Nazir 40a — the Talmud in English

And

therefore

to teach it —

for the mitzva shaving, that it must be with a razor —

from the leper,

who shaves twice with a razor,

is impossible! ![](pamud.bmp "

precise page location") Since

one does not derive a lenient matter [the shaving of the nazirite, which is lenient, since it is only on the head]

Nazirite shaving, which is lenient, since it is performed only on the head]

from a stringent matter [the shaving of the leper, which is stringent, for he shaves his entire body],

leper’s shaving, which is stringent, since he shaves his entire body],

to make stringent for him [concerning the shaving of the nazirite, that the shaving must be only with a razor].

upon the Nazirite shaving, that the shaving must be performed only with a razor].

Rabbi says: It is not necessary,

that is, it is not compelled that the Torah wrote “razor” in order to teach concerning the nazirite’s final shaving that it must be with a razor; rather, we can say that “razor” was written in order to teach concerning the prohibition of shaving, that it must specifically be with a razor, [and the Gemara explains this below].

And why do I say that this is not compelled?

For this law, that the shaving is only with a razor, we can derive from another place, for

it says: “

A razor shall not pass over his head until the completion,”

and for this reason the Torah juxtaposed “until the completion” to “razor,” because

the Torah said

by this:

after the completion —

that is, when he shaves the mitzva shaving —

the shaving shall be only with a razor.

And we challenge Rabbi:

But it is written: “

A razor shall not pass over his head,”

and included in this are all the hair-removing instruments, as the first tanna said; if so, how did Rabbi say that “razor” comes to teach concerning the prohibition of the shaving? For he is liable even for all the hair-removing instruments!?

And we answer: In any event, “razor” was written concerning the prohibition of shaving, in order

to transgress concerning it —

the nazirite who shaved with an actual razor —

two prohibitions —

For what the Torah said: “A razor shall ‘not’ pass over his head” is expounded before it and after it, as though the Torah had said: “A razor — no; it shall not pass over his head.” The first prohibition is for a razor alone, and the second is for all the hair-removing instruments, with the razor included among them.

Rav Hisda said,

It is a halakha given to Moses at Sinai:

To receive lashes

for the shaving, the nazirite receives lashes even

for

one hair

alone

only.

To prevent

the mitzva shaving upon completion of the days of his naziriteship,

two;

if he left two hairs, his shaving is not valid for him.

To overturn

the days of his naziriteship because of the shaving,

he overturns only for

the shaving of

most of his head.

And with a razor,

that is, this that we said at the outset, that he receives lashes, applies only when he shaved with a razor; and the Gemara explains it as it proceeds.

And we challenge: Is it only

with a razor, no —

indeed he receives lashes, but

with another thing —

with the other hair-removing instruments —

not

receive lashes!?

But

we learned

in our Mishna:

A nazirite who shaved, whether with scissors, whether with a razor, or who clipped off any amount, is liable!?

And we answer:

Say [say this] in Rav Hisda’s words: “

and

in the manner of a razor,”

that is, that he shaves the hair at its root.

It was taught likewise

in accordance with Rav Hisda’s words, that he receives lashes even for one hair, and he overturns only for most of his head:

A nazirite who pulled out, plucked out, or clipped off any amount

that is, even one hair, behold, he is

liable.

And

he overturns only for most of his head.

And

this that we said, that he receives lashes, applies only

with a razor,

that is, in the manner of a razor.

Rabbi Shimon ben Yehuda says in the name of Rabbi Shimon:

Just as two hairs prevent it

for the fulfillment of the mitzva of shaving,

so

even

two hairs

alone that were shaved are

overturning for him,

even though most of the head was not shaved.

We learned there

in tractate Nega’im:

Three shave, and their shaving is a mitzva:

1.

A nazirite

who shaves his head in the shaving of purification.

2.

And a leper

who shaves his entire body at the end of the days of his confinement, when he becomes pure from his leprosy, and at the end of the days of his counting, as it is said [Leviticus 14:8]: “And the one being purified shall wash his garments and shave all his hair, and bathe in water and become pure; afterward he may come into the camp, but he shall dwell outside his tent for seven days. And it shall be on the seventh day: he shall shave again all his hair, his head and his beard and his eyebrows and all his hair he shall shave. And on the eighth day he shall take two unblemished lambs [for a guilt-offering and a burnt-offering], and one unblemished year-old ewe-lamb [for a sin-offering], and one log of oil. And the priest shall take one lamb and offer it as a guilt-offering, and the log of oil, and wave them as a waving before the Lord. And if he is poor and his hand cannot reach, he shall take one lamb as a guilt-offering for a waving. And two turtledoves or two young pigeons, which his hand can reach; and one shall be a sin-offering and the other a burnt-offering.”

3.

And the Levites

in the wilderness, as it is said to Moses: “Take the Levites from among the Children of Israel and purify them. And thus shall you do to them to purify them: sprinkle upon them waters of purification, and let a razor pass over all their flesh, and let them wash their garments and purify themselves. And they shall take one bull, the son of cattle, and its meal-offering of fine flour mixed with oil, and a second bull, the son of cattle, you shall take as a sin-offering. And Aaron shall wave the Levites as a waving before the Lord, from among the Children of Israel, and they shall be to perform the service of the work of the Lord’.”

And all of them who shaved not with a razor, or who left two hairs

that were not shaved,

have done nothing at all.

The master said: Three shave, and their shaving is a mitzva:

And we challenge: Is it not

obvious,

for all of them are explicit verses!? And we answer:

It might have been said:

The shaving is not a mitzva in its own right, but

it is for removing hair [it is only in order to remove the hair],

it is only intended to remove the hair],

and

if so, a razor does not prevent their shaving; rather,

even an application of depilatory [an application of a substance that removes the hair], for in the end the hair has been removed.

the application of a substance that removes the hair] would suffice, since in the end the hair has been removed.

It teaches us

the Mishna

that it is not so,

but their shaving is a mitzva in its own right, and he shaves only with a razor.

It teaches

in the Mishna [the master said]:

And all of them who shaved not with a razor

etc. have done nothing at all. And we challenge:

Granted, concerning a nazirite,

he shaves the mitzva shaving only with a razor, because

it is written: “

A razor shall not pass over his head,”

as explained above [at the beginning of the page], that from this verse it is learned that the mitzva shaving is only with a razor.

And

granted also

concerning the Levites,

they shave only with a razor, because

it is written: “And let a razor pass over all their flesh.”

But a leper,

who shaves

with a razor,

from where do we know it,

for in the Torah it says only, “And he shall shave all his hair,” and, “On the seventh day he shall shave all his hair,” but with a razor — no!?

And the Gemara adds to its question:

And if you say that it should come from the Levites,

perhaps you will say: Let us bring the shaving of the leper, which is with a razor, from the shaving of the Levites, and derive as follows:

What is distinctive about the Levites [that they]

they]

require shaving, and their shaving is only with a razor; so too I will bring the leper, who requires shaving, and his shaving is only with a razor.

But

there is room to refute: What is distinctive about the Levites, that they require waving with their bodies,

as it is said: “And Aaron shall wave the Levites as a waving before the Lord.”

Would you say the same concerning the leper, that it is not so

that he requires waving with his body, but rather with his offering, as it is said: “And the priest shall take the one lamb and offer it as a guilt-offering, and the log of oil, and wave them as a waving before the Lord.”

Rather, let it come from the nazirite,

perhaps you will say to bring the leper, who shaves with a razor, from the nazirite; but there is room to refute:

What is distinctive about the nazirite, that his offering requires bread; would you say the same concerning the leper, that it is not so

that he brings bread with his offering?

If so, from where do we know concerning the leper that his shaving is with a razor!?

And we answer:

Rather,

indeed the leper’s shaving

does not come from one [it cannot be brought through a derivation from one verse, whether from the Levites alone or from the nazirite alone] —

it cannot be derived through an av binyan from a single verse, whether from the Levites alone or from a Nazirite alone]—

but

let it come from both of them [let us bring the law of the leper, that he requires shaving with a razor, through a derivation from both verses together].

we derive the law that the leper is required to shave with a razor through an av binyan from both verses together].

How should it come,

that is, how shall we derive it from them?

And the Gemara explains how it is derived from the two of them:

If you say:

Let it come

for the leper

from the Levites

alone,

there is room to refute:

What is distinctive about the Levites, that they require waving with their bodies

— would you say the same concerning the leper, who does not require waving with his body —

And if you say:

The nazirite proves it,

who does not require waving with his body, and nevertheless his shaving is with a razor.

There is room to refute:

What is distinctive about the nazirite, that his offering requires bread.

Rather, you must return and say as at the beginning:

The Levites prove it,

whose offering does not require bread, and nevertheless their shaving is only with a razor.

And

it is found that

the judgment has returned.

This one is not seen as this one, and this one is not seen as this one [the stringency and the refutation of one are not like the stringency and the refutation of the other].

Therefore, one should derive from

the

common aspect between them —

that they require shaving, and their shaving is with a razor —

so too I will bring the leper, who requires shaving, and his shaving is with a razor!

Said

he challenged

Rava of Barnish to Rav Ashi: