Nazir 8a — the Talmud in English

Mishna:

The one who says:

“I am hereby a nazirite like the hair of my head, and like the dust of the earth, and like the sand of the sea,”

he is a nazirite forever.

That is to say, he accepted upon himself nazirite periods according to the number of the hairs of his head, or like the dust of the earth and the sand of the sea; and since they are exceedingly numerous, it turns out that he is a nazirite forever.

And he brings the sacrifices of a nazirite, and

shaves

once every thirty days

the hairs of his head,

once every thirty days,

because every thirty days is the completion of a naziriteship.

Rabbi says: He does not shave once every thirty days,

because the meaning of his words is one long naziriteship, whose days equal the number of the hairs of his head; and if so, he cannot shave in the middle of the naziriteship.

And which one is he who shaves once every thirty days?

With what wording will he speak, so that his words will be understood as accepting a large number of naziriteships?

The one who says: I have naziriteship upon myself

naziriteships

like the hair of my head, and like the dust of the earth, and like the sand of the sea.

And the tanna of the Mishna continues:

And if there was before him an empty house or an empty basket, and he said:

“I am hereby a nazirite

like

the fullness of the house”

or

“I am hereby a nazirite like

the fullness of the basket.”

They examine him

to determine what he intended by his words.

If he said:

I vowed

one large naziriteship,

I vowed only one naziriteship, and what I said, “the fullness of the house or the basket,” I intended only to say that “the matter is extended for me, as though I had accepted upon myself naziriteships equal to the fullness of the basket”—he is

a nazirite for thirty days.

And if he said: I vowed without specification.

We must be in doubt concerning his words, and we

regard the basket

as a matter of doubt

as though it were full

of small grains of

mustard, and

he is

a nazirite all his days.

And his law depends on the dispute between Rabbi and the Sages.

According to the Sages: he is in doubt, perhaps he is obligated in many naziriteships, corresponding to the number of mustard grains needed to fill the basket.

According to Rabbi: he is in doubt whether he is a nazirite of one long naziriteship.

And if he said:

“I am hereby a nazirite from here until a certain place,”

he is a nazirite according to the number of days of walking from here until that certain place.

Therefore,

they estimate how many days

of walking there are

from here until that certain place.

If there are fewer than thirty days

of walking from here until that certain place, he is

a nazirite for thirty days,

because there is no naziriteship of fewer than thirty days.

And if not,

but there are more than thirty days from here until that certain place, he is

a nazirite

of one long naziriteship

according to the number of days

from here until that certain place.

And if he said:

“I am hereby a nazirite according to the number of days of the sun,”

since he said “according to the number,” it implies that he will count a number of naziriteships equal to the number of days of the sun in a year—

and he

counts naziriteships

many

according to the number of days of the sun

in a solar year.

Rabbi Judah said:

Indeed, this is the law: he counts a number of naziriteships corresponding to the days of the year, and not one naziriteship corresponding to the number of days of the year.

For

there was an incident

with a person who said, “I am hereby a nazirite according to the number of days of the sun,” and the Sages obligated him to count 365 naziriteships, corresponding to the number of days of the sun in the year, and

when he completed

them,

he died.

Gemara:

We learned in the Mishna: “I am hereby a nazirite like the fullness of the house or like the fullness of the basket; and if he said, ‘I vowed without specification,’”

we regard the basket as though it were full of mustard, and he is a nazirite all his days

[according to the Sages, many naziriteships; and according to Rabbi, one long naziriteship]:

And we raise an objection:

But why

is he a nazirite all his days!?

Let us see it

[let us regard the basket]

as though

it were

full of cucumbers and gourds,

which are large and whose number is relatively small, or even full of dough,

and let there be a remedy for him

[let there be a remedy for him], so that he will count only one naziriteship, because perhaps his words are interpreted as referring to a filling with dough!?

And this is because it is a presumption that a person does not bring himself into a matter whose doubt is more stringent than its certainty.

For if he were certainly obligated in a naziriteship like the fullness of the house with mustard grains, he would count thirty days each time, bring sacrifices, and shave. Whereas in a state of doubt, he would shave only once after thirty days—according to the Sages who disagree with Rabbi—and thereafter he would not shave.

For after the first shaving, he is in doubt whether he is obligated to conduct many naziriteships, or whether he is obligated in nothing. And when he conducts the second naziriteship because of the doubt, he cannot shave, since he cannot bring sacrifices, because perhaps he is not a nazirite, and his sacrifices are non-sacred animals in the Temple courtyard. And every nazirite who does not bring sacrifices does not shave the hair of his head.

Hezekiah said:

This law of our Mishna

is in dispute

among the tannaim

and is taught

according to the view of

Rabbi Shimon, who said: A person brings himself into a matter whose doubt is more stringent than its certainty.

For it was taught in a beraita:

The one who says,

“I am hereby a nazirite on condition that there be

[if there are]

one hundred kor in this heap.”

And

after he vowed,

he went and found that it had been stolen or lost,

and he can no longer know how much had been in it.

Rabbi Shimon forbids him

with all the laws of naziriteship, since

the doubt of naziriteship is stringent,

and perhaps there were one hundred kor in that heap when he spoke.

And even though his doubt is more stringent than his certainty, for if he becomes impure it turns out that he is a doubtful impure nazirite, and there is no remedy for him, because he cannot bring an impure person’s guilt-offering, since perhaps there were not one hundred kor in the heap, and it turns out that the guilt-offering is a non-sacred animal in the Temple courtyard.

Rabbi Judah permits, for the doubt of naziriteship is lenient,

since his doubt is more stringent than his certainty, and a person does not bring himself into a matter whose doubt is more stringent than its certainty; necessarily, his intention was that he would be a nazirite only if it would be found that there were indeed one hundred kor in the heap.

We see, then, that the tannaim disputed this presumption: whether a person brings himself into a matter whose doubt is more stringent than its certainty.

And according to Rabbi Shimon, a person brings himself into a matter whose doubt is more stringent than its certainty; for if not, he should have said according to Rabbi Judah’s reasoning that this person intended to be a nazirite only if it would certainly be found that there were one hundred kor in the heap.

And our Mishna is according to the view of Rabbi Shimon.

Rabbi Yohanan said,

to explain our Mishna, that when one says, “I am hereby a nazirite like the fullness of the house,” he is a nazirite all his days, and we do not say that since his doubt is more stringent than his certainty, he should be a nazirite only for one naziriteship—

You may even say

that you can say that our Mishna is even according to the view of

Rabbi Judah,

who holds that a person does not bring himself into a matter whose doubt is more stringent than its certainty. For there is a distinction between Rabbi Judah’s ruling concerning the heap and our Mishna:

There,

concerning the heap that was lost,

he did not enter into naziriteship

[this person did not enter into naziriteship].

That is to say, a person does not bring himself into a matter whose doubt is more stringent than its certainty only in a place where we can say that, because of this, he did not accept naziriteship upon himself at all. For example, concerning the heap, where we say: since its doubt is more stringent than its certainty, this person did not intend to enter into such a doubt, and his intention was not that he be a nazirite unless it would be clear to him, when he examined the heap, that there were one hundred kor in this heap.

But

here,

concerning a nazirite like the fullness of the house,

he entered

into naziriteship

[it is certain that he accepted one naziriteship upon himself], because there is no side to the doubt that perhaps he is not obligated in naziriteship at all, for even if his words are interpreted as referring to the fullness of the house with dough, in the end he accepted one naziriteship upon himself—

And from now,

with what

will he be able

to remove it from himself,

how will he withdraw from the naziriteship?

For in any event he entered into naziriteship, and according to the possibility that his words are interpreted as referring to the fullness of the house with mustard grains, he accepted one long naziriteship upon himself—and as he proceeds to explain, this answer is said according to Rabbi—and we are uncertain whether he has not yet left the naziriteship into which he certainly entered. And in every such case he remains in naziriteship.

For once he began conducting himself in a naziriteship to which he is obligated in any event, and we are uncertain whether he has still not left his naziriteship, because he intended one long naziriteship, in such a case, even though his doubt is more stringent than certainty, he is obligated to continue conducting himself in naziriteship because of the doubt.

And the Gemara wonders:

Why not,

why can he not withdraw from the naziriteship—

Let us regard the basket,

why should we not regard the basket

as though it were full of cucumbers and gourds,

or even full of dough,

and let there be a remedy for him,

and let there be a remedy for him!? And the Gemara explains the question:

For it might have occurred to you

of the one who raised the objection

that naziriteships

many

he accepted upon himself.

That is to say, it might have occurred to the one who raised this question that Rabbi Yohanan’s answer applies also according to the Sages: if he intended mustard, he is obligated in many naziriteships and not one long naziriteship. According to their view, it turns out that after he conducts one naziriteship in which he is obligated in any event, he can shave and leave his naziriteship, for even if he accepted many naziriteships upon himself, he shaves at the end of thirty days and leaves the first naziriteship—

And since he has already left the naziriteship, there is no difference at all between him and one who has not conducted naziriteship at all until now. And just as concerning the heap we say, according to Rabbi Judah, that he is not obligated to conduct naziriteship, since his doubt is more stringent than his certainty, so too here we should say this.

And we answer: It cannot be said as the questioner understood Rabbi Yohanan’s answer, that it is according to the Sages, who hold that even if he intended the fullness of the house with mustard, he is not obligated in one long naziriteship, but in many naziriteships.