משנה: מִי שֶׁנַָּזַר שְׁתֵּי נְזִירִיּוֹת מְגַלֵּחַ אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה יוֹם שְׁלֹשִׁים וְאֶחָד וְהַשְּׁנִייָה יוֹם שִׁשִּׁים וְאֶחָד. וְאִם גִּילַּח אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה יוֹם שְׁלֹשִׁים מְגַלֵּחַ אֶת הַשְּׁנִייָה יוֹם שִׁשִּׁים וְאִם גִּילַּח יוֹם שִׁשִּׁים חָסֵר אֶחָד יָצָא. זוֹ עֵדוּת הֵעִיד רִבִּי פַּפַּייַס עַל מִי שֶׁנָּזַר שְׁתֵּי נְזִירִיּוֹת שֶׁאִם גִּילַּח אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה יוֹם שְׁלֹשִׁים מְגַלֵּחַ אֶת הַשְּׁנִייָה יוֹם שִׁשִּׁים וְאִם גִּילַּח יוֹם שִׁשִּׁים חָסֵר אֶחָד יָצָא שֶׁיּוֹם שְׁלֹשִׁים עוֹלֶה לוֹ מִן הַמִּנְייָן. MISHNAH: If somebody vowed two neziriot, he shaves for the first on the 31st day, for the second on the 61st day17In all cases in this Mishnah, “part of a day is counted as an entire day” and the last day of a period is at the same time the first of the next period, whether the period be 30 or 31 days., but if he shaved for the first on the 30th day, he shaves for the second on the 60th, and if he shaved on the day before the 60th18Compare Latin usage to replace 19 by 20-1, etc., he has fulfilled his obligation. The following testimony did Rebbi Pappaias give19Any “testimony” mentioned in the Mishnah was given in Yabneh and accepted by the Synhedrion.: if somebody vowed two neziriot, he shaves for the first on the 31st day, for the second on the 61st day, but if he shaved for the first on the 30th day, he shaves for the second on the 60th, and if he shaved on the day before the 60th, he has fulfilled his obligation since the 30th day is counted for him.
הלכה: מִי שֶׁנָּזַר שְׁתֵּי נְזִירִיּוֹת כול׳. הִשְׁלִים נְזִירוּתוֹ הָרִאשׁוֹנָה וּבָא לְהִישָּׁעֵן עַל הַשְּׁנִייָה. לֹא מָֽצְאוּ פֶתַח לָרִאשׁוֹנָה עַד שֶׁמָּֽצְאוּ פֶתַח לַשְּׁנִייָה. עָלַת לוֹ שְׁנִייָה רִאשׁוֹנָה. מַה נָן קַייָמִין. אִם בְּאוֹמֵר. הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר שְׁתַּיִם. נֵדֶר שֶׁבָּטַל מַחֲצִיתוֹ בָּטַל אֶת כּוּלּוֹ. אִם בְּאוֹמֵר. הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר ל̇ יוֹם אֵילּוּ ל̇ יוֹם אֵילּוּ. לֹא בְדָא עָלַת לוֹ שְׁנִייָה רִאשֹׁנָה. אֶלָּא כִּי נָן קַייָמִין בְּאוֹמֵר. הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר וְנָזִיר. בְּאוֹמֵר. אֵילּוּ לִנְזִירוּת. אֲבָל אִם אָמַר. אֵילּוּ לִנְזִירוּתִי וְאֵילּוּ לִנְזִירוּת אֲחֶרֶת לֹא בְדָא עָלַת לוֹ שְׁנִייָה רִאשׁוֹנָה. אָמַר רִבִּי לָֽעְזָר. הִשְׁלִים נְזִירוּתוֹ לָרִאשׁוֹנָה. מִכֵּיוָן שֶׁהֵבִיא קָרְבָּן וְגִילַּח עָלַת לוֹ רִאשׁוֹנָה שְׁנִייָה. רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא פְּקִיד לַחֲבֵרַייָא. אִין שְׁמַעְתּוֹן מִילָּה מֵרִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר הֲווֹן יָֽדְעִין דְּרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן פְּלִיג. עַד שֶׁיָּבִיא כָּל־קָרְבְּנוֹתָיו. כְּרַבָנִין. בְּרַם כְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אֲפִילוּ לֹא הֵבִיא אֶלָּא קָרְבָּן אֶחָד. הִפְרִישׁ שְׁתֵּיהֶן כְּאַחַת אֵין בְיָדוֹ אֶלָּא אַחַת. הִפְרִישָׁהּ זוֹ בִפְנֵי עַצְמָהּ וְזוֹ בִפְנֵי עַצְמָהּ אוֹ שֶׁהֵבִיא שֶׁלְּזוֹ בְזוֹ וְשֶׁלְּזוֹ בְזוֹ לֹא יָצָא. הָא לְקַדֵּשׁ קָֽדְשָׁה. לֹא כֵן תַּנֵּי רִבִּי חִייָה. קָרְבָּנוֹ לַיי֨ עַל נִזְרוֹ. שֶׁיִּקְדּוֹם נִזְרוֹ לְקָרְבָּנוֹ וְלֹא שֶׁיִּקְדּוֹם קָרְבָּנוֹ לְנִזְרוֹ. שַׁנְייָא הִיא שֶׁעוֹמֵד בִּנְזִירוּתוֹ. נִיחָא שְׁנִייָה רִאשׁוֹנָה. רִאשׁוֹנָה שְׁנִייָה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוּדָה. וְהָדָא מְסַייְעָא לְרִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר. לֹא כֵן רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא מְפַקֵּד לַחֲבֵרַייָא. אִין שְׁמַעְתּוֹן מִילָּה מֵרִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר הֲווֹן יָֽדְעִין דְּרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן פְּלִיג. עַד שֶׁיָּבִיא כָּל־קָרְבְּנוֹתָיו. וְסָֽבְרִין מֵימַר כְּרַבָּנִין. וָכָא כְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אֲנָן קַייָמִין. רִבִּי חִינְנָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי פִינְחָס. תִּיפְתָּר בִּנְזִירוּתוֹ וּבִנְזִירוּתוֹ שֶׁל בְּנוֹ. בְּדָא עָלַת לוֹ שְׁנִייָה רִאשׁוֹנָה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן. לֹא כֵן סָֽבְרִנָן מֵימַר בָּאוֹמֵר. הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר. בְּדִין הָיָה שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא נָזִיר אֶלָּא אַחַת. אַתְּ הוּא שֶׁהֶחֱמַרְתָּה עָלָיו שֶׁיְּהֵא נָזִיר שְׁתַּיִם. לֹא דַייֶךָ שֶׁהֶחֱמַרְתָּ עָלָיו שֶׁיְּהֵא נָזִיר שְׁתַּיִם אֶלָּא שֶׁאַתְּ אוֹמֵר. אֵין בְּיָדוֹ כְּלוּם. HALAKHAH: “If somebody vowed two neziriot,” etc. If he finished his first period of nezirut and started to lean20The expression “to lean on” for “going to start” is found only here. on the second, when they did not find an opening for the first while they found an opening for the second21Since nezirut presupposes a vow, any nezirut can be eliminated by an Elder who finds “an opening” to declare the vow invalid; cf. Nedarim, Introduction, p. 422; Nazir 3:1:2-3" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Nazir.3.1.2-3">Chapter 3:1, Notes 6–9; Nazir 9:1:2-7" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Nazir.9.1.2-7">Chapter 9:1., the second can be used for the first22If he had sacrifices prepared for the second nezirut but none for the first, those of the second may be used for the first.. Where do we hold? If he said, “I am a nazir twice,” a vow which is partially annulled is totally annulled23Nedarim 9:6:1" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Nedarim.9.6.1">Mishnah Nedarim 9:6. In this case, no sacrifice is due since there is no nezirut; if he wishes, he can shave without formality.. If he said, “I am a nazir for these 30 days and those 30 days,” in this case the second cannot be used for the first24If he made two separate vows, rather than one vow covering separate periods, the sacrifices are not transferable since they are dedicated for separate vows.. But we must hold that he said, “I am a nazir and nazir.” If he said, “these are for nezirut.25He refers to the vow but not to the particular instance mentioned in the vow. Then the sacrifice can be brought for any obligation implied by the vow.” But if he said, “these are for my nezirut; those are for the other nezirut,” in this case the second cannot be used for the first24If he made two separate vows, rather than one vow covering separate periods, the sacrifices are not transferable since they are dedicated for separate vows.. Rebbi Eleazar said, if he finished the first nezirut, as soon as he brought a sacrifice and shaved, the first is credited for the second26R. Eleazar deals with the opposite case. He made the double vow, finished the first period, brought a sacrifice, and then went to ask an Elder about his vow. If the first nezirut was annulled, he can count the nezirut he kept as second nezirut and be freed from his obligation. This is essentially stated in Tosephta 2:15 (quoted in the Nedarim.17b">Babli, Nedarim 17b, Shevuot.27b">Šebuot 27b): “If somebody vowed two neziriot, finished the first one but did not bring his sacrifices, went to an Elder to ask to annul his first [nezirut], the second nezirut is fulfilled by the first.”. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa commanded the colleagues: If you hear anything formulated by Rebbi Eleazar, you should know that Rebbi Joḥanan disagrees27Since R. Eleazar was R. Joḥanan’s student, if he felt impelled to formulate a statement by himself, not referring to R. Joḥanan, it is safe to assume that R. Joḥanan disagreed.: not unless he brings all his sacrifices, following the rabbis; but following Rebbi Simeon even if he brings only one sacrifice28R. Joḥanan does not disagree with the main thrust of R. Eleazar’s statement, that the nezirut can be counted as the one covered by his vow, but he objects to the formulation referring to “a sacrifice”, which implies that a nazir can shave and drink wine after one sacrifice. This is R. Simeon’s opinion in Nazir 6:9:1" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Nazir.6.9.1">Mishnah 6:11. R. Joḥanan insists that all three sacrifices be brought in order to be valid; this is the opinion of the anonymous majority which in R. Joḥanan’s opinion always defines practice (cf. Yevamot 4:11:8" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Yevamot.4.11.8">Yebamot 4:11, Note 177).. If he dedicated both together, he has only one in his hand29This refers to a different situation, Tosephta 2:15: “If somebody vowed two neziriot, finished both of them, and brought the sacrifices for both of them together, he has only one in his hand.” Since the sacrifices of a nazir presuppose a period of at least 30 days for the growth of his hair, it is impossible for one person to bring sacrifices for multiple periods of nezirut together. He has to be nazir for another 30 days and bring another set of sacrifices.. If he dedicated each of them separately or30This must read “and”; then the text becomes the last sentence in Tosephta 2:15. brought each of them for the other, he did not acquit himself [of his obligation]. This means that as far as holiness goes, they became holy31If one of the neziriot was dissolved by an Elder, why should the sacrifice attached to it be holy? If the vow was in error, the dedication is in error.. But did not Rebbi Ḥiyya state32Nazir 2:9:3" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Nazir.2.9.3">Chapter 2:9, Note 118.: “His sacrifice to the Eternal for his nezirut,” i. e., that his vow of nazir should precede his sacrifice, rather than that his sacrifice precede his vow of nazir. It is different, because he still is in nezirut33The argument of R. Ḥiyya is not applicable to our case. It is clear that a person cannot dedicate animals to satisfy a future vow of nazir since that would be “stipulating about non-existence” (Nazir 2:5:3" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Nazir.2.5.3">Chapter 2:5, Note 89). But in the present case, the vow exists.. One understands the second for the first34The case treated at the start of the Halakhah.. The first for the second35The case discussed by R. Eleazar. Does the argument of R. Ḥiyya not apply in this case, when the dedication of the sacrifice for the first period preceded the start of the second.? Rebbi Jehudah said, this supports Rebbi Eleazar. But did not Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa command the colleagues: If you hear anything formulated by Rebbi Eleazar, you should know that Rebbi Joḥanan disagrees; not unless he brings all his sacrifices. They wanted to say, following the rabbis. But here, we hold with Rebbi Simeon36Since the disagreement between R. Eleazar and R. Joḥanan only refers to the disagreement between R. Simeon and the rabbis, it is clear that R. Eleazar follows R. Simeon and the second period substituted for the first both in time and in sacrifices.. Rebbi Ḥinena in the name of Rebbi Phineas: Explain it for his nezirut and the nezirut he pledged for his son. In that, the second can be used for the first37He rejects the previous explanation and restricts the possibility of substituting the second period for the first to the case that both are occasioned by the birth of a son, one period for himself and one for his son’s birth. In this case, it was stated in Nazir 2:9:3" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Nazir.2.9.3">Chapter 2:9 (Note 118) that R. Ḥiyya’s argument is disregarded; both neziriot combined constitute one vow.. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, did we not argue about one who said, “I am a nazir”38It had been decided that the substitution of sacrifices was possible only for the person who said, “I am a nazir and nazir.” It would be a reasonable interpretation to say that the second “and nazir” was said for emphasis rather than duplication. Therefore, the second nezirut is a rabbinic obligation, not an original vow, and there should be no discussion of legalistic niceties in this case.? He really should be a nazir only once. You were severe with him and obligated him to be a nazir twice. Is it not enough that you were severe with him and obligated him to be a nazir twice, that now you say, he has nothing in his hands?