## Nazir Daf 25a

###### Nazir 25a:1
[Nazir 25a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/25a:1)

וַהֲלֹא דְּמֵי חַטָּאת מְעוֹרָבִין בָּהֶן? אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: הֲלָכָה הִיא בְּנָזִיר. רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ אָמַר: ״לְכׇל נִדְרֵיהֶם וּלְכׇל נִדְבוֹתָם״, הַתּוֹרָה אָמְרָה: מוֹתַר נֶדֶר יְהֵא לִנְדָבָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But the money for the sin-offering is mingled with these** unallocated funds. How can it all be used for gift burnt-offerings? **Rabbi Yoḥanan said: It is** an accepted ***halakha* with regard to a nazirite** that his unallocated funds are used for gift offerings, despite the fact that they include the value of a sin-offering. **Reish Lakish said:** The verse states: “Whether **for any of their vows or for any of their gift offerings,** which are brought to the Lord as a burnt-offering” (Leviticus 22:18). In this verse, **the Torah states** that **the surplus of a vow shall be for a gift offering.** Here too, if the vow of naziriteship cannot be fulfilled, due to the death of the one who took the vow, the money is for a gift offering.


###### Nazir 25a:2
[Nazir 25a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/25a:2)

בִּשְׁלָמָא לְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, דְּאָמַר: הֲלָכָה הִיא בְּנָזִיר, אַמְּטוּ לְהָכִי סְתוּמִין — אִין, מְפוֹרָשִׁין — לָא. אֶלָּא לְרֵישׁ לָקִישׁ ״לְכׇל נִדְרֵיהֶם וּלְכׇל נִדְבוֹתָם״, מַאי אִירְיָא סְתוּמִין? אֲפִילּוּ מְפוֹרָשִׁין!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Granted, according to** the opinion of **Rabbi Yoḥanan, who said** that **it is a *halakha* with regard to a nazirite,** it is **for this reason** that if the funds **were unallocated, yes,** the money is used for gift offerings, but if they were **allocated, no,** they may not be used for this purpose, as this is the *halakha* passed down by tradition. **However, according to** the opinion of **Reish Lakish,** who derives the *halakha* from the verse: **“For any of their vows or for any of their gift offerings,” why** state **specifically unallocated** funds; **even allocated** money should be used for gift offerings after the death of their owner.


###### Nazir 25a:3
[Nazir 25a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/25a:3)

אָמַר רָבָא: מְפוֹרָשִׁין לָא מָצֵית אָמְרַתְּ, כְּבָר פַּסְקַהּ תַּנָּא דְּבֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל: ״רַק קׇדָשֶׁיךָ אֲשֶׁר יִהְיוּ לְךָ וּנְדָרֶיךָ״ — בְּוַלְדֵי קָדָשִׁים וּבִתְמוּרָתָם הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said: You cannot say** that this *halakha* should apply to **allocated** funds, as **the *tanna* of the school of Rabbi Yishmael has already ruled** in **this** regard. The *tanna* explained the following verse that deals with the obligation to bring consecrated animals to the Temple: **“Only your sacred things that you have, and your vows”** (Deuteronomy 12:26). **The verse is speaking of the offspring of consecrated** female peace-offerings **and their substitutes,** i.e., when one says a non-sacred animal should substitute for a sacred animal.


###### Nazir 25a:4
[Nazir 25a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/25a:4)

מָה תַּקָּנָתָן — ״תִּשָּׂא וּבָאתָ אֶל הַמָּקוֹם אֲשֶׁר יִבְחַר ה׳״. יָכוֹל יַעֲלֵם לְבֵית הַבְּחִירָה, וְיִמְנַע מֵהֶם מַיִם וּמָזוֹן בִּשְׁבִיל שֶׁיָּמוּתוּ, תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וְעָשִׂיתָ עֹלֹתֶיךָ הַבָּשָׂר וְהַדָּם״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to these animals, **what is their** means of **remedy? “You shall take and go to the place that the Lord shall choose”** (Deuteronomy 12:26). One **might** have thought that this means that **he must bring them up to the Temple, and** yet he does not sacrifice them but **withholds water and food from them so that they should die.** Therefore, **the verse states: “And you shall sacrifice your burnt-offerings, the flesh and the blood,** upon the altar of the Lord your God; and the blood of your offerings shall be poured out against the altar of the Lord your God, and you shall eat the flesh” (Deuteronomy 12:27).


###### Nazir 25a:5
[Nazir 25a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/25a:5)

לוֹמַר לָךְ: כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁאַתָּה נוֹהֵג בָּעוֹלָה — נְהוֹג בִּתְמוּרָתָהּ, כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁאַתָּה נוֹהֵג בַּשְּׁלָמִים — נְהוֹג בְּוַלְדֵיהֶם. יָכוֹל אַף וְלַד חַטָּאת וּתְמוּרַת אָשָׁם כֵּן, — תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״רַק״, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *tanna* explains that this verse comes **to say to you: In the manner that you treat a burnt-offering you must treat its substitute,** i.e., it should be sacrificed in its entirety; **in the manner that you treat a peace-offering you must treat their offspring,** as its inner parts must be sacrificed on the altar, with the rest eaten by the owners. One **might** have thought that **the offspring of a sin-offering and the substitute of a guilt-offering** should **also** be treated **so,** i.e., they too should be sacrificed on the altar like sin-offerings and guilt-offerings. Therefore **the verse states: “Only”** (Deuteronomy 12:26), which excludes these cases. This is **the statement of Rabbi Yishmael.**


###### Nazir 25a:6
[Nazir 25a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/25a:6)

רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר: אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ, הֲרֵי הוּא אוֹמֵר ״אָשָׁם הוּא״ — בַּהֲוָיָיתוֹ יְהֵא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Akiva says:** In the case of a guilt-offering this exposition is **not necessary, as it says: “It is a guilt-offering”** (Leviticus 5:19), from which it may be inferred: **It** alone **shall be** sacrificed **in its** current **state,** but not its substitute. This *baraita* explicitly teaches that the surplus money of a sin-offering cannot be used for another offering. Consequently, the money set aside for a nazirite’s sin-offering must be cast into the Dead Sea upon the death of its owner rather than used for a gift offering, even according to the opinion of Reish Lakish.


###### Nazir 25a:7
[Nazir 25a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/25a:7)

קָתָנֵי: יָכוֹל יַעֲלֵם לְבֵית הַבְּחִירָה וְיִמְנַע מֵהֶם מַיִם וּמָזוֹן בִּשְׁבִיל שֶׁיָּמוּתוּ — תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וְעָשִׂיתָ עֹלֹתֶיךָ״. אַמַּאי? הָא וְלַד חַטָּאת הוּא דִּגְמִירִין בָּהּ מִיתָה? אִי לָאו קְרָא, הֲוָה אָמֵינָא וְלַד חַטָּאת בְּכׇל מָקוֹם,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ Since the Gemara has cited the above *baraita*, it analyzes it in detail. The *baraita* **teaches:** One **might** have thought that **one must bring them up to the Temple and withhold water and food from them so that they should die. The verse states: “And you shall sacrifice your burnt-offerings.”** The Gemara asks: **Why** would one think he should act in this manner? After all, **it is** only with regard to **the offspring of a sin-offering that we learned** that it must be left to **die,** but not other offerings. Why, then, is it necessary to derive the exclusion of the offspring of other offerings and the substitution of other offerings from a verse? The Gemara answers: **If** it were **not** for the **verse, I would say** that **the offspring of a sin-offering** may be killed **anywhere,** i.e., it need not be brought to the Temple and left to die there,