Nazir 33a (לג.) — the Talmud in English

Abaye said:

There is no need to emend the version; rather, it is referring to a case where he said,

“Alternatively, if it is not so-and-so,

I too

will be

I will be

a nazir!”

And what is meant by “

his words were not fulfilled”?

His initial words were not fulfilled,

his first vow,

but his final words,

his second vow.

We learned in the Mishna:

he recoiled backwards,

that person turned back—

he is not a nazir, etc.

And the Gemara infers:

The reason is because he recoiled

backwards,

and therefore he is not a nazir, because the matter was not clarified.

But if he comes before us,

if that person comes before us and it becomes clear who he is,

he is a nazir!

Whose opinion is this?

Which tanna is the author of our Mishna, who holds this view?