Talmud Nazir (E)

oath, as it has been taught: How do we know that if a man says. ‘[By] my right hand,’ it is accounted
an oath? From the verse, The Lord hath sworn by his right hand.
11
 And how do we know that if a
man says. ‘By my left hand,’ it is accounted an oath? Because the verse continues, And by the arm of
his strength.
11
 
    MISHNAH. [IF A MAN SAYS] ‘I DECLARE MYSELF A NAZIRITE [TO ABSTAIN] FROM
PRESSED GRAPES, OR FROM GRAPE STONES, OR FROM POLLING, OR FROM
[CONTRACTING] RITUAL DEFILEMENT, HE BECOMES A NAZIRITE AND ALL THE
REGULATIONS OF NAZIRITESHIP APPLY TO HIM.
 
    GEMARA. The Mishnah is not in agreement with R. Simeon, for it has been taught: R. Simeon
says that he does not incur the liabilities [of a nazirite] unless he vows to abstain from everything
[that is forbidden to a nazirite], whilst the Rabbis say that even though he vows to abstain from one
thing only, he becomes a nazirite.
 
    What is R. Simeon's reason?-Scripture says. [He shall eat] nothing that is made of the grape-vine,
from the pressed grapes even to the grape-stone.
12
 And what is the Rabbis’ reason? — The verse
reads, He shall abstain
13
 from wine and strong drink.
14
 What does R. Simeon make of the statement,
‘He shall abstain from wine and strong drink’? — He requires it to prohibit wine the drinking of
which is a ritual obligation as well as wine the drinking of which is optional. What is this [wine the
drinking of which is obligatory]? The wine of Kiddush
15
 and Habdalah,
15
 [is it not]?
____________________
(1) And therefore R. Meir's reason is not the one given by Resh Lakish.
(2) V. Num. VI, 10. [I.e., he undertook to bring such birds should he afterwards become unclean during his proposed
naziriteship; hence he becomes a nazirite (Rashi).]
(3) As this was the usual manner in which free-will offerings of birds were made.
(4) Cf. Lev. XIV, 4. [That is he undertook to bring birds for a leper freeing him from his obligatory sacrifices. Asheri.]
This question creates a difficulty both for R. Johanan and Resh Lakish (Rashi).
(5) And as such a one has not to bring the offering of birds, he must have referred to himself.
(6) Between R. Johanan and Resh Lakish.
(7) As he may simply be undertaking to bring an offering of birds.
(8)  [That is, according to R. Meir; v. Rashi and Tosaf. This difference will, however, apply also on the view of the
Rabbis, for where he explicitly states....’the birds mentioned in the same context as hair,’ the Rabbis would also agree
according to Resh Lakish that he becomes a nazirite; cf. Rashi 2b (top).]
(9) Tosaf. Ned. I, e.g., if he says, ‘My right hand that I shall eat this loaf.’
(10) Dan. XII, 7; and when he refers to his right hand he means the oath in the same context.
(11) Isa. LXII. 8. [‘Arm of his strength’ refers to the left hand; ,’. Ber. 6a.]
(12) The emphasis is laid on the word ‘nothing’, so that the vow must expressly include everything. Num. VI, 4.
(13) Lit., ‘vow to abstain’.
(14) Ibid. VI, 3. Thus it is sufficient if his vow refers specifically to wine only. This verse is made here to refer to the
actual taking of the nazirite vow; though from the context it might he thought to he part of the enumeration of objects
forbidden the nazirite.
(15) V. Glos.
Talmud - Mas. Nazir 4a
Talmud - Mas. Nazir 4a
Talmud - Mas. Nazir 4a
But surely here he is bound by the oath taken on Mount Sinai?
1
 — We must therefore suppose the
following dictum of Raba to be indicated, [Viz.:] — [If a man says,] ‘I swear to drink [wine]’ and
later says, ‘I wish to be a nazirite,’ the nazirite vow operates despite the oath.
2
 
    And do not the Rabbis also require [this verse] to prohibit wine, the drinking of which is a ritual
obligation as well as wine the drinking of which is optional? — If this were its [sole] purpose, only

---

wine need have been mentioned in the verse! [What is the purport of the addition] of ‘strong drink’!
It is to enable us to infer both things.
3
 And R. Simeon?
4
 — He [will hold] that the reason for the
addition of strong drink is to guide us in the interpretation of the same expression when used in
connection with the Temple service, in the verse, Drink no wine nor strong drink, thou, nor thy sons
with thee.
5
 Just as for the nazirite, only wine is forbidden but not other beverages, so in connection
with the Temple service, only wine is forbidden [to the priests], but not other intoxicating beverages.
This conflicts with the opinion of R. Judah, for it has been taught: R.Judah said that [a priest] who
eats preserved figs from Keilah,
6
 or drinks honey or milk, and then enters the Temple, is guilty.
7
Alternatively,
8
 R. Simeon rejects the Principle that a prohibition can come into operation when a
prohibition [on a different count] is already present,
9
 as has been taught: R. Simeon says that a man
who eats carrion
10
 on the Day of Atonement is not liable [to a penalty for breach of observance of
the day].
11
 
    What do the Rabbis make of the verse, [‘He shall eat] nothing that is made of the grapevine’?
12
The Rabbis will tell you that this teaches that [the various kinds of food] forbidden to a nazirite can
combine together.
13
 R. Simeon. on the other hand, does not require a rule about combination, for it
has been taught: R. Simeon says that a mite [of forbidden food] is sufficient [to entail liability] to
stripes; a quantity equivalent to an olive is required only where a sacrifice is [the appropriate
penalty].
 
    MISHNAH. [IF A MAN SAYS] ‘I VOW TO BE LIKE SAMSON,
14
 THE SON OF MANOAH,
WHO WAS THE HUSBAND OF DELILAH, OR ‘WHO PLUCKED UP THE GATES OF
GAZAH,’
15
 OR ‘WHOSE EYES THE PHILISTINES PUT OUT,’
16
 HE BECOMES A NAZIRITE
LIKE SAMSON. GEMARA. Why must [the Mishnah] specify all these expressions? — All are
necessary. For if he were to say. ‘I wish to be like Samson,’ I might think that some other Samson
[was intended], and so we are told [that he must add] ‘like the son of Manoah.’ Again, if he were to
add [only] ‘the son of Manoah,’ I might think that there is someone else so named, and so we are
told [that he must add], ‘like the husband of Delilah,’ or ‘like him whose eyes the Philistines put
out.’
17
 
    MISHNAH. WHAT DIFFERENCE IS THERE BETWEEN A NAZIRITE LIKE SAMSON AND
A LIFE-NAZIRITE?
18
 A LIFE-NAZIRITE. WHENEVER HIS HAIR BECOMES BURDENSOME,
MAY THIN IT WITH A RAZOR AND THEN OFFER THREE ANIMAL SACRIFICES,
19
WHILST SHOULD HE BE RITUALLY DEFILED, HE MUST OFFER THE SACRIFICE
[PRESCRIBED] FOR DEFILEMENT.
20
 THE NAZIRITE LIKE SAMSON IS NOT PERMITTED
TO THIN HIS HAIR SHOULD IT BECOME BURDENSOME, AND IF [RITUALLY] DEFILED,
DOES NOT OFFER THE SACRIFICE [PRESCRIBED] FOR DEFILEMENT.
 
    GEMARA. How does the life-nazirite come in here?
21
 — There is a hiatus [in the Mishnah]. and
it should read as follows: If a man says, ‘I intend to be a life-nazirite,’ he becomes a life-nazirite.
What difference is there between a nazirite like Samson and a life-nazirite? A life-nazirite whenever
his hair becomes burdensome may thin it with a razor and then offer three animal sacrifices, whilst
should he be ritually defiled, he must offer the sacrifice [prescribed] for defilement. The nazirite like
Samson is not permitted to thin his hair with a razor should it become burdensome,
____________________
(1) I.e., surely his vow cannot annul obligations in existence since the giving of the law on Mount Sinai, so Rashi. Tosaf.
(Rabbenu Tam) replaces the last two sentences by the following: ‘Can it be that the wine of Kiddush and Habdalah is
indicated? But is he then bound by an oath taken on Mount Sinai?’ According to this view there is no scriptural
obligation to drink wine at Kiddush and Habdalah. This is the view usually accepted.
(2) I.e., although this is wine the drinking of which is incumbent on him.
(3) Viz.: (i) wine the drinking of which is an obligation is forbidden the nazirite. (ii) though he vows to abstain from one
thing only he becomes a nazirite.

---