Nazir 7b (ז:) — the Talmud in English

And if it taught

only, “I am a nazir and

one hour,” and did not teach, “I am a nazir for one and a half,”—

I would have said that it is specifically when he says “one hour” that he counts two periods of nezirut,

because he did not intend precision.

That is to say, this is an expression referring to something that cannot exist, since one does not undertake nezirut for hours. For even if he says, “I am a nazir for thirty days and one hour,” he is a nazir for thirty-one days. And since his statement must be extended beyond its literal wording, we extend it by a complete period of nezirut.

But

one who says, “I am a nazir for

one and a half,”

intended precision,

since it is possible for him to be a nazir for forty-five days, which is one and a half periods of nezirut,

perhaps say that he should not count two [I would have said that he should not count two periods of nezirut].

It teaches us

that our Mishna teaches that

in all of them

he is

a nazir for two.

Mishna:

If a person says,

“I am a nazir for thirty days and one hour,”

he is

a nazir for thirty-one days, since there is no nezirut for hours,

as it is stated: “the days of his abstention,” and not hours.

But he is not liable for two periods of nezirut [as is one who says: “I am a nazir and one hour,” as explained in the preceding Mishna], since he interrupted the words “thirty days” between the word “nazir” and “and one hour.” Therefore, the meaning of his words is not two periods of nezirut, but one extended period of nezirut.

The same law applies if he says, “I am a nazir for thirty and one day”: He does not observe two periods of nezirut, since he interrupted the word “thirty” between the word “nazir” and “and one day.”

Gemara:

Rav said: They taught this only when he said “I am a nazir for

thirty-one days.”

In that case, he is a nazir for only thirty-one days.

thirty-one days”

But

if he said: “I am a nazir for

thirty days and one day”—

he added the word “day”—he is

a nazir for two.

And the Gemara explains the reason of

Rav:

He

held in accordance with Rabbi Akiva, who interprets redundant language [who interprets the redundant language of people], that is, one who derives from ordinary human speech something that was not stated explicitly, but is implied by the precise wording.

As we learned in the chapter “One Who Sells a House” [in Bava Batra 64a]:

A person who sells a house

does not sell

the pit [a cavity dug in the ground for storing water],

nor the cistern [a pit dug in the ground, for which a stone wall is built],

even though he wrote for him in the bill of sale that he was selling him “

depth and height [depth and height],” unless he also wrote for him, “from the depths of the earth to the height of the firmament.”

And

the seller

must acquire a path for himself

from the buyer to reach the pit and the cistern that he retained,

the statement of Rabbi Akiva.

For Rabbi Akiva holds: Whenever a person sells, he sells generously. Therefore, he sold the entire field and did not retain a path for himself.

And the Sages say: He need not

the seller

acquire a path for himself

from the buyer in order to go to the pit and the cistern, because a person sells begrudgingly, and he retained a path for himself by which to go there.

And Rabbi Akiva concedes

who holds that he must acquire a path for himself,

when he said to him

the seller to the buyer: “

Except for these,”

meaning: “I am selling you everything except the pit and the cistern,”

that he need not acquire a path for himself.

Since the condition that he stated, “except for these,” is an unnecessary condition—for they are in any event not included in the sale—his intention must certainly be that he is retaining these along with the path by which to reach them.

Similarly, in our matter, since he added the word “day,” his intention is to divide his undertaking into two: one undertaking concerning nezirut for thirty days, and a second undertaking concerning nezirut for one day. And since nezirut cannot be less than thirty days, he is a nazir for two periods.

—who holds that the seller must acquire a path for himself—

when he said to him

the seller to the buyer: “

Except for these,”

meaning: “I am selling you everything except the pit and the cistern,”

that he does not need to acquire a path for himself.

And because the condition “except for these” was unnecessary, since they were in any event not included in the sale, it certainly means that he is retaining them together with a path by which he can reach them.

The same applies in our case: Since he added the word “day,” his intention is to divide his undertaking into two: one undertaking concerning thirty days of nazirite status, and a second undertaking concerning one day of nazirite status. And since nazirite status cannot be for less than thirty days, he is a nazir for two periods.