Talmud Jerusalem
Talmud Jerusalem

Talmud for Nazir 5:1

מחלוקת כר"ש דתנינן תמן שבועה שלא אוכל ואכל נבילות וטריפות שקצים ורמשים חייב ורבי שמעון פוטר אמר רבי זעירא בכולל נחלקו אבל בפורט כל עמא מודיי שאין שבועות חלות על איסורין וכאן בכולל אנן קיימין אמר ר' יודן כאן בנדרים כאן בשבועות נדרים חלין על איסורין ואין שבועות חלות על האיסורין כשם שכינוי נזירות כנזירות כך כינוי שמשון כשמשון היידין אינון כינוי שמשון אמר ר' אבינא שמשוך שמשור שמשוץ מן הכא הכביד שערו רבי דמר ר' ירמיה משום ר' אימי דברי ר' נזיר עולם מגלח אחד לשנים עשר חדש דברי חכמים פעמים שהוא מגלח אחת לשלשים יום פעמים שהוא מגלח אחת לי"ב חדש ר' הילא בשם ר' אסי מתניתא אמרה כן הריני נזיר כשער ראשי וכעפר הארץ וכחול הים הרי זה נזיר עולם ומגלח אחת לשלשים יום ר' אומר אין זה מגלח אחת לשלשים יום אלא אחת לי"ב חדש ואי זהו שמגלח אחת לשלשים יום האומר הרי עלי נזירות כשערות ראשי וכעפר הארץ וכחול הים אמר ר' זעירא בסתם חלוקין מה נן קיימין אם באומר מלא שערי כל עמא מודיי שמגלח לאחר שנים עשר חדש אם באומר כמיניין שערות ראשי כל עמא מודיי שמגלח אחד לשלשים יום אלא כי נן קיימין באומר כשיער ר' אומר מלא ראשי ורבנין אמרין כאומר כמיניין שערות ראשי וכאן למה אין האיש נודר שאינו אלא כמזרז עצמו מן האסורין ועוד מן הדא הוסיף רבי יהודה אם אמר

R. Hanina says: The sun must have gone down and the moon have commenced to rise. In effect R. Samuel says: The moon cannot shine as long as the sun still lightens, neither can the moon shine after the sun has darted his (morning) beams. R. Samuel bar-Hiya, in the name of R. Hanina, says: If a man, when the sun has begun to set, descends from the summit of Mount Carmel to bathe in the sea, and re-ascends to partake of the oblations, he has certainly bathed during the daytime. It is, however, only a certainty in the case of one taking cross-roads to shorten the route; but not in the case of one who follows the high road (Strata). What is meant by "the intermediate period "? R. Tanhooma says: It resembles the delay of a drop of blood placed on the edge of a sword, i.e. the time required for the drop of blood to divide and run down on either side of the blade, is equivalent to the period of transition. According to R. Nehemiah, it means the time it would require for a man to run half a mile, after sunset. R. Yosse says: This twilight lasts no longer than the twinkling of an eye, and not even the men of science could measure it. Whilst the R. Yosse and R. Aha were together, the former said to the latter: Does it not seem to you that the passage of this half a mile (twilight) lasts but a second? It is certainly my opinion, said R. Aha. However, R. Hiya does not say so, but each twinkling of an eye, measured by the duration of the passage of half a mile (as R. Nehemiah), is doubtful. R. Mena says : I have made an objection in the presence of R. Aha: Have we not learnt elsewhere, that if an impurity is seen, once during the day and again during the intermediate period, or once in the twilight and again on the morrow, when the certainty exists that the impurity dates partly from this day and partly from the next day, there is a certainty as to the circumstances of the impurity, and the sacrifice is obligatory.

Jerusalem Talmud Nazir

It was stated: “All substitute names for nazir vows are like nazir vows, and one whips because of them.” Even though Rebbi Joḥanan said, one does not whip for prohibitions7Nedarim 1:1, Note 36., he agrees in this case that he is whipped8If somebody makes a vow using unapproved language and does not keep it, he cannot be accused of transgressing a biblical prohibition. But if he refers, if only obliquely, to the biblical laws of the nazir, such an infringement is punishable by law.. Even though Rebbi Simeon said, he does not bring a sacrifice9In Mishnah 5:7, R. Simeon holds that for a questionable vow of nazir one cannot bring a sacrifice since the Temple does not accept questionable sacrifices., he agrees in this case that he be whipped10Since the vow is not questionable.. Even though Rebbi Jehudah said, a questionable nazir vow is permitted11In Halakhah 4:6; based on Num. 6:2., he agrees in this case that he be whipped10Since the vow is not questionable.. Where do we hold? If he has the intention of becoming a nazir, even if he only said, I shall be a nazir if I mention bread, he is a nazir. Similarly, if he had no intention of becoming a nazir, even if he mentioned nazir, he is no nazir; for example if he was reading the Torah and mentioned nazir,naziq. But we hold about one who says, I declared my vow of nazir by any of these expressions. If one of them is a valid expression of a vow of nazir12From the list mentioned in the Mishnah., it will fall on him, otherwise, will the vow of nazir not fall on him? One tells him: keep the discipline13Deut. 12:28; if he had the intention of becoming a nazir, even if he did not use exactly the prescribed language. The same expression is used in the Babli, Menaḥot 81b, regarding a person who makes an irregular vow of a sacrifice..
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jerusalem Talmud Nazir

Unless the cow stood up, unless the door was opened44Under which circumstances will the House of Shammai insist that the maker of the vow is a nazir? If the cow does stand up or if she never stands up?? Let us hear from the following45Mishnah 5:6: “If people dispute facts; A says that he will be nazir if a fact is true, B says that he will be nazir if it is not true, C says that he will be nazir if both A and B are wrong. The House of Shammai say, …”: “The House of Shammai say, they are all nezirim. But the House of Hillel say, only those are nezirim whose words turned out not to be true.” So is the Mishnah46The text is garbled here (and somewhat garbled in Halakhah 6:6): “So is the Mishnah: ‘Whose words turned out to be true;’ it is formulated in the opposite, so as not to bury her son.” The rancher’s statement, that his cow said, “I shall be a nezirah if I be standing up”, for the House of Shammai has to be interpreted as a vow of nazir if the cow never stands up, since the cow standing up is the desired outcome; just as a woman who is afraid her son might die will formulate it saying her son certainly will not die. (It is possible to read a similar interpretation into the text of the Babli, 10b.): “Whose words turned out not to be true;” it is formulated in the opposite, as not to say that she should not bury her son. Even if the cow did not stand up, even if the door was not opened47For the House of Shammai, he is a nazir in any case..
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jerusalem Talmud Terumot

HALAKHAH: There85Mishnah Nazir 5:1. The entire Halakhah is copied from Nazir, Halakhah 5:1., we have stated: “The House of Shammai say, dedication in error is dedication.” Rebbi Jeremiah said, if he intends to say “profane” and he says “fire sacrifice”, he dedicated it86This is his interpretation of the House of Shammai’s position.. Rebbi Yose said, we consider only if he intended to dedicate but he erred because of something else87The full text of Mishnah Nazir5:1 is: “The House of Shammai say, dedication in error is dedication, but the House of Hillel say, it is no dedication. How is that? If he said, the black bull coming out first from my house shall be dedicated [as sacrifice] and a white one came out, the House of Shammai say, it is dedicated, but the House of Hillel say, it is not dedicated.” R. Yose restricts the opinion of the house of Shammai to the case when he wanted to dedicate some animal for a certain kind of sacrifice and the only error is in the individual selected.. What is the status of this Mishnah88The Mishnah here in Terumot. For R. Jeremiah, it only follows the House of Hillel.? In the opinion of Rebbi Jeremiah it is in dispute, in the opinion of Rebbi Yose it is everybody’s opinion.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jerusalem Talmud Nazir

Available for Premium members only
Full Chapter