Jerusalem Talmud Nazir Chapter 5

בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים הֶקְדֵּשׁ טָעוּת הֶקְדֵּשׁ וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים אֵינוֹ הֶקְדֵּשׁ. כֵּיצַד אָמַר שׁוֹר שָׁחוֹר שֶׁיֵּצֵא מִבֵּיתִי רִאשׁוֹן הֲרֵי הוּא הֶקְדֵּשׁ וְיָצָא לָבָן בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים הֶקְדֵּשׁ וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים אֵינוֹ הֶקְדֵּשׁ. דֵּינָר זָהָב שֶׁיַּעֲלֵה בְיָדִי רִאשׁוֹן הֲרֵי הוּא הֶקְדֵּשׁ וְעָלָה שֶׁלְּכֶסֶף בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים הֶקְדֵּשׁ וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים אֵינוֹ הֶקְדֵּשׁ. חָבִית שֶׁלְּיַיִן שֶׁתַּעֲלֶה בְיָדִי רִאשׁוֹנָה הְרֵי הִיא הֶקְדֵּשׁ וְעָלְתָה שֶׁלְּשֶׁמֶן בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים הֶקְדֵּשׁ וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים אֵינוֹ הֶקְדֵּשׁ. בֵּית שַׁמַּי אוֹמְרִים הֶקְדֵּשׁ טָעוּת הֶקְדֵּשׁ כול׳. תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. הַמִּתְכַּוֵּין לוֹמַר תְּרוּמָה וְאָמַר מַעֲשֵׂר. מַעֲשֵׂר וְאָמַר תְּרוּמָה. עוֹלָה וְאָמַר שְּׁלָמִים. שְּׁלָמִים וְאָמַר עוֹלָה. אָמַר רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה. בָּא לוֹמַר חוּלִין וְאָמַר עוֹלָה. קִדְּשָׁהּ. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. בְּמִתְכַּוֵּין לְהַקְדִּישׁ אֲנָן קַיָימִין אֶלָּא שֶׁהוּא טוֹעֶה מִשׁוּם דָּבָר אחת. הִיא מַתְנִיתָא מַה הִיא. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי יִרְמְיָה בְמַחְלוֹקֶת. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵי דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל. בִּשְׂפָתַיִם. לֹא בַּלֵּב. יָכוֹל שֶׁאֲנִי מוֹצִיא אֶת הַגּוֹמֵר בַּלֵּב. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר לְבַטֵּא. שְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר. הַגּוֹמֵר בְּלֵב אֵינוֹ חַיָיב עַד שֶׁיּוֹצִיא בִשְׂפָתָיו. וְהָתַנֵּי. כֹּל נְדִיב לֵב. זֶה הַגּוֹמֵר בַּלֵּב. אַתָּה אוֹמֵר. זֶה הַגּוֹמֵר בַּלֵּב. אוֹ אֵינוֹ אֶלָּא הַמּוֹצִיא בִשְׂפָתָיו. כְּשֶׁהוּא אוֹמֵר מוֹצָא שְׂפָתֶיךָ תִשְׁמוֹר וְעָשִׂיתָ הֲרֵי הַמּוֹצִיא בִשְׂפָתָיו אָמוּר. הָא מַה אֲנִי מְקַיֵים כֹּל נְדִיב לֵב. זֶה הַגּוֹמֵר בַּלֵּב. מָאן דָּמַר שְׁמוּאֵל לְקָרְבַּן. תַּמָּן תַּנִינָן. הַמְּכַנֵּס מָעוֹת וְאָמַר. הֲרֵי אֵילּוּ לְשִׁקְלִי. בֵּית שַׁמַּי אוֹמְרִים. מוֹתָרָן נְדָבָה. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים. מוֹתָרָן חוּלִין. שֶׁאָבִיא מֵהֶן שִׁקְלִי. שָׁוִין שֶׁמּוֹתָרָן חוּלִין. אֵילּוּ לְחַטָּאתִי. שָׁוִין שֶׁמּוֹתָרֵיהֶן נְדָבָה. מֵהֶן חַטָּאתִי. שָׁוִין שֶׁמּוֹתָרֵיהֶן חוּלִין. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר. מַה פְלִיגִין. בִּמְכַנֵּס פְּרוֹטְרוֹט. אֲבָל בְּאוֹמֵר. אֵילּוּ. כָּל עַמָּא מוֹדֵיי שֶׁהַמּוֹתָר נְדָבָה. רִבִּי חִזְקִיָּה רִבִּי בֵּיבַי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי לָ‍עְזָר. מַה פְלִיגִין. בִּמְכַנֵּס פְּרוֹטְרוֹט. אֲבָל בְּאוֹמֵר. אֵילּוּ. כָּל עַמָּא מוֹדֵיי שֶׁהַמּוֹתָר חוּלִין. אָמַר רִבִּי חִזְקִיָּה. מַתְנִיתָא מְסַיְיעָא לְרִבִּי בֵּיבַי. אָמַר רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. מַה בֵין שְׁקָלִים לַחַטָּאת. אֶלָּא שֶׁהַשְּׁקָלִים יֵשׁ לָהֶן קִיצְבָּה. מָה נָן קַיָימִין. אִם בְּאוֹמֵר. שֶׁאָבִיא מֵהֶן שְׁקָלִים. כָּל עַמָּא מוֹדֵיי שֶׁהַמּוֹתָר נְדָבָה. אִם בְּאוֹמֵר. שֶׁאָבִיא מֵהֶם חַטָּאתִי. כָּל עַמָּא מוֹדֵיי שֶׁהַמּוֹתָר חוּלִין. אֶלָּא כֵּן אֲנָן קַיָימִין בְּאוֹמֵר. אֵילּוּ. שְׁקָלִים עַל יְדֵי שֶׁקִּצְבָּתָן מִן הַתּוֹרָה מוֹתָרָן חוּלִין. חַטָּאת עַל יְדֵי שֶׁאֵין קִצְבָּתָן מִן הַתּוֹרָה מוֹתָרָהּ נְדָבָה. מָה עֲבַד לָהּ רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. פָּתַר לָהּ בִּמְכַנֵּס פְּרוֹטְרוֹט כְּבֵית הִלֵּל. הִפְרִישׁ שִׁקְלוֹ. סָבוּר הוּא שֶׁהוּא חַיָיב וְנִמְצָא שֶׁאֵינוֹ חַיָיב. לֹא קָדַשׁ. הִפְרִישׁ שְׁנַיִם. סָבוּר שֶׁחַיָיב שְׁנַיִם וְנִמְצָא שֶׁאֵינוֹ חַיָיב אֶלָּא אַחַת. אוֹתוֹ הַשֵּׁינִי מָה אַתְּ עֲבַד לֵיהּ. סָבַר שֶׁהוּא חַיָיב וְנִמְצָא שֶׁאֵינוֹ חַיָיב. בְּאוֹמֵר. אֵילּוּ. הִפְרִישׁ חַטָּאתוֹ. סָבוּר שֶׁהוּא חַיָיב וְנִמְצָא שֶׁאֵינוֹ חַיָיב. לֹא קָדְשָׁה. הִפְרִישׁ שְׁתַּיִם. סָבוּר שֶׁהוּא חַיָיב שְׁתַּיִם וְנִמְצָא שֶׁאֵינוֹ חַיָיב אֶלָּא אַחַת. אוֹתָהּ הַשְּׁנִיָיה מָה אַתְּ עֲבַד לָהּ. סָבוּר שֶׁחַיָיב וְנִמְצָא שֶׁאֵינוֹ חַיָיב. אוֹ בְאוֹמֵר. אֵילּוּ. תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. הָאוֹמֵר. הֲרֵי עָלַי בַּמַּחֲבַת. וְהֵבִיא בַמַּרְחֶשֶׁת. בַּמַּרְחֶשֶׁת. וְהֵבִיא בַּמַּחֲבַת. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. דְּבֵית שַׁמַּי הִיא. דְּבֵית שַׁמַּי אוֹמְרִים. הֶקְדֵּשׁ טָעוּת הֶקְדֵּשׁ. רִבִּי זְעִירָה בְּעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. וְלָמָּה לֵי נָן פָּ‍תְרִין לָהּ דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל בְּאוֹמֵר בַּמַּחֲבַת אָמַרְתִּי. אֲבָל אִם אָמַר. הֲרֵי עָלַי בַּמַּחֲבַת. וְחָזַר וְאָמַר. בַּמַּרְחֶשֶׁת. יָצָא. אָתָא רִבִּי חֲנִינָא וְרִבִּי יָסָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל הִיא. רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה בָעֵי. אָמַר. הֲרֵי עָלַי אוֹ בַמַּחֲבַת אוֹ בַמַּרְחֶשֶׁת. וְחָזַר וְאָמַר. בַּמַּחֲבַת. וְחָזַר וְאָמַר. בַּמַּרְחֶשֶׁת. רִבִּי יוּדָה בַּר פָּזִי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי אָחָא רִבִּי חָמָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. קוֹבְעָן אֲפִילוּ בְפֶה. סָ‍בְרִין מֵימַר. אֲפִילוּ יָמִים טוֹבִים קוֹבְעִין. אֲפִילוּ כֵלִים קוֹבְעִין. תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי יוּדָה אוֹמֵר. עָשָׂה שׁוֹגֵג כְּמֵזִיד בִּתְמוּרָה. וְלֹא עָשָׂה שׁוֹגֵג כְּמֵזִיד בְּמוּקְדָּשִׁין. חִזְקִיָּה אָמַר. לְשׁוֹגֵג בְּלֹא תַעֲשֶׂה וּלְמֵמִיר בְּלֹא תַעֲשֶׂה. אֲבָל אִם בָּא לוֹמַר חוּלִין וְאָמַר עוֹלָה. קָדְשָׁה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. בָּא לוֹמַר חוּלִין וְאָמַר עוֹלָה. קָדְשָׁה. אֲבָל אִם בָּא לוֹמַר עוֹלָה וְאָמַר חוּלִין לֹא קָדְשָׁה. וַתְיָיא דְּרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן כְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי יוּדָה בִּתְמוּרָה כפרתה דְּרִבִּי יִרְמְיָה עַל דְּבֵית שַׁמַּי בְּמוּקְדָּשִׁין. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן נִיחָא. עָשָׂה שׁוֹגֵג כְּמֵזִיד בִּתְמוּרָה. וְלֹא עָשָׂה שׁוֹגֵג כְּמֵזִיד בְּמוּקְדָּשִׁין. בְּמַקְדִּישׁ בְּכוֹר. וּמִי קָדַשׁ. לֹא כֵן אָמַר רִבִּי חִיָיה וְרִבִּי אָחָא רִבִּי יָסָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. הִקְדִּישׁ בְּכוֹר וְעָלָה לַמִּזְבֵּחַ אֲפִילוּ לְדָמִים לֹא קָדַשׁ. הִקְדִּישׁ בַּעַל מוּם לַמִּזְבֵּחַ אֲפִילוּ בִתְמוּרָה לֹא קָדְשָׁה. אֶלָּא הַמַּקְדִּישׁ בַּעַל מוּם עוֹבֵר. וּמְחוּבָּר הוּא לְמַכּוֹת. אָמַר רִבִּי יוּדָן אָבוֹי דְּרִבִּי מַתַּנְיָה. תִּיפְתָּר בִּמְקַדֵּשׁ תְּמִימִין לְבֶדֶק הַבַּיִת. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי יוּדָה בְּשִׁיטַּת אָבִיו. הִקְדִּישׁ תְּמִימִים לְבֶדֶק הַבַּיִת עוֹבֵר בַּעֲשֵׂה. מְנַיִין בְּלֹא תַעֲשֶׂה. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר וִיְדַבֵּר יי אֶל מֹשֶׁה לֵאמוֹר. לָאו אָמוּר. דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי יוּדָה. רִבִּי הֲוָה יְתִיב מַתְנֵי בְפָרָשַׁת אֵין מֵמִירִין בִּבְכוֹר וְחוֹלִין אָבוֹי דְּבַר פְּדָיָיה. חַמְתֵּיהּ רִבִּי. אָמַר. אֲנָא יְדַע מָה אֲנָא אֲמַר כְּדוֹן אֲנָא מֵימַר וַיְדַבֵּר יי אֶל מֹשֶׁה לֵּאמוֹר. לֹא יֵימַר דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי יוּדָה. וּכְתִיב כֵּן. דָּמַר רִבִּי אִמִּי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. גּוֹרְעִין לִדְרוֹשׁ מִתְּחִילַּת הַפָּרָשָׁה לְסוֹפָהּ. רִבִּי חֲנִינָה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה. וַאֲפִילוּ בְאֶמְצַע הַתֵּיבָה. וְיָצַקְתָּ עָלֶיהָ שֶׁמֶן מִנְחָה הִיא. וְיָצַקְתָּ מִשֶׁמֶן מִשחָה. לְרַבּוֹת כָּל הַמְנָחוֹת לִיצִיקָה. תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. שׁוֹם הַיְתוֹמִין שְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם. שׁוֹם הֶקְדֵּשׁ שְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם. וּמַכְרִיזִין בַּבּוֹקֶר וּבָעֶרֶב. אָמַר רִבִּי מָנָא. רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר חָשַׁשׁ עַל הַעֲרָמָה. רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ לֹא חָשַׁשׁ עַל הַעֲרָמָה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן. אַתְיָא דְּרִבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר כְּבֵית שַׁמַּי וּדְרִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ כְּבֵית הִלֵּל. דְּרִבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר כְּבֵית שַׁמַּי. דְּבֵית שַׁמַּי אוֹמְרִים. אָדָם נִשְׁאַל עַל הֶקְדֵּישׁוֹ. וְהוּא דַהֲוָה אָמַר. אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לְהַדִיר הֲנָיָיה. וּדְרִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ כְּבֵית הִלֵּל. דְּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים. אֵין אָדָם נִשְׁאַל עַל הֶקְדֵּישׁוֹ. וְהוּא דַהֲוָה אָמַר. צָרִיךְ לְהַדִיר הֲנָיָיה. מַה נַפְשֵׁךְ. תְּהֵא בוֹ הָאִישׁ הַזֶּה שֶׁיִּשְׁאַל עַל הֲנָיָיתוֹ. מוֹדֶה רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בְּעָרֵב שֶׁהוּא צָרִיךְ לְהַדִּיר הֲנָיָיה. מָה אָמַר רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בְּמַתָּנָה. מִכֵּיוָן שֶׁהוּא נוֹתֵן מַתָּנָה בְּעַיִן יָפָה אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לְהַדִּיר הֲנָיָיה. אוֹ מֵאַחַר שֶׁהוֹרַע כּוֹחוֹ וְהוּא חוֹזֵר בּוֹ צָרִיךְ לְהַדִּיר הֲנָיָיה. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא. קְרֵיבָתֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי חַגַּיי הֲוָה בַּעַל חַיָיב קַרְטֵס. אָתָא מָרֵי חוֹבָא וְטָרַף. אָתָא עוֹבְדָא קוֹמֵי דְרִבִּי אָחָא. אָמַר. צָרִיךְ לְהַדִיר הֲנָיָיה. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי אָמַר. אֵין צָרִיךְ לְהַדִיר הֲנָיָיה. אָמְרִין חֲבֵרַיָיא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי אָחָא רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. יְאוּת אָמַר רִבִּי אָחָא. דְּאִין חָזַר הוּא עָלֶיהָ לֹא אָתֵי מָרֵי חוֹבָה וְטָרַף. אָמַר לוֹן רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. עַבְדָּה לוֹן תַכְשִׁיטִין עַבְדָּה לוֹן פָּרָה פֶרְנוֹן. אָמַר רִבִּי חַגַּיי. מֹשֶׁה. יְאוּת אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. וּנְפַק עוֹבְדָא כְרִבִּי אָחָא. תַּמָּן אַתְּ אָמַר. תֵּצֵא וְתִרְעֶה בָעֵדֶר. וָכָא אַתְּ אָמַר אָכֵין. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן. תַּמָּן לִנְזִירוּתוֹ נִשְׁאַל. מִכֹּחַ נְזִירוּת יָצְאוּ קָרְבְּנוֹתָיו לַחוּלִין. רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי חוּנָה רִבִּי חִזְקִיָּה רִבִּי אָחָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. כָּל עַמָּא מוֹדֵיי שֶׁאֵין נִשְׁאַל עַל תְּמוּרָתוֹ. מַה פְלִיגִין. בְּהֶקְדֵּישׁוֹ. שֶׁבֵּית שַׁמַּי אוֹמְרִים. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁאֵין אָדָם נִשְׁאַל עַל תְּמוּרָתוֹ כָּךְ אֵין נִשְׁאַל עַל הֶקְדֵּישׁוֹ. בֵּית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים. אָדָם נִשְׁאַל עַל הֶקְדֵּישׁוֹ וְאֵין נִשְׁאַל עַל תְּמוּרָתוֹ. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ בְּשֵׁם בַּר קַפָּרָא. אִם תּוֹפְשׂוֹ מִשֵּׁם שׁוֹר מִשֵּׁם רִאשׁוֹן. שׁוֹר שָׁחוֹר שֶׁיֵּצֵא מִבַּיִת רִאשׁוֹן. וְיָצָא לָבָן וְיָצְאוּ שְׁחוֹרִין אַחֲרָיו. אַתְּ תּוֹפְשׂוֹ מִשּׁוּם רֹאשׁ לַשְּׁחוֹרִים. שׁוֹר לָבָן שֶׁיֵּצֵא מִבֵּיתִי רִאשׁוֹן. וְיָצָא שָׁחוֹר וְיָצְאוּ לְבָנִים אַחֲרָיו. אַתְּ תּוֹפְשׂוֹ מִשּׁוּם רֹאשׁ לַלְּבָנִים. שׁוֹר שֶׁעָמַד עַל הָאֵבוּס. וְנִמְצָא רָבוּץ. רָבוּץ. וְנִמְצָא עוֹמֵד. יְהֵא בָהּ כְּהָדָא דָמַר רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. נִתְכַּוֵון לִתְרוֹם כְּרִי חִיטִּין וְתָרַם שְׂעוֹרִים. בַּלַּיְלָה לֹא עָשָׂה כְּלוּם. בַּיּוֹם מַה שֶׁעָשָׂה עָשׂוּי. שְׁחַמְתִּית. וְנִמְצֵאת אַגְרוֹן. אֲפִילוּ בַּיּוֹם לֹא עָשָׂה כְּלוּם. אַיִל. לֹא כְּלוּם. עֵגֶל. אִין. דִּכְתִיב וְעֵגֶל בֶּן בָּקָר לְחַטָּאת. כֶּבֶשׂ. לֹא כְּלוּם. סְלָעִים. לֹא כְּלוּם. פּרוֹטְרוֹט. לֹא כְּלוּם. דֵּינָר זָהָב. קָדַשׁ.

MISHNAH: The house of Shammai say, dedication in error is dedication, but the House of Hillel say, dedication in error is not dedication. How? If one said, the black ox which comes out of my house first shall be dedicated, and a white one came out; the house of Shammai say, it is dedicated it be black,” the House of Shammai will agree that there is no dedication. Since oxen are possible as sacrifices, the dedication mentioned here is dedication as sacrifice. , but the House of Hillel say, it is not dedicated. The gold denar which first comes into my hand shall be dedicated, but it was a silver one; the house of Shammai say, it is dedicated, but the House of Hillel say, it is not dedicated. The wine amphora which first comes into my hand shall be dedicated, but it was a one of oil; the house of Shammai say, it is dedicated, but the House of Hillel say, it is not dedicated vow made in error treated in Mishnah 4 . . HALAKHAH: “The House of Shammai say, dedication in error is dedication.” There 3:8. The following two paragraphs are Halakhah Terumot 3:8, explained there in Notes 85–92 . , we have stated: “If somebody intends to say heave but says tithe, tithe but says heave, fire offering but says well-being offering, well-being offering but says fire offering.” Rebbi Jeremiah said, if he intends to say “profane” and says “fire sacrifice”, he dedicated it. Rebbi Yose said, we consider only whether he intended to dedicate but erred because of something else. What is the status of this Mishnah? In the opinion of Rebbi Jeremiah it is in dispute, in the opinion of Rebbi Yose it is everybody’s opinion. “With his lips but not in his mind.” I could think that I exclude him who decides in his mind; the verse says ( Lev . 5:4 ): “To articulate”. But Samuel said, he who decides in his mind is not obligated until he pronounces with his lips. But did we not state: “( Ex . 35:5 ) Everyone who volunteers in his mind,” that is he who decides in his mind. You say, that is he who decides in his mind, but maybe that is he who pronounces with his lips? When he says ( Deut . 23:24 ): “What comes out from your lips you have to keep,” that speaks about him who pronounces with his lips. Therefore, how can I confirm “every one who volunteers in his mind?” That is he who decides in his mind. What Samuel said refers to a sacrifice. There 2:3 . , we have stated: “If somebody collects coins and says, ‘these are for my Temple tax ( Ex . 30:13 ). While the relation of the biblical ŝeqel to currency in circulation may have varied from time to time, at the beginning of the tax season the amount was clearly stated and known to everybody ( Mishnah Šeqalim 2:4 ). Therefore, nobody who mentions the Temple tax will intend to dedicate more than the stated amount. In contrast, a purification sacrifice can be a sheep or a goat ( Lev . 4 ), in special circumstances also a couple of birds or a flour offering ( Lev . 5 ). ,’ the House of Shammai say, the excess should be given as a donation, but the House of Hillel say, the excess is profane. ‘That I shall be able to pay my Temple tax,’ they agree that the excess is profane. ‘These [monies] are for my purification offering’, they agree that the excess is profane.” 2:3 . The Yerushalmi text reproduced in the Babli ( editio princeps ) is too closely adapted to Babylonian spelling to be useful for variant readings. Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: When do they disagree? If he collects little by little. But if he says “these,” everybody agrees that the excess should be given as a donation. Rebbi Ḥizqiah, Rebbi Bevai in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: When do they disagree? If he collects little by little. But if he says “these,” everybody agrees that the excess is profane. Rebbi Ḥizqiah said, the Mishnah 2:4. supports Rebbi Bevai: “Rebbi Simeon says, what is the difference between Temple tax and purification sacrifices? Only that the Temple tax is a fixed amount ( Ex . 30:13 ). While the relation of the biblical ŝeqel to currency in circulation may have varied from time to time, at the beginning of the tax season the amount was clearly stated and known to everybody ( Mishnah Šeqalim 2:4 ). Therefore, nobody who mentions the Temple tax will intend to dedicate more than the stated amount. In contrast, a purification sacrifice can be a sheep or a goat ( Lev . 4 ), in special circumstances also a couple of birds or a flour offering ( Lev . 5 ). .” Where do we hold? If he says, “that I shall use it for the Temple tax,” everybody agrees that the excess should be given as a donation text: “Is profane” (as explained in Note 13 ). . If he says, “that I shall use it for my purification offering,” everybody agrees that the excess is profane text: “Should be given as a donation” (as explained in Note 13 ). . But we are considering one who says “these.” Since the Temple tax has a fixed rate from the Torah, the excess is profane. Since purification offerings do not have a fixed rate from the Torah, the excess should be given as a donation. How does Rebbi Yose handle this? He explains it if he collects little by little, following the House of Hillel. If somebody put aside his Temple tax in the belief that he owed it and it turned out that he did not owe, it was not dedicated. If he put aside two in the belief that he owed twice and it turned out that he owed only once, how do you treat the second? If he believed that he owed it and it turned out that he did not owe, [or as] if he said: “these”? , this is introduced with a referral clause, “let us hear from the following.” That clause is correctly missing in the present text since the argument from Šeqalim is not presented here. If somebody put aside a purification sacrifice in the belief that he owed it and it turned out that he did not owe, it was not dedicated. If he put aside two in the belief that he owed two and it turned out that he owed only one, how do you treat the second? As if he believed that he owed it and it turned out that he did not owe, or as if he had said “these” it is stated that the dedication is not removed automatically, that the second animal has to be sent to graze until it develops a defect or becomes too old to be an acceptable sacrifice. The implied conclusion seems to be that the redemption money for that animal is a donation to the Temple. ? There 12:2 . , we have stated: “If somebody says, ‘I undertake [to bring] on a pan. 2:5–6 . ’ and he brought in a deep vessel. 2:7 . , in a deep vessel and he brought on a pan.” Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: This is the House of Shammai’s. 12:26 ), the House of Hillel should hold that an offering which does not fulfill the specification of the donor’s vow has to be rejected by the officiating priests. But for the House of Shammai, who hold that a dedication is always valid, even if made in error, the nonconforming offering is not profane. , since the House of Shammai say, “dedication in error is dedication.” Rebbi Ze‘ira asked before Rebbi Yose: Why do we not explain it according to everybody, if he said, “I said, on a pan”? But if he said, “I undertake [to bring] on a pan,” and then he changed his mind and said, “in a deep vessel”, he fulfilled his duty. Rebbi Ḥanina and Rebbi Yasa came in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: it is everybody’s opinion. Rebbi Jeremiah asked: If he said, “I undertake [to bring] on a pan or in a deep vessel,” turned around and said, “on a pan”, and turned around and said, “in a deep vessel”? Rebbi Jehudah bar Pazi in the name of Rebbi Aḥa, Rebbi Hama in the name of Rebbi Yose: He determines even orally it follows that the donor’s statement determines the kind of cereal sacrifice he is required to bring, even if as yet he owes no flour. . They thought to say, even holidays determine, even vessels determine. There 2:3 . , we have stated: “Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah says, He. 27:10 ff. made error equal to intent for substitution, but not for sacrifices.” Ḥizqiah said, in error: a prohibition, the one who substitutes: a prohibition. 27:10 ). A person who intentionally violates this prohibition is whipped. It is asserted that a person who unintentionally violates the prohibition is also whipped (see the next paragraph). But a dedication in error is not a dedication for the House of Hillel. . If he wants to say “profane” but said “an elevation sacrifice”, it is sanctified. 23:24 ). . If he wants to say “an elevation sacrifice” but said “profane”, it is not sanctified. It follows that Rebbi Joḥanan, interpreting Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah, parallels Rebbi Jeremiah’s explanation 3:8, Note 86 ). regarding the House of Shammai on sacrifices. In Rebbi Joḥanan’s opinion, may one understand that “He made error equal to intent for substitution, but not for sacrifices,” if somebody dedicates a firstling? to state that substitution in error is substitution, dedication in error is not dedication. But he insists that for R. Yose ben R. Jehudah, substitution in error is criminally punishable. Now everybody agrees that dedication in error is not punishable, but where do we find that intentional dedication should be punishable, to justify R. Yose ben R. Jehudah’s formulation? The answer is that the dedication of a firstling (which must be given to a Cohen) for any other sacrifice is forbidden ( Lev . 27:26 ) and, therefore, should be subject to criminal prosecution. Can it be dedicated? Did not Rebbi Ḥiyya, Rebbi Aḥa, and Rebbi Yasa say in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: If somebody dedicated a firstling and it was brought to the altar, it is not sanctified even for its money’s worth. If somebody dedicated a blemished animal for the altar, even as a substitute it is not sanctified. But if somebody dedicated an animal with a temporary blemish. Is that consistent, Bulletin, Verband jüdischer Lehrer und Kantoren der Schweiz Nr. 21, 1977, pp. 4–5. with whipping? Rebbi Yudan, Rebbi Mattaniah’s father, said, explain it if he gave unblemished animals for the upkeep of the Temple. 27:9 to reserve such animals for the altar. However, that rule is formulated as an obligation, not as a prohibition and, therefore, involves no prosecutable offense. In the next paragraph it is established that R. Jehudah and his son found a biblical source which allows one to find a prohibition in Lev . 27:9 . The rule of R. Yose ben Jehudah is valid only for him and his father, not for most other Sages. . Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah follows his father’s method: If somebody dedicated unblemished animals for the upkeep of the Temple, he violates a positive commandment. 27:9 . . Why also a prohibition? The verse says: “The Eternal spoke to Moses לאמר”. 27:1 . It is assumed that this heading applies also to the paragraph Lev . 27:9–34 since v. 9 starts with a connecting ו. : a prohibition was pronounced, the words of Rebbi Jehudah. Rebbi was sitting and studying the rule that “a firstling cannot be substituted” when Bar Pedaiah’s father was passing by. Rebbi saw him, and said, do I know what I should say here, “the Eternal spoke to Moses לאמר,” could one explain the words of Rebbi Jehudah? Is it written thus? 5:1 ( ס ), explained there in Notes 8–10 , Horaiot 1:3 ( ה ). It follows what Rebbi Immi said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: For interpretation, one removes from its beginning to its end. Rebbi Ḥanina in the name of Rebbi Jeremiah: Even a middle word. “You have to pour oil on.” You have to pour oil on a flour offering, to subject all flour offerings to pouring. There, we have stated 6:1. The argument refers to the part of the Mishnah which is not quoted: “The public sale of orphans’ property goes on for 30 days, the public sale of Temple property goes on for 30 days, and one publicly announces mornings and evenings. If somebody dedicates his property while the lien if favor of a wife’s ketubah was in effect, Rebbi Eliezer says, if he would divorce her, he has to make her vow not to have any usufruct from him; Rebbi Joshua says, it is not necessary. Similarly, Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says regarding a guarantor of a woman’s ketubah whose husband divorces her, that he shall make him execute a vow of usufruct lest he could plot against his property and take his wife back.” : “The public sale of orphans’ property goes on for 30 days, the public sale of Temple property goes on for 30 days, and they are publicly announed mornings and evenings.” Rebbi Mana said, Rebbi Eliezer is afraid of trickery from the Temple, she cannot remarry him. R. Eliezer suspects that a husband who donates his property to the Temple might want to get it back by divorcing his wife, waiting until she has collected her ketubah , then remarrying her and receiving the ketubah money as dowry. , Rebbi Joshua is not afraid of trickery. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, Rebbi Eliezer follows the House of Shammai and Rebbi Joshua the House of Hillel 23a . . Rebbi Eliezer follows the House of Shammai, since the House of Shammai say, a person may ask about his dedication; could he say that he does not have to vow usufruct?, Introduction p. 422, Chapter 9). Therefore, the text must read: דְּבֵית שַׁמַּי אוֹמְרִים. אֵיו אָדָם נִשְׁאַל עַל הֶקְדֵּשׁוֹ. וְהוּא דַהֲוָה אָמַר. אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לְהַדִיר הֲנָייָה. וּדְרִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ כְּבֵית הִלֵּל. דְּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים. אָדָם נִשְׁאַל עַל הֶקְדֵּשׁוֹ. וְהוּא דַהֲוָה אָמַר. צָרִיךְ לְהַדִיר הֲנָייָה. “Rebbi Eliezer follows the House of Shammai, since the House of Shammai say, a person may not ask about his dedication; could he say that he does not have to vow ususfruct? Rebbi Joshua follows the House of Hillel, since the House of Hillel say, a person may ask about his dedication; could he say that he has to vow usufruct?” The “vow of usufruct” is a vow never to have any usufruct from the person designated in the vow. Rebbi Joshua follows the House of Hillel, since the House of Hillel say, a person may not ask about his dedication; could he say that he has to vow usufruct? In any case, could not a man ask about his vow of usufruct? Rebbi Joshua agrees that a guarantor must execute a vow of usufruct is collected from a third party has to promise never to take her back. It is not that the guarantor has to vow; he has to ask the divorcing couple for their vows. . What does Rebbi Joshua say about a gift? Since he gives voluntarily, he does not have to vow usufruct, or since [the recipient’s] power is small and [the donor] may change his mind, does he have to vow usufruct? Let us hear from the following: The husband of a relative of Rebbi Ḥaggai owed on a document, “papyrus, roll of papyrus”. . The creditor came and foreclosed. The case preceded the creditor’s loan document. came before Rebbi Aḥa, who said, he. owes a vow of usufruct. Rebbi Yose said, he does not have to vow usufruct. The colleagues said before Rebbi Aḥa [and] Rebbi Yose: Does Rebbi Aḥa say it correctly? Since if he takes her back, does not the creditor come and foreclose? Rebbi Yose said to them, she turns it into jewelry or keeps it as additions to her dowry 5:10, Note 218 . Before the marriage, they sign a stipulation that the husband shall have no rights to the property. Then the creditor would be left without recourse. . Rebbi Ḥaggai said, by Moses! Rebbi Yose says it correctly. It was executed following Rebbi Aḥa. There, designates an animal as his sacrifice at completion, and then asks about his vow and has it annulled, the animal becomes profane. , you say: “It shall leave and graze with the herd.” And here, you say so? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, there he asked about his vow of nazir . Because of the vow of nazir sacrifice. If there is no nazir , there is no sacrifice. The Babli rejects this argument and holds (9a) either that for the House of Shammai there can be no dissolution of a vow of nazir because there can be no dissolution of a dedication, or (32a) for the House of Hillel substitutions can be revoked. did his sacrifices become profane. Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rebbi Ḥuna; Rebbi Ḥizqiah, Rebbi Aḥa, in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Everybody agrees that nobody can ask about his substitution sacrifice. If there is no nazir , there is no sacrifice. The Babli rejects this argument and holds (9a) either that for the House of Shammai there can be no dissolution of a vow of nazir because there can be no dissolution of a dedication, or (32a) for the House of Hillel substitutions can be revoked. . Where do they disagree? About his dedication; for the House of Shammai say, since a person cannot ask about his substitution, he cannot ask about his dedication, but the House of Hillel say, a person can ask about his dedication but not about his substitution. 27:10 according to the House of Hillel but the interpretation is confirmed by the Babli, 31a . . Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish in the name of Bar Qappara: You catch him at the mention of “ox”, at the mention of “first”. “The black ox which comes out of my house first,” if a white one came out and the black followed him, you catch him because he is the leader of the black ones. “The white ox which comes out of my house first,” if a black one came out and the white followed him, you catch him because he is the leader of the white ones. “The ox which stands at the manger” and it was lying down, “lying down” and it was standing, should be like what Rebbi Abbahu said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: If he wanted to give heave from wheat and he gave from barley, during nighttime he did not do anything, during daytime, what he did is done. Brown grain and it turned out to be white 2:5, Notes 85–86 . אגרו, אגדו is human food, שחמתית שמתית usually is animal feed. , even during daytime he did not do anything. “A ram” is nothing. “A calf” yes, since it is written: “A calf of cattle as purification offering.” “A sheep” is nothing. “Tetradrachmas” is nothing. “Change” is nothing might mean “money” or “coin” in general. Denominations in late provincial usage may not correspond to standard values.} . “A gold denar” was sanctified.

מִי שֶׁנָּדַר בַּנָּזִיר וְנִשְׁאַל לַחֲכָמִים וְאָסְרוּ מוֹנֶה מִשָּׁעָה שֶׁנָּדַר. נִשְׁאַל לַחֲכָמִים וְהִתִּירוּ הָיְתָה לוֹ בְהֵמָה מוּפְרֶשֶׁת תֵּצֵא וְתִרְעֶה בָעֵדֶר. אָמְרוּ בֵית הִלֵּל לְבֵית שַׁמַּאי אֵין אַתֶּם מוֹדִין בָּזֶה שֶׁהוּא הֶקְדֵּשׁ טָעוּת שֶׁתֵּצֵא וְתִרְעֶה בָעֵדֶר. אָמְרוּ לָהֶן בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אֵי אַתֶּם מוֹדִין בְּמִי שֶׁטָּעָה וְקָרָא לַתְּשִׁיעִי עֲשִׂירִי וְלַעֲשִׂירִי תְּשִׁיעִי וּלְאַחַד עָשָׂר עֲשִׂירִי שֶׁהוּא מְקוּדָּשׁ. אָמְרוּ לָהֶן בֵּית הִלֵּל לֹא הַשֵּׁבֶט קִידְּשׁוֹ. וּמָה אִילּוּ טָעָה וְהִנִּיחַ אֶת הַשֵּׁבֶט עַל הַשְּׁמִינִי וְעַל שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר שֶׁמָּא עָשָׂה כְּלוּם. אֶלָּא כָּתוּב שֶׁקִּידֵּשׁ אֶת הָעֲשִׂירִי הוּא קִידֵּשׁ אֶת הַתְּשִׁיעִי וְאֶת אַחַד עָשָׂר. מִי שֶׁנָּדַר בַּנָּזִיר כול׳. תַּנֵּי. בֵּית שַׁמַּי אוֹמְרִים. מִשָּׁעָה שֶׁנִּשְׁאַל. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים. מִשָּׁעָה שֶׁנָּזַר. מַה נָן קַיָימִין. אִם בֶּשֶׁגִּילְגֵּל בְּנִזְרוֹ. כָּל עַמָּא מוֹדֵיי מִשָּׁעָה שֶׁנִּשְׁאַל. אִם בְּשֶׁלֹּא גִילגֵּל בְּנִזְרוֹ. כָּל עַמָּא מוֹדֵיי מִשָּׁעָה שֶׁנָּזַר. אֶלָּא כִּי נָן קַיָימִין בְּשֶׁעָתִיד לִישָּׁאֵל. בֵּית שַׁמַּי אוֹמְרִים. מִכֵּיוָן שֶׁעָתִיד לִישָּׁאֵל מְגַלְגְּל הוּא. וּבֵית הִלִּל אוֹמְרִים. אִילּוּ גִילגֵּל לֹא הָיָה נִשְׁאַל. הֲרֵי שֶׁנָּזַר וְהָיָה מְגַלְגֵּל בְּנִזְרוֹ אֵין נִשְׁאֲלִין לוֹ אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן נָהַג בָּהֶן בְּאִיסּוּר כַּיָּמִים שֶׁנָּהַג בָּהֶן בְּהֵיתֵר. דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי יוּדָה. אָמַר רִבִּי יָסָא. בַּמֶּה דְבָרִים אֲמוּרִים. בְּנִזְרוֹ מְרוּבֶּה. אֲבָל בְּנִזְרוֹ מְמוּעָט דַּייוֹ שְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם. וּמַה בֵּין נִזְרוֹ מְרוּבֶּה לְנִזְרוֹ מְמוּעָט. אֶלָּא אָכֵן הוּא. בַּמֶּה דְבָרִים אֲמוּרִים. בִּזְמַן שֶׁגִּילגֵּל בְּנִזְרוֹ זְמַן מְרוּבֶּה. אֲבָל גִּילגֵּל בְּנִזְרוֹ זְמַן מְמוּעָט דַּייוֹ שְׁלֹשִׁים. מַה נָן קַיָימִין. בְּשֶׁגִּילגֵּל בְּטוּמְאָה כָּל עַמָּא מוֹדֵיי שֶׁסָּתַר הַכֹּל. אִם בְּשֶׁלֹּא גִילגֵּל בְּתִגְלַחַת כָּל עַמָּא מוֹדוּיֵי שֶׁלֹּא סָתַר אֶלָּא ל̇ יוֹם. אֶלָּא כֵּן אֲנָן קַיָימִין בְּשֶׁגִּילגֵּל בַּיַּיִן. בְּעוֹמֵד בְּתוֹךְ נְזִירוּתוֹ. אֲבָל בְּעוֹמֵד לְאַחַר נְזִירוּתוֹ אַכֹּל סָתַר. תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. קָרָא לַתְּשִׁיעִי עֲשִׂירִי וְלַעֲשִׂירִי תְּשִׁיעִי וּלְאַחַד עָשָׂר עֲשִׂירִי. שְׁלָשְׁתָּן מְקוּדָּשִׁין. הַתְּשִׁיעִי נֶאֱכַל בְּמוּמוֹ וְהָעֲשִׂירִי מַעֲשֵׂר וְאַחַד עָשָׂר קָרַב שְׁלָמִים. יִהְיֶה קוֹדֶשׁ. מְלַמֵּד שֶׁהַקְּדוּשָּׁה חָלָה עַל הַתְּשִׁיעִי וְעַל אַחַד עָשָׂר. יָכוֹל יִקְרְבוּ שְׁנֵיהֶן. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר בָּקָר. בָּקָר לְרַבּוֹת אַחַד עָשָׂר. בֶּן בָּקָר לְהוֹצִיא אֶת הַתְּשִׁיעִי. מָה רָאִיתָ לְרַבּוֹת אַחַד עָשָׂר וּלְהוֹצִיא תְּשִׁיעִי. אַחַר שֶׁרִיבָּה הַכָּתוּב מִיעֵט. שֶׁתִּימְצָא אוֹמֵר. אֵימָתַי הַקּוֹדֶשׁ עוֹשֶׂה תְמוּרָה לְפָנָיו אוֹ לְאַחֲרָיו. הֲוֵי אוֹמֵר. לְאַחֲרָיו. מַרְבֶּה אֲנִי אַחַד עָשָׂר שֶׁהוּא אַחַר הַקְּדוּשָּׁה. וּמוֹצִיא אֲנִי אֶת הַתְּשִׁיעִי שֶׁהוּא לִפְנֵי הַקְּדוּשָּׁה. עַד כְּדוֹן כְּסָבוּר בּוֹ שֶׁהוּא עֲשִׂירִי וְקָרוּי עֲשִׂירִי. הָיָה יוֹדֵעַ בּוֹ שֶׁהוּא תְשִׁיעִי וְקַרְיָין עֲשִׂירִי. חֲבֵרַיָיה אָמְרִין. קָדַשׁ. רִבִּי יוּדָן אָמַר. לֹא קָדַשׁ. מַתְנִיתָא מְסַיְיעָא לַחֲבֵרַיָיה. אָמְרוּ בֵית הִלֵּל לְבֵית שַׁמַּי. אֵין אַתֶּם מוֹדִין. שֶׁתֵּצֵא וְתִרְעֶה בָעֵדֶר. אָמְרוּ לָהֶן בֵּית שַׁמַּי. אֵי אַתֶּם מוֹדִין בְּמִי שֶׁטָּעָה וְקָרָא לַתְּשִׁיעִי עֲשִׂירִי וְלַעֲשִׂירִי תְּשִׁיעִי וּלְאַחַד עָשָׂר עֲשִׂירִי שֶׁהוּא מְקוּדָּשׁ. וְאֵינָן מְקַבְּלִין מִינְּהוֹן. דִּלֹא כֵן יְתִיבוּנוֹן. מָה אַתֵּם מֵשִׁיבִין אוֹתָנוּ מִן דָּבָר שֶׁהָיָה קָדוֹשׁ שֶׁלֹּא בְטָעוּת עַל דָּבָר שֶׁהוּא קָדוֹשׁ בֵּין בְּטָעוּת בֵּין שֶׁלֹּא בְטָעוּת. כַּיי דָּמַר רִבִּי אִמִּי. עֲשִׁירֵי הֲווּ בִתְשׁוּבָה. אוֹ יֵיבָא כַּיי דָמַר רִבִּי נָסָא. כְּאֵינַשׁ דְּאִית לֵיהּ תְּרֵין טַעֲמִין וּמָתִיב חַד מִנְהוֹן.

MISHNAH: A person who made a vow of nazir , asked the Sages and they forbade, counts from the moment of his vow. If he asked the Sages and they permitted, if he had an animal designated, it leaves and grazes with the herd, designates an animal as his sacrifice at completion, and then asks about his vow and has it annulled, the animal becomes profane. . The house of Hillel said to the House of Shammai: Do you not agree that this is dedication in error, it leaves and grazes in the herd? The House of Shammai anwered, do you not agree that if somebody erred and designated the ninth as the tenth, or the tenth as ninth, or the eleventh as tenth, it is sanctified 9:8 . Every tenth newborn animal of cattle, sheep, and goats has to be brought as sacrifice ( Lev . 27:31 ). The sacrifice is eaten by the rancher and his family; the priests have no part in it. The verse requires that the animals be counted with a staff and the tenth be designated. If the rancher erred between 9, 10, 11, all animals involved are sanctified. But if the error was by a count of more than one, there is no dedication and the animals remain profane. ? The House of Hillel anwered, not the staff sanctified it, for if he erred and put his staff on the eighth or the twelth, did he do anything? But the verse which sanctified the tenth sanctified the ninth and the eleventh. 27:31 , interpreted in the Halakhah, the Babli Bekhorot 61a , and Sifra Beḥuqqotay Pereq 13(2). . HALAKHAH: “A person who made a vow of nazir ,” etc. It was stated: The House of Shammai say, from the moment he asked; but the House of Hillel say, from the moment he vowed. Where do we hold? If he scoffed 1:1, Note 178 ( Berakhot 6:3, Note 130 ). at his vow, everybody agrees from the moment he asked. If he did not scoff at his vow, everybody agrees from the moment he vowed. But we have to deal with one who is going to ask. The House of Shammai say, since he decided to ask, he is now scoffing. But the House of Hillel say, if he were scoffing, he would not ask. If he made a vow of nazir and scoffed at his vow, one does not let him ask about it unless he kept its prohibitions for the number of days he did not keep the prohibitions, the words of Rebbi Jehudah. Rebbi Yasa said, when has this been said? If he vowed a lengthy period. But if he vowed a short period, thirty days are sufficient for him. What is the difference between a lengthy and a short period? But it must be: When has this been said? If he scoffed at his vow for a lengthy period. But if he scoffed at his vow for a short period, thirty days are sufficient for him vow. . Where are we holding? If he scoffed in impurity, everybody agrees that he invalidated everything by biblical decree. . If he scoffed in shaving, everybody agrees that he invalidated only 30 days for many periods shaves every thirty days, Mishnah 1:4 . . But we must deal with the case that he scoffed with wine; he is whipped if his transgression is observed by two witnesses after due warning. Biblical law contains no instructions which would require him to continue his vow for additional days. R. Jehudah’s rule which requires him to continue for an additional time, equal to that in which he disregarded the prohibition of wine, is purely rabbinical. . That is, if he is still within his period of nazir . But after his period of nazir , he invalidated everything. There 9:8 . This starts the discussion of the rules of animal tithes ( Note 87 ). , we have stated: “If he called the ninth tenth, and the tenth ninth, and the eleventh tenth, all three are sanctified. The ninth may be eaten when it develops a defect, the tenth is tithe, the eleventh is brought as well-being sacrifice.” “It shall be holy”. 27:32 : “About tithes of cattle and flocks, anything which passes under the staff, the tenth shall be holy for the Eternal.” Since the determination of which animal is the tenth is not automatic, any which either is the tenth or is designated as the tenth by the rancher’s staff is holy. , this teaches that holiness falls on the ninth and the eleventh. 61a , Sifra Wayyiqra Pereq 16(4). I could think that both of them should be sacrificed, the verse says “cattle”. 3:1 , speaking of well-being sacrifices. , “cattle” to include the eleventh. “From the cattle”” is interpreted to mean: “Not all.” It is then a problem of rabbinic interpretation to determine which kinds are excluded. Since the expression “ from the cattle” mentioned in Lev . 1:3 was used to exclude animals used for sinful purposes [ Sifra Wayyiqra Parsheta 2(7)], the expression used here can be taken to apply to other situations. , to exclude the ninth. What reason do you have to include the eleventh and to exclude the ninth? After the verse included, it excluded. You can argue, when are sanctified [animals] subject to substitution. 27:33 . ? Before or after? One has to say, afterwards. I am including the eleventh which is after sanctification and I am excluding the ninth which is before sanctification. So far, if he thought that it was the tenth which he called “tenth”. If he knew that it was the ninth and called it “tenth”? The colleagues say, it is sanctified. Rebbi Yudan said, it is not sanctified. The Mishnah supports the colleagues: “The House of Hillel said to the House of Shammai: Do you not agree that it leaves and grazes with the herd? The House of Shammai anwered them, do you not agree that if somebody erred and designated the ninth as the tenth, or the tenth as ninth, or the eleventh as tenth, it is sanctified.” And they do not accept it! Otherwise, they could have answered: Why do you answer us from something which is sanctified only if not in [willful] error about something which will be sanctified both in error and not in error! As Rebbi Immi said, they were rich in answer 6:2 (32b): עֲשִׁירִין הֲווּ בִתְשׁוּבוֹת. , or as Rebbi Nasa said, like somebody who has two reasons and he responds by giving one of them.

מִי שֶׁנָּזַר בַּנָּזִיר וְהָלַךְ לְהָבִיא אֶת בְּהֶמְתּוֹ וּמְצָאָהּ שֶׁנִּגְנְבָה אִם עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִגְנְבָה בְהֵמָה נָזַר הֲרֵי זֶה נָזִיר. וְאִם מִשֶּׁנִּגְנְבָה בְהֵמָה נָזַר אֵינוֹ נָזִיר. זוֹ טָעוּת טָעָה נַחוּם אִישׁ הַמָּדִי כְּשֶׁעָלוּ נְזִירִין מִן הַגּוֹלָה וּמָצְאוּ בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ חָרֵב אָמַר לָהֶם נַחוּם אִישׁ הַמָּדִי אִילּוּ הֱיִיתֶם יוֹדְעִים שֶׁבֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ עָתִיד לִיחָרֵב נוֹזְרִין הֱיִיתֶם. אָמְרוּ לוֹ לָאו וְהִתִּירָן נַחוּם אִישׁ הַמָּדִי. וּכְשֶׁבָּא דָּבָר אֵצֶל חֲכָמִים אָמְרוּ כָּל שֶׁנָּזַר עַד שֶׁלֹּא חָרַב בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ נָזִיר וּמִשֶּׁחָרַב בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ אֵינוֹ נָזִיר. מִי שֶׁנָּזַר בַּנָּזִיר וְהָלַךְ לְהָבִיא אֶת בְּהֶמְתּוֹ כול׳. מָה אֲנָן קַיָימִין. אִם בְּשֶׁרָאָה בְהֵמָה עוֹבֶרֶת בַּשּׁוּק וְאָמַר. הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר עַל בְּהֵמָה זֹאת שֶׁעָבְרָה. אֲפִילוּ מִשֶׁנִּגְנְבָה בְהֵמָה נָזִיר. אִם כְּסָבוּר שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ וְנִמְצָא שֶׁאֵין לוֹ. כָּךְ אָנוּ אוֹמְרִים. הָיָה עָשִׁיר וְהֶעֱנִי תִּיפָּקַע מִמֶּנּוּ נְזִירוּתוֹ. אֲלָּא אָכֵן אֲנָן קַיָימִין. בָּאוֹמֵר. הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר עַל הַבְּהֵמָה שֶׁיֵּשׁ לִי בְתוֹךְ הַבַּיִת. וְהָלַךְ וּמִצָאָהּ שֶׁנִּגְנְבָה. אִם עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִגְנְבָה הַבְּהֵמָה נָזַר הֲרֵי זֶה נָזִיר. אִם מִשֶּׁנִּגְנְבָה הַבְּהֵמָה נָזַר אֵין זֶה נָזִיר. תַּלְמִידוֹהִי דְּרִבִּי חִיָיה בַּר לוּלְיָינָא אָמְרִין. רִבִי יוּדָה שָׁאֵל. הֶחֱזִירוּהָ הַגַּנָּבִים בַּלַּיְלָה. לְמַפְרֵעַ חָזַר עָלַיו נְזִירוּתוֹ אוֹ מִיכָּן וְלָבֹא. זוֹ טָעוּת טָעָה נַחוּם אִישׁ הַמָּדִי. מַה טָעָה. שֶׁפָּתַח לָהֶם בְּנוֹלָד. אָמַר לָהֶם נַחוּם אִישׁ הַמָּדִי. אִילּוּ הָיִיתֶם יוֹדְעִין שֶׁבֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ עָתִיד לִיחָרֵב נוֹדְרִין הָיִיתֶם. אָמַר רִבִּי זְעִירָא. הֲוָה צָרִיךְ מֵימַר לוֹן. לֹא הָיִיתֶם יוֹדְעִין שֶׁכְּבָר נִתְנַבְּאוּ הַנְּבִיאִים לָכֶם שֶׁבֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ עָתִיד לִיחָרֵב. לֹא הֲוָות כְּנוֹלָד. אָמַר לוֹן רִבִּי הִילָא. עוֹד הוּא כְּנוֹלָד. יָכְלִין הֲווֹן מֵימַר. יָדְעִין הֲוֵינָן. אֶלָּא הֲוֵינָן סָבְרִינָן דְּמִילַּיָיא רְחִיקִין. הֶחָזוֹן אֲשֶׁר הוּא חוֹזֶה לְיָמִים רַבִּים. תַּנֵּי. שְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת נְזִירִין עָלוּ בִימֵי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן שֶׁטַח. מֵאָה וַחֲמִשִּׁים מְצָאוֹ לָהֶם פֶּתַח. וּמֵאָה וַחֲמִשִּׁים לֹא מְצָאוֹ לָהֶם. אָתָא גַבֵּי יַנַּאי מַלְכָּא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. אִית הָכָא תְּלַת מְאָוָון נְזִירִין בְּעֵיי תְּשַׁע מְאָוָון קָרְבָּנִין. הַב אַתְּ פַּלְגָּא מִן דִּידָךְ וַאֲנָא פַלְגָּא מִן דִּידִי. שְׁלַח לֵיהּ אַרְבַּע מְאָה וְחַמְשִׁין. אֲזַל לִישְׁנָא בִישָׁא אָמַר לֵיהּ. לָא יְהַב מִדִּידֵיהּ כְּלוּם. שָׁמַע יַנַּאי מַלְכָּא וְכָעַס. שָׁמַע שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן שֶׁטַח וְעָרַק. לִבְתַר יוֹמִין סָלְקִין בְּנֵי נַשׁ רַבְרְבִין מִמַּלְכוּתָא דְפָרַס. אָמְרוּ לֵיהּ. נְהִירִין הֲוִינָן דַּהֲוָה חַד גַּבְרָא סָב וַהֲוָה אֲמַר קוֹמֵינָן מִילִּין דְּחָכְמָה. תַּנִּי לוֹן עוּבְדָּא. אָמְרוּ לוֹן שְׁלַח אַיְיתִיתֵיהּ. שָׁלַח יְהַב לֵיהּ מִילָּה וְאַיְיתִיתֵיהּ. אָתָא יְתַב לֵיהּ בֵּין מַלְכָּא לְמַלְכְּתָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. לָמָּה אַפְלֵיתָה בִּי. אֲמַר לֵיהּ אֲנָא לָא אַפְלִיתִי בָּךְ. אַתְּ מִמָּמוֹנָךְ וַאֲנָא מִן אוֹרַיְיתִי. דִּכְתִיב כִּי בְצֵל הַחָכְמָה בְּצֵל הַכֶּסֶף. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. וְלָמָּה עָרַקְתְּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. שְׁמָעִית דְּמָרִי כְעַס עָלַי וְקַיְימִית הָדֵין קְרָא חֳבִי כִּמְעַט רֶגַע עַד יַעֲבֹר זָעַם. וּקְרָא עִלּוֹי. וְיִתְרוֹן דַּעַת הַחָכְמָה תְּחַיֶּה בְעָלֶיהָ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. וְלָמָּה יָתַבְתְּ בֵּין מַלְכָּא לְמַלְכְתָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. בְּסִיפְרָא דְּבַר סִירָה כְתִיב. סַלְסְלֶיהָ וּתְרוֹמְמֶךָ וּבֵין נְגִידִים תּוֹשִׁיבֶךָ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. הַב כַּסָּא וְנִיבְרִיךְ. יָבוּן לֵיהּ כַּסָּא וָמַר. נְבָרֵךְ עַל הַמָּזוֹן שֶׁאָכַל יַנַּאי וַחֲבֵירָיו. אֲמַר לֵיהּ. וּמַה נֵימוֹר. נְבָרֵךְ עַל הַמָּזוֹן שֶׁלֹּא אָכַלְנוּ. אֲמַר. יֵיבוּן לֵיהּ וְיֵיכוּל. יָבוּן לֵיהּ וְאָכַל. וְאָמַר. נְבָרֵךְ עַל הַמָּזוֹן שֶׁאָכַלְנוּ. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. חֲלוּקִין עַל שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן שֶׁטַח. רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה אָמַר. עַל הָרִאשׁוֹנָה. רִבִּי בָּא אָמַר עַל הַשְּׁנִיָיה. מֻחְלְפָה שִׁיטָּתֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי יִרְמְיָה. תָּמֵּן צְרִיכָא לֵיהּ וָכָא פְּשִׁיטָא לֵיהּ. הֵּן דִּצְרִיכָא לֵיהּ כְּרַבָּנִן. הֵן דִּפְשִׁיטָא לֵיהּ כְּרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל. דְּתַנֵּי. עָלָה הֵיסֶב וְטִבֵּל עִמָּהֶן אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא אָכַל עִמָּהֶן כְּזַיִת דָּגָן מְזַמְּנִין דִּבְרֵי חֲכָמִים. רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. לְעוֹלָם אֵין מְזַמְּנִין עָלָיו עַד שֶׁיֹּאכַל כְּזַיִת דָּגָן. דְּתַנֵּי. שְׁנַיִם בַּפַּת וְאֶחָד בַּיָּרָק מְזַמְּנִין. מַתְנִיתָא דְּרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל.

MISHNAH: A person vowed to be a nazir and went to bring his animal. when he found that it was stolen; if he vowed before the animal was stolen he is a nazir , after the animal was stolen he is not a nazir . This error was made by Naḥum from Media: When nezirim came from the Diaspora and found that the Temple had been destroyed, Naḥum from Media asked them: If you had known that the Temple would be destroyed, would you have made a vow of nazir 9:2 ) who admits that people may ask to annul a vow because of unforseeable circumstances, but the anonymous majority forbid this kind of question. ? They said to him, no, and Naḥum from Media permitted them. When the case came before the Sages they said, anyone who made his vow before the Temple was destroyed is a nazir , after the Temple was destroyed he is not a nazir . HALAKHAH: “If a person vowed to be a nazir and went to bring his animal,” etc. Where do we hold? If he saw an animal passing on the market and said, I am a nazir on that animal which passed by, he is a nazir even if the animal was stolen unless the animal was sold to him). . If he thought that he had one and it turned out that he did not, would we say if he was rich and became poor, the nezirut would be invalidated? But we must hold that he said, I am a nazir on the animal I have at home, then went and found it stolen. If he vowed before the animal was stolen he is a nazir , after the animal was stolen he is not a nazir . The students of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Julianus say: Rebbi Jehudah asked: If the thieves returned it in the night, did his nezirut return to him retroactively or for the future? 9:2, Notes 48–49 . “That was the error of Naḥum from Media.” What was his error? That he found for them an opening due to changed circumstances. “Naḥum from Media said to them: ‘Would you have made a vow to become nezirim if you had known that the Temple would be destroyed at some future time?’ ” Rebbi Ze‘ira said, the following he should have said to them: Did you not know that the prophets already had prophesied that eventually the Temple would be destroyed? Then there are no changed circumstances. Rebbi Hila said, still it is changed circumstances. They could have said to him, we knew it, but it seemed to us that this referred to the distant future: “The vision he sees is for many years.” 7:2, Notes 79–90 . It has been stated: 300 nezirim came in the days of Rebbi Simeon ben Shetaḥ. For 150 of them he found an opening, for 150 of them he did not find an opening. He came to king Yannai and said to him: There are here 300 nezirim who need 900 sacrifices. You should give half of them from your side, I shall give half from my side. The king sent him 450 animals. An informer went around and said that the other one had not given anything from his own money. King Yannai heard about it and got angry. Simeon ben Shetaḥ heard and fled. After some time, important people from the Persian empire came to king Yannai. They said to him: We remember that there was an old man who gave us a rabbinic discourse. They said to him, send and bring him! He sent and gave him his word; he came and sat between king and queen. He said to him, why did you trick me? He said, I did not trick you; you with your money and I with my learning, as it is written ( Eccl . 7:12 ) “In the shadow of wisdom, in the shadow of money.” He said to him, why did you disappear? He said to him, I heard that my lord was angry with me and I wanted to fulfill the verse ( Is . 26:20 ) “Hide a little bit until the rage passes;” he used about himself ( Eccl . 7:12 ): “Knowledge is an advantage, wisdom lets its possessor live.” He said to him, why did you sit between king and queen? He said to him, it is written in the book of Ben Sirach: “Esteem it and it will raise you and seat you among princes.” He said, bring him a cup that he may recite Grace. They brought him a cup and he said: “Let us give praise for the food that Yannai and his company ate.” He said to him, what should I say, “for the food that we did not eat?” He said, bring him something that he may eat. They brought, he ate and recited: “For the food that we ate.” . Rebbi Yoḥanan said, his colleagues disagree with Simeon ben Shetaḥ. Rebbi Jeremiah said, about the first action; Rebbi Abba said, about the second action. Rebbi Jeremiah seems to contradict himself! There he wondered about it and here it is obvious for him! He wondered following the Sages; it is obvious to him following Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel. We have stated about this: If one came, was lying on a couch, and dipped with them, even if he did not eat grain the volume of an olive one ‘invites’ with him, the words of the Sages. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Yoḥanan: One never ‘invites’ anyone unless he has eaten grain the volume of an olive. But did we not formulate, “two [eating] bread and one [eating] vegetable, then one ‘invites’?” This baraita follows Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel.

הָיוּ מְהַלְּכִין בַּדֶּרֶךְ וְאֶחָד בָּא כְנֶגְדָּן אָמַר אֶחָד מֵהֶן הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר שֶׁזֶּה אִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי. וְאֶחָד אָמַר הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר שֶׁאֵינוֹ הוּא. הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר שֶׁאֶחָד מִכֶּם נָזִיר שֶׁאֵין אֶחָד מִכֶּם נָזִיר שֶׁשְּׁנֵיכֶם נְזִירִין שֶׁכּוּלְּכֶם נְזִירִין. בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים כּוּלָּן נְזִירִין. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים אֵינוֹ נָזִיר אֶלָּא מִי שֶׁלֹּא נִתְקַיְימוּ דְבָרָיו. וְרִבִּי טַרְפוֹן אוֹמֵר אֵין אֶחָד מֵהֶן נָזִיר. הִרְתִּיעַ לַאֲחוֹרָיו אֵינוֹ נָזִיר. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר יֹאמַר אִם הָיָה כִדְבָרַי הֲרֵינִי נְזִיר חוֹבָה. וְאִם לָאו הֲרֵינִי נְזִיר נְדָבָה. רָאָה אֶת הָכּוֹי וְאָמַר הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר שֶׁזֶּה חַיָּה הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר שֶׁאֵין זֶה חַיָּה. הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר שֶׁזֶּה בְּהֵמָה הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר שֶׁאֵין זֶה בְּהֵמָה. הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר שֶׁזֶּה חַיָּה וּבְהֵמָה. הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר שֶׁאֵין זֶה לֹא חַיָּה וְלָּא בְהֵמָה. הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר שֶׁאֶחָד מִכֶּם נָזִיר שֶׁאֵין אֶחָד מִכֶּם נָזִיר שֶׁשְּׁנֵיכֶם נְזִירִין הֲרֵי כּוּלָּם נְזִירִין. הָיוּ מְהַלְּכִין בַּדֶּרֶךְ כול׳. כֵּינִי מַתְנִיתָא. מִי שֶׁנִּתְקַיימוּ דְּבָרִים. לָשׁוֹן הָפוּךְ הוּא. דְּלָא קָבְרָת בְּרָהּ. תַּנֵּי. רִבִּי יוּדָה אוֹמֵר מִשּׁוּם רִבִּי טַרְפוֹן. אֵין אֶחָד מֵהֶן נָזִיר. שֶׁאֵין נְזִירוּת אֶלָּא עַל הַתְרָיָיה. הָדָא הִיא דְרִבִּי יוּדָה אָמַר. סְפֵק נְזִירוּת מוּתָּר. מַה נָן קַיָימִין. אִם בְּשֶׁזֶּה אוֹמֵר. רְאוּבֵן. וְזֶה אוֹמֵר. שִׁמְעוֹן. מַה נַפְשֵׁךְ. רְאוּבֵן הוּא נָזִיר הוּא. שִׁמְעוֹן הוּא נָזִיר הוּא. אֶלָּא כִּי נָן קַיָימִין. בְּשֶׁזֶּה אוֹמֵר. רְאוּבֵן. וְזֶה אוֹמֵר. שִׁמְעוֹן. הִרְתִּיעַ לַאֲחוֹרָיו אֵינוֹ לֹא רְאוּבֵן וְלֹא שִׁמְעוֹן אֵינוֹ נָזִיר. הָדָא הִיא דְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר. אֵינוֹ מֵבִיא קָרְבָּן עַד שֶׁיִהְיֶה. תַּנֵּי. וְכוּלָּן מוֹנִין תִּשְׁעָה נְזִירִיּוֹת. וְהָא אִינּוּן עֶשֶׂר. אֵי אֶפְשַׁר שֶׁלֹּא נִתְקַיְימוּ דִּבְרֵי אֶחָד מֵהֶן. אָמַר רִבִּי יָסָא. דְּבֵית שַׁמַּי הִיא. דְּבֵית שַׁמַּי אוֹמְרִים. הֶקְדֵּשׁ טָעוּת הֶקְדֵּשׁ.

MISHNAH: If they were walking on the road and a person came towards them when one said, “I am a nazir unless he is Mr. X”, and another said, “I am a nazir if it is not he”; “I am a nazir unless one of you is a nazir ”, “unless both of you are nezirim ”, “unless all of you are nezirim ”. The House of Shammai say, they are all nezirim ” is a nazir , even if his condition was not satisfied. , but the House of Hillel say, only those whose assertions prove wrong are nezirim . Rebbi Ṭarphon said, none of them is a nazir . 6:2 requires that a vow of nazir be clearly expressed, but these people did mention nazir only to emphasize their statements, there is no valid vow. . If he suddenly returned, no one is a nazir and who should not. . Rebbi Simeon says, one can be offered only if they are due, otherwise the animals would be sinful profane offerings in the Temple. Therefore, it is necessary to offer a new vow which takes care of all possibilities. should say: If it was as I said, I am a nazir by obligation, otherwise I am a nazir voluntarily. If one saw a koy 2:9 ff., Note 154). and said, “I am a nazir if this is a wild animal”, “I am a nazir if this is not a wild animal”. , “I am a nazir if this is a domestic animal”, “I am a nazir if this is a not a domestic animal”, “I am a nazir if this is a wild and domestic animal”, “I am a nazir if this is neither a wild nor a domestic animal”, “I am a nazir if one of you is a nazir ”, “if one of you is not a nazir ”, “if both of you are nezirim ”, then all of them are nezirim . HALAKHAH: “If they were walking on the road,” etc. Should the Mishnah not read: “whose assertions are correct”? if he is Mr. X”, and another said, “I am a nazir if he is not”; “I am a nazir if one of you is a nazir ”, “if both of you are nezirim ”, “if all of you are nezirim ”. In that case, the House of Hillel should state that the ones whose statements are correct are nezirim . It is language of opposites, “that she did not bury her son.” It was stated: “Rebbi Jehudah said in the name of Rebbi Ṭarphon: None of them is a nazir since nezirut exists only by warning.” exists only by הפלאה ‘clear statement’ ”. The meaning is the same here; a legal warning for a breach of the vow could only be issued if the vow was clearly stated. That is what Rebbi Jehudah said, “doubtful nezirut is permitted. 4:12 . ” Where do we hold? If one says, Reuben, and the other says, Simeon, as you take it, if he is Reuben, one is a nazir , if he is Simeon, one is a nazir . But we must hold that one says, Reuben, and the other says, Simeon. He suddenly disappeared, he was neither Reuben nor Simeon; nobody is a nazir . That is what Rebbi Simeon said, he cannot bring a sacrifice unless it exists if his wife bore a son and she had a miscarriage. . It was stated”, or “9 nezirim ”. The formulation of the Mishnah in the Yerushalmi clearly speaks of only two people who dispute and pile vow onto vow. : “All of them count nine neziriot ”. Are they not ten?. It is impossible that the words of any of them should not be correct. Rebbi Yasa said, this is the House of Shammai’s, since the House of Shammai say, dedication in error is dedication.