Talmud Nazir (E)

(8) I.e., defray their cost. His meaning would then be, ‘I shall be in his place for the purpose of offering his sacrifices;’
cf. Num,. VI, 14ff..
(9) ‘Glorify’ and ‘comely’ are from the same Hebrew root.
(10) Ex. XV, 2.
(11) For the Feast of Tabernacles. Cf. Lev. XXIII, 42 and 40.
(12) And so the reference is to the naziriteship, when his hair would grow long.
(13) Because he denies himself that which the Torah has permitted.
Talmud - Mas. Nazir 3a
Talmud - Mas. Nazir 3a
Talmud - Mas. Nazir 3a
Yes. For even R. Eliezer ha-Kappar who says that a nazirite is accounted a sinner, means only the
nazirite who has contracted ritual impurity; for, since he must nullify [his previous abstinence]
1
 in
accordance with the rule laid down by the Merciful One, But the former days shall be void, because
his consecration was defiled,
2
 there is a danger that he may break his nazirite vow.
3
 But a nazirite
who remains ritually clean is not termed a sinner.
4
 
    I INTEND TO BE LIKE THIS: Granted that he takes hold of his hair, he does not say ‘I intend to
be through this,’
5
 [but only ‘like this’]? — Samuel said: We suppose that a nazirite is passing by at
the time.
 
    I INTEND TO CURL
6
 [MY HAIR]. How do we know that this [word MESALSEL] refers to the
curling of the hair? — From a remark made by a maidservant
7
 of Rabbi's household, who said to a
certain man: How much longer are you going to curl [mesalsel] your hair? But perhaps [it refers to]
the Torah
8
 in accordance with the verse, Extol her [salseleha] and she will exalt thee?
9
 — Samuel
said: Here, too, we suppose that he takes hold of his hair.
 
    I MEAN TO TEND
10
 [MY HAIR]. How do we know that this [word MEKALKEL] refers to the
tending of his hair? — From what we learnt: ‘With regard to orpiment.
11
 R. Judah said that there
must be sufficient to depilate the kilkul,’
12
 and Rab commented: [This means the hair of] one of the
temples.
13
 But might it not mean tending the poor. in accordance with the verse, And Joseph
sustained [wa-yekalkel] his father and his brothers?
14
 — Samuel said: Here too. we assume that he
takes hold of his hair.
 
    I UNDERTAKE TO DEVELOP
15
 TRESSES,’
16
 HE BECOMES A NAZIRITE. How do we know
that this [word] shilluah signifies increase? — From the verse, Thy shoots [shelohayik] are a park of
pomegranates.
17
 But perhaps it has the significance of ‘removal’
18
 in accordance with the verse, And
sendeth [we-sholeah] waters upon the fields?
19
 — The occurrence of the word pera’ [tresses] in
connection with the nazirite gives the tanna the clue. It says here, He shall be holy. he shall let the
locks [pera’] grow long.
20
 and it says elsewhere regarding an ordinary priest,
21
 Nor’ suffer their
locks [pera’] to grow long [yeshallehu].
22
 Alternatively, we can say that the sholeah used of water,
23
also signifies increase,
24
 for when produce is watered it shoots up.
 
    [IF HE SAYS] ‘I TAKE UPON MYSELF [AN OBLIGATION INVOLVING] BIRDS,’ R. MEIR
SAYS HE BECOMES A NAZIRITE. What is R. Meir's reason? — Resh Lakish said: [In making
this vow] he has in mind the birds that are coupled with hair in the scriptural verse, Till his hair was
grown long like eagles’ feathers, and his nails like birds’ claws.
25
 R. Meir is of the opinion that a
man will refer to one thing when he means something else occurring in the same context,
26
____________________
(1) The period which elapsed before he became unclean.
(2) Num. VI, 22.
(3) He may not be able to control his desire for wine for the longer period.
(4) Cf. infra 29a, where the opposite is asserted.

---

(5) The text is uncertain. The meaning would apparently be: I intend to discipline myself through my hair, reading 
vzc
instead of 
vzf
 in cur. edd.
(6) Heb. mesalsel.
(7) This maidservant always spoke Hebrew, v. Meg. 28a.
(8) I.e., he vows to engage in the study of Torah.
(9) Prov. IV, 8.
(10) Heb. mekalkel.
(11) Heb. sid, usually lime, here orpiment, used as a depilatory.
(12) The transference of this amount from a private to a public domain on the Sabbath constitutes an indictable offence.
(13) Shah. 80b.
(14) Gen. XLVII, 12.
(15) Heb. leshaleah.
(16) Heb. pera’.
(17) Cant. IV, 13.
(18) I.e., he vows to remove his hair.
(19) Job V, 10. I.e. transports the waters from field to field (cf. the context).
(20) Num. VI, 5.
(21) I.e., not the High Priest, who is subject to stricter regulations. V. Sanh. 22b.
(22)  Ezek. XLIV, 20. In Sanh. 22b this same comparison is made to show that pera’ means a growth of thirty days’
duration (the normal duration of a nazirite vow). Thus whether shilluah means ‘grow’ or remove’, the nazirite vow is
implicit in the word pera’.
(23) In the verse of Job.
(24) [Cur. edd. add in brackets, ‘as R. Joseph translated,’ referring to the Targum on the Prophets ascribed to R. Joseph.
V. B.K. (Sonc. ed.) p. 9, n. 9. The reading that follows is, however, not found in our Targum.]
(25) Dan. IV, 30. It is assumed that he takes hold of his hair, or a nazirite is passing by (Rashi). Cf. below.
(26) Lit., ‘he is seized by what is close to it.’ E.g., here, he says ‘birds’ when he means ‘hair’.
Talmud - Mas. Nazir 3b
Talmud - Mas. Nazir 3b
Talmud - Mas. Nazir 3b
whilst the Rabbis are of the opinion that a man will not refer to one thing when he means another. R.
Johanan said: Both [R. Meir and the Rabbis] are agreed that a man will not refer to one thing etc.,
1
and R. Meir's reason is that we take account of the possibility that what he had undertaken was to
bring the birds of a ritually unclean nazirite.
2
 
    But if we are to take [possible meanings] into account, why should we not say that he was
undertaking [to bring] a free will offering of birds? — in that event, he would have said, ‘I undertake
to bring a nest.’
3
 
    But perhaps he meant: I undertake [to bring] the birds of a leper?
4
 — We must suppose that a
nazirite passes by at the time. But perhaps it was a ritually unclean nazirite and he desired to free
him from his [obligatory] sacrifices? — We must suppose that a ritually clean nazirite passes by at
the time.
5
 
    What [practical] difference is there between them?
6
 — There would be a difference [for example]
if he should say: I take upon myself [an obligation involving] the birds mentioned in the same
context as hair. According to R. Johanan, notwithstanding that he says this, he becomes a nazirite if
one is passing at the time, but not otherwise;
7
 whereas according to R. Simeon b. Lakish, even
though no nazirite passes by at the time [he becomes a nazirite].
8
 But is there any authority who
disputes that a man may refer to one thing and mean another occurring in the same context? Has it
not been taught: If a man says, ‘[By] my right hand,’ it is accounted an oath.
9
 Now, surely the reason
for this is the verse, When he lifted up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and swore by
Him who liveth for ever?
10
 — Not so. It is because the expression ‘[By my] right hand,’ is itself an

---