## Nazir Daf 17b

###### Nazir 17b:1
[Nazir 17b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/17b:1)

אֶלָּא: כְּגוֹן שֶׁנִּכְנַס בְּשִׁידָּה תֵּיבָה וּמִגְדָּל, וּבָא חֲבֵירוֹ וּפָרַע מֵעָלָיו מַעֲזִיבָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** Rava’s question should be understood to refer to a case **where** one **entered** the cemetery **in a chest, box, or cabinet,** i.e., in large wooden containers that do not contract ritual impurity. One can enter a cemetery in such a container without becoming impure. If one was carried into a cemetery inside one of these containers, then took a vow of naziriteship, **and another came and removed the top [*ma’aziva*] from above him,** he would become ritually impure by virtue of being in the cemetery.


###### Nazir 17b:2
[Nazir 17b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/17b:2)

כִּי גְּמִירִין שְׁהִיָּיה, בְּבֵית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ, אֲבָל אַבָּרַאי — לָא. אוֹ דִלְמָא לָא שְׁנָא? תֵּיקוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If he was then warned to leave the cemetery, the question is as follows: **When we learned** by tradition that one is liable to receive lashes for **delaying** his exit, does that apply only **to the Temple, but outside** the Temple, such as when a nazirite is in a cemetery, does the *halakha* **not** apply, so that he is liable to receive lashes even if he did not delay his exit? **Or perhaps it is not different,** and a nazirite in a cemetery is flogged only if he remains there for a specific period of time. The dilemma **shall stand** unresolved.


###### Nazir 17b:3
[Nazir 17b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/17b:3)

בָּעֵי רַב אָשֵׁי: נָזַר וְהוּא בְּבֵית הַקְּבָרוֹת, טָעוּן גִּילּוּחַ, אוֹ לָא? כִּי בָּעֵי תִּגְלַחַת טָהוֹר שֶׁנִּטְמָא, דְּקָא מְטַמֵּא לִנְזִירוּתֵיהּ, אֲבָל טָמֵא שֶׁנָּזַר — לָא. אוֹ דִלְמָא לָא שְׁנָא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Rav Ashi raises a dilemma:** If **one took a vow of naziriteship while in a cemetery,** is he **required to shave** upon becoming ritually pure, before starting his term of naziriteship, **or not?** The Gemara explains the two sides of the question: **When** a ritually impure nazirite **is required to shave** before starting his tally, does that refer only to **a ritually pure** nazirite **who became impure, who has defiled his naziriteship? But a ritually impure** person **who** only **took a vow of naziriteship,** and whose naziriteship has not yet begun, is he **not** obligated to shave? **Or perhaps it is not different.**


###### Nazir 17b:4
[Nazir 17b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/17b:4)

תָּא שְׁמַע: מִי שֶׁנָּזַר וְהוּא בְּבֵית הַקְּבָרוֹת, אֲפִילּוּ הָיָה שָׁם שְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם — אֵינוֹ עוֹלֶה לוֹ מִן הַמִּנְיָן, וְאֵינוֹ מֵבִיא קׇרְבַּן טוּמְאָה. קׇרְבַּן טוּמְאָה הוּא דְּלָא מַיְיתֵי, אֲבָל גַּלּוֹחֵי בָּעֵי! ״מַה טַּעַם״ קָאָמַר: מַה טַּעַם אֵינוֹ מֵבִיא קׇרְבַּן טוּמְאָה — מִשּׁוּם דְּלָא בָּעֵי גַּלּוֹחֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Come** and **hear** a proof from the mishna: **One who took a vow of naziriteship while in a cemetery, even if he was there** for a full **thirty days** without leaving, those days he spent in the cemetery **do not count** as part **of his tally,** since his naziriteship has not yet gone into effect, **and he** therefore **does not bring the offerings of impurity.** The Gemara infers from this: **It is the offerings of impurity** that **he does not bring, but he is required to shave.** The Gemara rejects this proof: It is possible that the mishna **is saying: What is the reason,** as follows: **What is the reason** that **he does not bring the offerings of impurity? Because he does not require shaving.** This indicates that the naziriteship has not yet begun, therefore, he does not bring the offerings either.


###### Nazir 17b:5
[Nazir 17b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/17b:5)

תָּא שְׁמַע: אֵין בֵּין טָמֵא שֶׁנָּזַר לְנָזִיר טָהוֹר שֶׁנִּטְמָא, אֶלָּא טָמֵא שֶׁנָּזַר — שְׁבִיעִי שֶׁלּוֹ עוֹלֶה לוֹ מִן הַמִּנְיָן, וְנָזִיר טָהוֹר שֶׁנִּטְמָא — אֵין שְׁבִיעִי שֶׁלּוֹ עוֹלֶה לוֹ מִן הַמִּנְיָן. מַאי לָאו, הָא לְתִגְלַחַת זֶה וָזֶה שָׁוִין? לָא: הָא לְמַלְקוּת זֶה וָזֶה שָׁוִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests another proof. **Come** and **hear** a proof from another *baraita*: **The difference between a ritually impure** person **who took a vow of naziriteship and a ritually pure nazirite who became impure is only** the following *halakha*: With regard to **an impure** person **who took a vow of naziriteship, his seventh** day of purification **counts** as part **of his tally** of the term of naziriteship, **but** with regard to **a pure nazirite who became impure, his seventh** day of purification **does not count** as part **of his tally.** The Gemara infers: **What, is it not** so that **with regard to shaving, this and that are equal,** and he must shave in either case? The Gemara rejects this: **No,** there is a different inference: **It is with regard to flogging** that **this and that are equal,** but one who took a vow of naziriteship while in a cemetery does not have to shave.


###### Nazir 17b:6
[Nazir 17b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/17b:6)

אֲבָל תִּגְלַחַת מַאי — זֶה מְגַלֵּחַ, וְזֶה אֵינוֹ מְגַלֵּחַ? לִיתְנְיֵיהּ! תְּנָא שְׁבִיעִי שֶׁלּוֹ וְכׇל מִילֵּי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara questions this answer: **But what** is the *halakha* concerning **shaving?** Does **this** one, who became ritually impure, **shave, and that** one, who vowed while in a cemetery, **not shave?** If so, **let him teach this** difference as well. The Gemara answers: The *tanna* **taught: His seventh day, and all matters** relevant to it, including the *halakha* of shaving. Once it says that the seventh day is part of the tally of the ritually impure nazirite who became pure, it can be inferred that he does not bring the offerings of impurity on the eighth day, and therefore he does not shave on the seventh day.


###### Nazir 17b:7
[Nazir 17b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/17b:7)

תָּא שְׁמַע: אֵין לִי אֶלָּא יְמֵי טוּמְאָתוֹ שֶׁאֵין עוֹלִין לוֹ מִן הַמִּנְיָן, יְמֵי חִלּוּטוֹ, מִנַּיִן? וְדִין הוּא: מָה יְמֵי טוּמְאָתוֹ מְגַלֵּחַ וּמֵבִיא קׇרְבָּן — אַף יְמֵי חִלּוּטוֹ מְגַלֵּחַ וּמֵבִיא קׇרְבָּן, וּמָה יְמֵי טוּמְאָתוֹ אֵין עוֹלִין לוֹ מִן הַמִּנְיָן — אַף יְמֵי חִלּוּטוֹ אֵין עוֹלִין לוֹ מִן הַמִּנְיָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara further suggests: **Come** and **hear** a proof from the following *baraita*: **I have** derived **only that** a nazirite’s **days of ritual impurity do not count** as part **of his tally; from where** do I derive that **his days of confirmed** leprosy, in a case where a nazirite became a leper during his term, do not count toward his tally of naziriteship? **And** it would seem that **by right** it should be so: **Just as** at the end of **his days of ritual impurity** the nazirite **shaves and brings offerings, so too** at the end of **his days of confirmed** leprosy the *halakha* is that he **shaves and brings offerings** for his leprosy. **And** this comparison can be extended: **Just as the days of his ritual impurity do not count** as part **of his tally, so too his days of confirmed** leprosy **do not count** as part **of his tally.**


###### Nazir 17b:8
[Nazir 17b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/17b:8)

לֹא, אִם אָמַרְתָּ בִּימֵי טוּמְאָתוֹ, שֶׁכֵּן מְבַטֵּל בָּהֶן אֶת הַקּוֹדְמִין — לְפִיכָךְ אֵין עוֹלִין לוֹ מִן הַמִּנְיָן, תֹּאמַר בִּימֵי חִלּוּטוֹ, שֶׁאֵינוֹ מְבַטֵּל אֶת הַקּוֹדְמִין — לְפִיכָךְ עוֹלִין לוֹ מִן הַמִּנְיָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: **No, if you say** so **with regard to his days of ritual impurity,** in that case it is **because with them, the previous** days of his naziriteship observed in ritual purity **are negated. Therefore,** those days **do not count** as part **of his tally.** But will **you say** the same **with regard to his days of confirmed** leprosy, **which do not negate the previous** days? If thirty days, enough time for his hair to regrow, remain in his term of naziriteship after becoming purified from his leprosy, the days before he contracted leprosy are not negated. It is **therefore** possible to argue that **they do count** as part **of his tally.**


###### Nazir 17b:9
[Nazir 17b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/17b:9)

אָמַרְתָּ: וּמָה נָזִיר בְּקֶבֶר שֶׁשְּׂעָרוֹ רָאוּי לְתִגְלַחַת — אֵין עוֹלִין לוֹ מִן הַמִּנְיָן, יְמֵי חִלּוּטוֹ שֶׁאֵין רָאוּי לְתִגְלַחַת, לֹא כׇּל שֶׁכֵּן שֶׁאֵין עוֹלִין לוֹ מִן הַמִּנְיָן?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: But **you can say** that **just as** with regard to **a nazirite** who was **in the grave,** i.e., a cemetery, **whose hair is fit for shaving,** those days spent in the cemetery **do not count** as part **of his tally, his days of confirmed** leprosy, **which are not fit for** counting as part of the tally required for the **shaving,** since he must first shave as part of the purification process for his leprosy, is it **not all the more so that they do not count** as part **of his tally?** This concludes the *baraita*.


###### Nazir 17b:10
[Nazir 17b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/17b:10)

מַאי לָאו, תִּגְלַחַת טוּמְאָה? לָא, תִּגְלַחַת טׇהֳרָה. הָכִי נָמֵי מִסְתַּבְּרָא,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara now attempts to prove from the *baraita* that one who took a vow of naziriteship while in a cemetery must shave at the close of his process of purification: **What, is it not** so that when the *baraita* mentions shaving, it is referring to **the shaving of impurity,** and it is teaching that one who took a vow of naziriteship in a cemetery must shave at the end of his purification process? The Gemara rejects this: **No,** it is referring to **the shaving of purity,** meaning the shaving done after one completes his term of naziriteship. He then will shave all of his hair, including that which grew during the time he was ritually impure due to his presence in the cemetery. The Gemara adds: **So, too, it is reasonable** to say that this is the correct interpretation,