Talmud Nazir (E)

(4) How will he meet the argument of the Rabbis?
(5) The verse was addressed to Aaron as High priest. Lev. x, 9.
(6) A town in the lowlands of Judea, cf. Josh. XV, 44’ v. Sanh. (Sonc. ed.) p. 481, n. 6.
(7) Of transgressing the prohibition against strong drink in Lev. X, 9.
(8)  An alternative reason for R. Simeon's opinion that he does not become a nazirite unless he vows to abstain from
everything, is being given (Rashi).
(9) In other words, an act already prohibited cannot he prohibited on another count. Hence, once his vow to abstain from
wine begins to operate, he can no longer become a full nazirite (Rashi). This interpretation considers the statement, ‘I
declare myself a nazirite (to abstain) from pressed grapes’ to consist of two parts in the following order: (i) I vow to
abstain from pressed grapes; (ii) I declare myself a nazirite. For other interpretations, v. Tosaf. and Asheri.
(10) Heb. nebelah, v. Glos.
(11) Carrion being already in itself prohibited.
(12) V. supra p. 7, n. 4.
(13) I.e., supposing he eats less of each kind than the minimum size of an olive, yet the total quantity consumed is the
size of an olive, he is liable to stripes.
(14) Samson was a nazirite to a limited extent only. V. next Mishnah.
(15) V. Judg. XVI, 3.
(16) V. Judg. XVI, 21.
(17) Thus the first three expressions are de rigueur, but for the third equivalents may he used.
(18) One who declares himself a nazirite for life. Samson was also a nazirite for life.
(19) A nazirite on terminating his abstinence was required to offer three animal sacrifices. V. Num. VI, 13ff
(20) Defilement of a nazirite. Num. VI, 9.
(21) Lit., ‘who mentioned its name’.
Talmud - Mas. Nazir 4b
Talmud - Mas. Nazir 4b
Talmud - Mas. Nazir 4b
and if ritually defiled does not offer the sacrifice [prescribed] for defilement. [You say that the
nazirite like Samson] does not have to offer the sacrifice [prescribed] for defilement,
1
 enabling me to
infer that he is subject to the nazirite obligation [which forbids him to defile himself]. Who then is
[the author of] our Mishnah, [seeing that] it can be neither R. Judah nor R. Simeon? For it has been
taught: R. Judah said that a nazirite like Samson is permitted to defile himself [deliberately, by
contact] with the dead, for Samson himself did so; R. Simeon says that if a man declares. ‘[I intend
to be] a nazirite like Samson,’ his statement is of no effect, since we are not aware that Samson
personally ever pronounced a nazirite vow.
2
 [We ask then:] Who [is the author of our Mishnah]? It
cannot be R. Judah, for he says that [a nazirite like Samson] may even [defile himself] intentionally.
whereas our Mishnah [merely] states [that no sacrifice need be offered] if he has become defiled
[accidentally]; nor can it be R. Simeon since he says that the vow does not become operative at all!
— Actually it is R. Judah [and the nazirite like Samson is permitted to defile himself] but because in
referring to the life-nazirite,
3
 the Mishnah uses the expression ‘SHOULD HE BE [RITUALLY]
DEFILED.’ the same expression is used in referring to the nazirite like Samson.
4
 
    May we say that the difference [of R. Judah and R. Simeon] is essentially the same as that of the
following Tannaim? For it has been taught: [If a man says.] ‘This [food] shall be [as forbidden] for
me as a firstling,’
5
 R. Jacob says he may not eat it, but R. Jose says he may.
6
 May we not say then
that R. Judah agrees with R. Jacob in holding that the object [with which the comparison is made,]
7
need not itself be one forbidden as the result of a vow, whilst R. Simeon agrees with R. Jose in
holding that the object [with which comparison is made] must be one forbidden as the result of a
vow? — This is not so. Both [R. Judah and R. Simeon] are agreed that it is necessary for the object
[with which comparison Is made] to be one forbidden as the result of a vow, but the case of the
firstling is different, since in the verse, [When a man voweth a vow]
8
 unto the Lord,
9
 [the
superfluous words ‘unto the Lord’] include the firstling
10
 [as a legitimate object of comparison].
 

---

    What does R. Jose reply [to this argument]? — He will say that the expression ‘unto the Lord’
serves to include the sin-offering and the guilt-offering
11
 [but not the firstling]. [We may ask him:]
On what ground, then, are the sin-offering and the guilt-offering included rather than the firstling? —
[He would reply:] The sin-offering and the guilt-offering are included because they have to be
expressly dedicated,
12
 but the firstling is excluded since it need not be expressly dedicated. And R.
Jacob? — He can rejoin: Firstlings too, are expressly dedicated, for it has been taught: [The
members] of our Teacher's household
13
 used to say: How do we know that when a firstling is born in
a man's flock, it is his duty to dedicate it expressly [for the altar]? Because it says, The males shalt
thou dedicate.
14
 And R. Jose? — He can reply: Granted that it is a religious duty to dedicate it
[expressly], yet if he fails to do so, is it not nevertheless sacred?
15
 
    [It may be said:] In the case of the nazirite, too, is there not a phrase ‘Into the Lord’?
16
 — This is
required for the purpose taught [in the following passage]: Simon the Just
17
 said: In the whole of my
life, I ate of the guilt-offering of a defiled nazirite [only once].
18
 This man who came to me from the
South country, had beauteous eyes and handsome features with his locks heaped into curls. I asked
him: ‘Why, my son, didst thou resolve to destroy such wonderful hair?’ He answered: ‘In my native
town. I was my father's shepherd, and, on going down to draw water from the well, I used to gaze at
my reflection [in its waters]. Then my evil inclination assailed me, seeking to compass my ruin,
19
and so I said to it, "Base wretch! Why dost thou plume thyself on a world that is not thine own, for
thy latter end is with worms and maggots. I swear
20
 I shall shear these locks to the glory of
Heaven!"’ Then I rose, and kissed him upon his head. and said to him: ‘Like unto thee, may there be
many nazirites in Israel. Of such as thou art, does the verse say, When a man shall clearly utter a
vow, the vow of a nazirite to consecrate himself unto the Lord.’
21
 
    But was not Samson a nazirite [in the ordinary sense]?
22
 Surely the verse states, For the child shall
be a nazirite into God from the womb!
23
 — It was the angel who said this.
 
    How do we know that [Samson] did defile himself [by contact] with the dead? Shall I say, because
it is written, With the jawbone of an ass have I smitten a thousand men,
24
 but it is possible that he
thrust it at them without touching them? But [we know it] again from the following. And smote
thirty men of then and took their spoil.
25
 But it is possible that he stripped them first and slew them
afterwards? — It says clearly [first]. And he smote, [and then,] And took. But it is still possible that
he [merely] wounded them mortally
26
 [before stripping them]! — [We must say], therefore, that it
was known by tradition [that he did come into contact with them]. Where does it state [in the
Scriptures] that a life-nazirite [may thin his hair]? — It has been taught: Rabbi said that Absalom
was a life-nazirite, for it says, And it came to pass at the end of forty years that Absalom said to the
king: [pray thee, let me go and pay my vow which I have vowed unto the Lord in Hebron.
27
 He used
to cut his hair every twelve months, for it says. [And when he polled his head,] now it was at every
year's [yamim] end [that he polled it],
28
____________________
(1) I.e., if he becomes unclean.
(2) Tosef. Nazir I, 3.
(3) Who is forbidden to defile himself.
(4) And the if is not to he pressed.
(5) The firstlings of clean domestic animals were the perquisite of the priests and could be eaten by them only. V. Num.
XVIII, 15.
(6) V. Ned. 13a.
(7) E.g.. the firstling or Samson. It is impossible to vow not to eat a firstling as it is holy from birth.
(8) From this phrase we infer that the object used for comparison must be itself prohibited as the result of a vow. V. Ned.
13a.
(9) Num. XXX, 3.
(10) Since it must he dedicted unto the Lord by the owner.

---