹ לְנִזְרוֹ. רִבִּי יוּדָה בְּעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. וְתִקְדּוֹם נְזִירוּתוֹ לִנְזִירוּת בְּנוֹ. לֹא כֵן אָמַר רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. הֲרֵי זֶה עוֹלָה לְאַחַר ל̇ יוֹם. מְכָרָהּ בְּתוֹךְ ל̇ יוֹם מְכוּרָה וְהֶקְדֵּישָׁהּ קָדְשָׁה. אָמַר. לֹא בָאוֹמֵר. הֲרֵי זוֹ. דִּילְמָא בְאוֹמֵר. הֲרֵי עָלַי. וְהָאוֹמֵר. הֲרֵי אֲנִי. כָּאוֹמֵר. הֲרֵי עָלַי. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי חִיָיה. נָזִיר לְאַחַר עֶשְׂרִים יוֹם נָזִיר מֵעַכְשָׁיו לְמֵאָה יוֹם. הֲרֵי זֶה מוֹנֶה עֶשְׂרִים יוֹם וּמַפְסִיק וְחוֹזֵר וּמוֹנֶה עוֹד ל̇ יוֹם וְחוֹזֵר וּמוֹנֶה עוֹד שְׁמוֹנִים כְּדֵי לְהַשְׁלִים נְזִירוּתוֹ הָרִאשׁוֹנָה.

MISHNAH: “I am a nazir and a nazir when a son is born to me.” If he started counting for himself when a son was born to him, he finishes his own and then counts for his son. “I am a nazir when a son is born to me, and a nazir .” If he had started counting for himself when a son was born to him he interrupts his own, counts for his son, and then finishes for himself. HALAKHAH: “ “I am a nazir and a nazir when a son is born to me,” etc. Rebbi Yose asked: If he said, “I am a nazir for these 30 days and those 30 days. for 30 days and then bring two sets of sacrifices to fulfill both vows? ” Rebbi Ze‘ira said before Rebbi Mana: Is that not the Mishnah? “He interrupts his own, counts for his son, and then finishes for himself.” Not even if his wife is in the process of giving birth for his son and only then his own even though they might start on the same day. ? He said to him, his nezirut is not comparable to his son’s nezirut , but to the case that he said, “I am already a nazir and a nazir after twenty days. not after 20 days but after 30 days and after he acquitted himself of his obligatory sacrifices. ” Rebbi Eleazar and Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina both say: If he finished his nezirut , his son’s nezirut cannot start for him before he was shaving with a sacrifice. About a nazir who became impure, the opinions of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina seem contradictory. There, he says, if a person impure by the impurity of the dead made a vow of nazir , his seventh day is counted. 19 ). There is no reason why he cannot start a period of nezirut on that same day. Quoted in the Babli, 17a , 18a . . If a nazir becomes impure, his seventh day is not counted 112 . 6:10 ). . In our case. , is he not like a person impure by the impurity of the dead, who made a vow of nazir ? And is not the seventh day counted for a person impure by the impurity of the dead, who made a vow of nazir ? Would this obligate him to bring a sacrifice for his impurity? But if a nazir who becomes impure, his seventh day is not counted; does it not obligate him to bring a sacrifice for his impurity? And here, because he is obligated to bring a sacrifice (of impurity), but it is not a sacrifice for impurity. , the seventh day is [not] cannot start before he has acquitted himself of his prior obligations; therefore the 30 th day of his nezirut , which corresponds to the 7 th day of impurity, cannot be counted. counted for him. Simeon bar Abba in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: If he polluted himself during his son’s nezirut but was warned because of his own nezirut , he is whipped is forbidden by biblical law to pollute himself with the impurity of the dead ( Num . 6:6–7 ), if he pollutes himself intentionally and his criminal intent was ascertained because he was warned by two witnesses not to pollute himself and he did it anyway, he is punished in criminal law. In order to lead to prosecution, the warning must correctly state the law which might be broken. . If he dedicated his sacrifices, they are sanctified are only one extended vow. There, it is disputed by R. Simeon ben Laqish. . One does not consider what Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: “His sacrifice to the Eternal for his nezirut ,. 6:21 . Tosephta 2:6 , Halakhah 3:2 (52c 1. 37), Šebuot 4:4 (35c 1. 58) { Num. rabba 10:42}. In the parallel sources, the statement is accepted as practice. ” i. e., his vow of nazir should precede his sacrifice, rather than that his sacrifice precede his vow of nazir . Rebbi Judah asked before Rebbi Yose: Why should his nezirut not precede that of his son when his son was born, why should he not finish his own and only then start the nezirut honoring his son’s birth? ? Did not Rebbi Abbahu say in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: “This animal shall be dedicated as elevation sacrifice after 30 days.” If he sold it within the thirty days, it is sold; its dedication sanctifies 3:1, 63c 1. 42.) . He said, is that not, if one said “This”. Perhaps if he said: “I have the obligation is personal and has to be dealt with under the rules of personal responsibility. ”? But the one who says, “I am”, is like one who says, “I have the obligation.” Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: “ Nazir after twenty days and nazir 100 days from now on.” He counts twenty days, interrupts and counts another 30 days, and counts another 80 to complete his first nezirut after 30 days and simultaneously makes a vow immediately to be a nazir for 100 days. Then he starts his immediate nezirut for 20 days, continues to count the 30 days of his other nezirut , brings his sacrifices and shaves, and counts the remaining 80 days of his immediate nezirut and brings the second set of sacrifices. Since the continuation of the interrupted nezirut is for more than 30 days, it is a valid nezirut and he does lose the initial 20 days. .

הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר כְּשֶׁיְּהֵא לִי בֵן וְנָזִיר מֵאָה יוֹם. נוֹלַד לוֹ בֵן עַד שִׁבְעִים לֹא יַפְסִיד כְּלוּם. לְאַחַר שִׁבְעים סוֹתֵר שִׁבְעִים שֶׁאֵין תִּגְלַחַת פָּחוֹת מִשְּׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם. הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר כְּשֶׁיְּהֵא לִי בֵן כול׳. פְּשִׁיטָא שֶׁבְּסוֹף הַיּוֹם עוֹלֶה לוֹ כְּכוּלּוֹ. תְּחִילַּת הַיּוֹם מָהוּ שֶׁיַּעֲלֶה לוֹ כְּכוּלּוֹ. וְלֹא מַתְנִיתָא הִיא. לְאַחַר שִׁבְעִים סוֹתֵר שִׁבְעִים. לֹא אֲפִילוּ מִקְצַת. הָדָא אָמְרָה. שֶׁתְּחִילַּת הַיּוֹם עוֹלֶה לוֹ כְּכוּלּוֹ. נוֹלַד בְּיוֹם שְׁמוֹנִים סוֹתֵר עֲשָׂרָה. נוֹלַד בְּיוֹם תִּשְׁעִים סוֹתֵר עֶשְׂרִים. הִשְׁלִים נְזִירוּתוֹ וּבָא לְהַשְׁלִים נְזִירוּת בְּנוֹ. נִיטְמָא בְּתוֹךְ עֲשָׂרָה יָמִים הָרִאשׁוֹנִים סוֹתֵר הַכֹּל. בְּתוֹך עֶשְׂרִים יָמִים הָאַחֲרוֹנִים. רִבִּי בָּא בְשֵׁם רַב וְרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן תְּרֵיהוֹן אָמְרִין. סוֹתֵר שְׁלֹשִׁים. רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר. אֵינוֹ סוֹתֵר אֶלָּא שֶׁבַע. שְׂמוּאֵל בַּר בָּא בְעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יָסָא. מִיסְבַּר סְבַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. סְתִירַת תַּעַר כִּסְתִירַת מַמָּשׁ. אָמַר רִבִּי זְעִירָא. אִין יִסְבּוֹר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. סְתִירַת תַּעַר כִּסְתִירַת מַמָּשׁ. לָמָּה לִי לְמֵימַר. סוֹתֵר לִשְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם. וְיִסְתּוֹר הַכֹּל. אָמַר רִבִּי אָבִין בַּר חִיָיה קוֹמֵי רִבִּי זְעִירָא. תִּיפְתָּר שֶׁנּוֹלַד בְּיוֹם שֶׁאֵינוֹ רָאוּי לְהָבִיא קָרְבָּן. הַגַּע עַצְמָךְ שֶׁנּוֹלַד בַּלַּיְלָה הֲרֵי אֵינוֹ רָאוּי לְהָבִיא קָרְבָּן. רָאוּי הוּא. לַיְלָה הוּא שֶׁגָּרַם. הַגַּע עַצְמָךְ הֲרֵי שֶׁנּוֹלַד בַּשַּׁבָּת הֲרֵי אֵינוֹ רָאוּי לְהָבִיא קָרְבָּן. רָאוּי. שַׁבָּת הִיא שֶׁגָּרְמָה. הִשְׁלִים נְזִירוּתוֹ וְלֹא הִסְפִּיק לְגַלֵּחַ עַד שֶׁנּוֹלַד בַּשַׁבָּת הֲרֵי אֵינוֹ רָאוּי לְהָבִיא קָרְבָּן. רָאוּי. שַׁבָּת הִיא שֶׁגָּרְמָה. הִשְׁלִים נְזִירוּתוֹ וְלֹא הִסְפִּיק לְגַלֵּחַ עַד שֶׁנּוֹלַד הַבֵּן. מְגַלֵּחַ תִּגְלַחַת אַחַת לִשְׁתֵּיהֶן. הִפְרִישׁ קָרְבְּנוֹתָיו וְלֹא הִסְפִּיק לְגַלֵּחַ עַד שֶׁנּוֹלַד הַבֵּן. תַּמָּן אָמְרִין. מְגַלֵּחַ תִּגְלַחַת אַחַת עַל שְׁתֵּיהֶן. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר. מְגַלֵּחַ וְחוֹזֵר וּמְגַלֵּחַ. מַתְנִיתָא פְלִיגָא עַל רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. שָׁאֲלוּ אֶת רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי. הֲרֵי שֶׁהָיָה נָזִיר וּמְצוֹרָע מָהוּ שֶׁיְּגַלַּח תִּגְלַחַת אַחַת וְתַעֲלֶה לוֹ לִנְזִירוּתוֹ וּלְצָרַעֲתוֹ. אָמַר לָהֶן. אִילּוּ זֶה מְגַלֵּחַ לְהַעֲבָרַת שִׂיעֵר. יָפֶה הָיִיתָ אוֹמֵר. אֶלָּא שֶׁהַנָּזִיר מְגַלֵּחַ לְהַעֲבִיר שִׂיעֵר וּמְצוֹרָע מְגַלֵּחַ לְגִידּוּל שִׂיעֵר. אָמְרוּ לוֹ. לֹא תַעֲלֶה לוֹ יְמֵי גְמָרוֹ. לֹא תַעֲלֶה לוֹ יְמֵי סְפִירוֹ. שְׁנֵיהֶן מְגַלְּחִין לְהַעֲבָרַת שִׂיעֵר. אָמְרוּ לוֹ. אִילּוּ זֶה מְגַלֵּחַ לִפְנֵי זְרִיקַת דָּמִים וְזֶה מְגַלֵּחַ לִפְנֵי זְרִיקַת דָּמִים יָפֶה הָיִיתָ אוֹמֵר. אֶלָּא שֶׁהַנָּזִיר מְגַלֵּחַ לִפְנֵי זְרִיקַת דָּמִים וּמְצוֹרָע מְגַלֵּחַ לְאַחַר זְרִיקַת דָּמִים. אָמְרוּ לוֹ. לֹא תַעֲלֶה לוֹ יְמֵי גְמָרוֹ. לֹא תַעֲלֶה לוֹ יְמֵי סְפִירוֹ. שְׁנֵיהֶן מְגַלְּחִין לִפְנֵי זְרִיקַת דָּמִים. אָמַר לָהֶן. אִילּוּ זֶה מְגַלֵּחַ לִפְנֵי בִּיאַת הַמַּיִם וְזֶה מְגַלֵּחַ לִפְנֵי בִּיאַת הַמַּיִם יָפֶה הָיִיתָ אוֹמֵר. אֶלָּא שֶׁהַנָּזִיר מְגַלֵּחַ לִפְנֵי בִּיאַת הַמַּיִם וְהַמְּצוֹרָע מְגַלֵּחַ לְאַחַר בִּיאַת הַמַּיִם. אָמְרוּ לוֹ. תֶּקֶן הַדָּבָר. לֹא תַעֲלֶה לוֹ יְמֵי גְמָרוֹ לֹא תַעֲלֶה לוֹ יְמֵי סְפִירוֹ. לֹא תַעֲלֶה לוֹ לְטָהֵר לֹא תַעֲלֶה לוֹ לְטַמֵּא. הֲרֵי שֶׁהָיָה נָזִיר וּמִצוֹרָע. אֲבָל אִם הָיָה נָזִיר וְנָזִיר מְגַלֵּחַ תִּגְלַחַת אַחַת עַל שְׁתֵּיהֶם. מָה עֲבַד לָהּ רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. פָּתַר לָהּ. חֲלוּקִים הֵן עַל רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי.

MISHNAH: “I shall be a nazir if a son is born to me and a nazir for 100 days. immediately. ” If a son is born to him in less than 70 [days], he should not lose anything, after his son’s birth he starts counting 30 days, brings his sacrifices and shaves, and then finishes the count of the days missing for the vow of 100 days. . After 70 [days], he reduces to 70 since no shaving is for less than 30 days for 30 days after his celebration for his son. . HALAKHAH: ““I shall be a nazir if a son is born to me,” etc. It is obvious that the end of a day is counted as a full [day] which by Mishnah 9 starts automatically at the moment of birth. . Is the start of a day counted as a full day on his own count, does the day also count as a full day for the father? ? Is that not the Mishnah: “after 70 [days], he reduces to 70,” not even a part. Therefore, the 70 th day counts for both. In the Babli, 15a , this a statement attributed to Rav. ? This implies that the start of a day is counted as a full day. If he was born on the eightieth day, he eliminates ten are counted, the last 10 are disregarded. (A gloss in Tosaphot 13b, s.v. לאחר has a different explanation.) . If he was born on the ninetieth day, he eliminates twenty. If he finished his nezirut and came to complete his son’s nezirut and became impure within the first ten days, he eliminates everything and he starts counting his son’s days, as long as his 100 days are not completed, any impurity of the dead will invalidate all his nezirut ( Mishnah 3:4 ). If the impurity occurs after he has counted 100 days, his days are immunized; the question is only what happens to the days he counts for his son. . Within the last twenty days? Rebbi Abba in the name of Rab and Rebbi Joḥanan both say, he eliminates thirty as prescribed in the Mishnah. . Rebbi Samuel said, he eliminates seven only. Samuel bar Abba asked before Rebbi Yose: Does Rebbi Joḥanan think that eliminating by a shaving knife is identical with substantial eliminating is forbidden to shave. If he shaves anyway, he loses 30 days of his count ( Mishnah 6:5 ). But impurity of his body, called here “substantial”, invalidates everything from the start. ? Rebbi Ze‘ira said, if Rebbi Joḥanan thought that eliminating by a shaving knife is identical to substantial eliminating, why would he say that he eliminates thirty for 100 days becomes impure (being defiled by a corpse) at any time before he has completed his count, he has to start a new count. ? Should he not invalidate everything? Rebbi Abin bar Ḥiyya said before Rebbi Ze‘ira: Explain it if he was born on a day unsuitable to bring a sacrifice has to start anew if he was defiled before he could have offered his sacrifices. Could one think of a situation where he had finished his count and still could not have offered sacrifices? The answer is negative. . Think of it, if he was born in the night 3:5 , 6 (73c 1. 8,10), Babli 20b , Sifra Ṣaw Pereq 18(7 ), based on Lev . 7:38 . , is that not unsuitable to bring a sacrifice? It is suitable; the night caused it. Think of it, if he was born on the Sabbath, is that not unsuitable to bring a sacrifice? It is suitable; the Sabbath caused it. If he had finished his nezirut but did not manage to shave when [the son] was born on the Sabbath, is that not unsuitable to bring a sacrifice? It is suitable; the Sabbath caused it. If he had finished his nezirut but did not manage to shave before his son was born starts on the day of the birth. He now cannot bring the sacrifices for thr prior nezirut since this would involve shaving his hair. , he celebrates one shaving for both. If he had dedicated his sacrifices but did not manage to shave before his son was born. There. , they say that he celebrates one shaving for both. Rebbi Joḥanan said, he shaves and then shaves a second time. A baraita disagrees with Rebbi Joḥanan: . 38 (best Sifry text in Yalqut Šim‘ony Num . #709). “They asked, the persons who ask are R. Eleazar ben Šamua‘ and R. Joḥanan the Alexandrian. Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai: Assume that he was both a nazir and a sufferer from scale disease. 14 ) requires the healed patient to shave all his hair after a preliminary ceremony (14:8), undergo a week of quarantine, shave again, including even his eyebrows (14:9), and offer his sacrifices the next day (14:10). The only impurity forbidden to the nazir is the impurity of corpses; therefore, it is quite possible for a sufferer from scale disease to be a nazir (even though such a person could never shave before he is healed since he cannot enter the Temple precinct.) , may he shave once and have it counted for his nezirut and his scale disease? He said to them: If he shaved is better: “If each of them shaved …”. In the Babli: “If both of them shaved to grow or both of them to remove.” to remove hair, you would be correct. But the nazir shaves to remove hair whereas the sufferer from scale disease shaves to have hair grow. They said to him, if it cannot be counted for the days of his completeness. 13, passim ), it is severe while his diagnosis is complete ( Lev . 13:45 , 46 ), and it is minor again during his quarantine in the process of purification. What Yerushalmi, Tosephta, and Sifry call גמרו “his completeness (of diagnosis)”, the Babli calls חֲלוּטוֹ “his absoluteness”. , should it not be counted for the days of his count.) ? Both of them shave to remove hair. (They said to him). . If both of them shaved before the sprinkling of the blood, you would be correct. But the nazir shaves before the sprinkling of the blood and the sufferer from scale disease shaves after the sprinkling of the blood! They said to him, if it cannot be counted for the days of his completeness, should it not be counted for the days of his count? Both of them shave before the sprinkling of the blood!). One should read with the Babli: “But the nazir shaves after the sprinkling of the blood and the sufferer from scale disease shaves before the sprinkling of the blood.” The nazir shaves after the sacrifices have been brought ( Num . 6:18 ) while the person healed from scale disease shaves the day before he brings his sacrifices. The problem is that the students declare that both the nazir and the sufferer from scale disease in his preliminary purification shave before the sprinkling of the blood; this seems to presuppose the uncorrected reading in the preceding sentence. The only way to make sense of the statement is also to emend this sentence: “Both of them shave after the sprinkling of the blood,” and to refer to the blood of the bird used in the preliminary ceremony of the sufferer from scale disease ( Lev . 14:7 ). He said to them, if both shaved before they immerse themselves in water, you would be correct. But the nazir shaves before he immerses himself in water and the sufferer from scale disease shaves after he immerses himself in water shaves after he immerses himself in water and the sufferer from scale disease shaves before he immerses himself in water.” The nazir shaves in the Temple, therefore he had to immerse himself in water to be able to enter the Temple. The sufferer from scale disease is required to shave before he immerses himself ( Lev . 14:9 ). . They said to him, the matter is settled. It cannot be counted for the days of his completeness, it cannot be counted for the days of his count. It cannot be counted for purification; it cannot be counted for impurity] is pure; it counts if he is impure.” The impure nazir shaves on the seventh day of his purification; this may be before he immerses himself. He has to shave before he brings his sacrifice on the eighth day. Therefore, a healed sufferer from scale disease who also is an impure nazir may combine his first shaving for his healing together with the shaving for his impure nezirut . . That is, if he was a nazir and sufferer from scale disease. But if he was a nazir and nazir , he may shave once for both.” What does Rebbi Joḥanan do with this? He explains that they disagree with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish is declared to be R. Simeon ben Laqish’s personal opinion, it is a minority opinion which does not represent practice. .