## Nazir Daf 2a

###### Nazir 2a:1
[Nazir 2a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/2a:1)

**כׇּל כִּינּוּיֵי נְזִירוּת** — כִּנְזִירוּת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** One becomes a nazirite by taking a nazirite vow, in which he simply declares himself a nazirite, as detailed in the Torah (Numbers 6:1–21). Additionally, **all substitutes** for the language **of nazirite vows are like nazirite vows** and are binding. Furthermore, intimations of nazirite vows, i.e., incomplete statements that are understood from context to be meant as nazirite vows, are considered binding nazirite vows.


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

הָאוֹמֵר ״אֱהֵא״ — הֲרֵי זֶה נָזִיר, אוֹ ״אֱהֵא נָאֶה״ — נָזִיר, ״נָזִיק״, ״נָזִיחַ״, ״פָּזִיחַ״ — הֲרֵי זֶה נָזִיר. ״הֲרֵינִי כָּזֶה״, ״הֲרֵינִי מְסַלְסֵל״, ״הֲרֵינִי מְכַלְכֵּל״, ״הֲרֵי עָלַי לְשַׁלֵּחַ פֶּרַע״ — הֲרֵי זֶה נָזִיר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Consequently, **one who says: I will be,** without further clarification, **is a nazirite,** as this is his implied intention. **Or,** if he said: **I will be beautiful,** he is **a nazirite.** The substitutes for the language of nazirite vows are as follows: If one says: I will be **a *nazik*,** a ***nazi’aḥ*,** or **a *pazi’aḥ*, he is a nazirite.** If one says: **I am hereby like this, I am hereby** a hair **curler, I am hereby growing** my **hair;** or: **It is** incumbent **upon me to grow long hair, he is a nazirite.**


###### Nazir 2a:3
[Nazir 2a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/2a:3)

״הֲרֵי עָלַי צִיפּוֹרִים״ — רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: נָזִיר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: אֵינוֹ נָזִיר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If one says: An obligation **is hereby** incumbent **upon me** with regard to **birds, Rabbi Meir says: He is a nazirite.** A nazirite brings two bird-offerings if he inadvertently becomes ritually impure from a corpse (Numbers 6:10), and it is understood that the individual used this indirect phrase to take a vow of naziriteship. **And the Sages say: He is not a nazirite.**


###### Nazir 2a:4
[Nazir 2a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/2a:4)

**גְּמָ׳** מִכְּדֵי תַּנָּא בְּסֵדֶר נָשִׁים קָאֵי, מַאי טַעְמָא תָּנֵי נָזִיר?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The Gemara begins by clarifying why this tractate appears in the order of *Nashim* within the six orders of the Mishna. **Now, the *tanna* is engaged in** the study of **the order of *Nashim*,** which discusses laws concerning marriage and the resulting obligations as well as with forbidden sexual relations. **What** then **is the reason** that he **teaches** the laws of the **nazirite** here?


###### Nazir 2a:5
[Nazir 2a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/2a:5)

תַּנָּא אַקְּרָא קָאֵי: ״וְהָיָה אִם לֹא תִמְצָא חֵן בְּעֵינָיו כִּי מָצָא בָהּ עֶרְוַת דָּבָר״. וְהָכִי קָאָמַר: מִי גָּרַם לָהּ לָעֲבֵירָה — יַיִן, וְקָאָמַר: כׇּל הָרוֹאֶה סוֹטָה בְּקִלְקוּלָהּ יַזִּיר עַצְמוֹ מִן הַיַּיִן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **The *tanna* is engaged in** the study of **the verse** pertaining to divorce: **“Then it comes to pass, if she finds no favor in his eyes, because he has found some unseemly matter about her”** (Deuteronomy 24:1). **And this is what he is saying: What caused** the woman **to** commit the **transgression** of adultery, alluded to in the verse by the phrase “unseemly matter”? It was **wine. And** the *tanna* is **saying: Anyone who sees a *sota* in her disgrace should abstain from wine.** Consequently, tractate *Nazir* is placed in the order of *Nashim*, immediately preceding tractate *Sota*, which is about a woman suspected by her husband of having been unfaithful, and tractate *Gittin*, which discusses divorce.


###### Nazir 2a:6
[Nazir 2a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/2a:6)

פָּתַח בְּכִינּוּיִין, וּמְפָרֵשׁ יָדוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara asks a question with regard to the mishna’s presentation of the different topics it addresses: The *tanna* **began with** the statement that all **substitutes** for the language of nazirite vows are considered nazirite vows, **but** then it **explains** the *halakha* of **intimations** of nazirite vows by providing examples of intimations rather than examples of substitutes for nazirite vows. Why didn’t the mishna provide examples of substitutes immediately after stating the *halakha* concerning substitutes?


###### Nazir 2a:7
[Nazir 2a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/2a:7)

אָמַר רָבָא, וְאִיתֵּימָא כְּדִי: חַסּוֹרֵי מִיחַסְּרָא וְהָכִי קָתָנֵי: כׇּל כִּינּוּיֵי נְזִירוּת — כִּנְזִירוּת, וִידוֹת נְזִירוּת — כִּנְזִירוּת, וְאֵלּוּ הֵן יָדוֹת: הָאוֹמֵר ״אֱהֵא״ — הֲרֵי זֶה נָזִיר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said, and some say** this statement **without attribution [*kedi*]:** The mishna **is incomplete and is teaching the following: All substitutes** for the language **of nazirite vows are like nazirite vows. And** similarly, all **intimations of nazirite vows are like nazirite vows. And these are** examples of **intimations: One who says: I will be, is a nazirite.**


###### Nazir 2a:8
[Nazir 2a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/2a:8)

וְלִפְרוֹשׁ כִּינּוּיֵי בְּרֵישָׁא! תַּנָּא מֵהָהוּא דְּסָלֵיק — הָהוּא מְפָרֵשׁ בְּרֵישָׁא. כְּדִתְנַן: בַּמֶּה מַדְלִיקִין וּבַמָּה אֵין מַדְלִיקִין, וּמְפָרֵשׁ ״אֵין מַדְלִיקִין״ בְּרֵישָׁא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But** nevertheless, **let** the *tanna* **explain** the cases of **substitutes first,** before providing examples of intimations, as the *halakha* of substitutes is mentioned before the *halakha* of intimations. The Gemara answers: The ***tanna*** employs the general style of the Mishna, which is that **the** subject **with which it concludes is the one that it explains first, as we learned** in a mishna (*Shabbat* 20b): **With what may one light** the Shabbat lamp **and with what may one not light** it? **And** the mishna **explains** the details of what **one may not light first,** before providing examples of fuel that may be used to light the Shabbat lamp.


###### Nazir 2a:9
[Nazir 2a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/2a:9)

בַּמֶּה טוֹמְנִין וּבַמָּה אֵין טוֹמְנִין, וּמְפָרֵשׁ ״אֵין טוֹמְנִין״ בְּרֵישָׁא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Similarly, another mishna (*Shabbat* 47b) states: **In what may one insulate** a pot of cooked food on Shabbat eve, **and in what may one not insulate** it? **And** the mishna **explains** the cases of material in which **one may not insulate** it **first,** before providing examples of materials in which one may insulate a pot of cooked food.


###### Nazir 2a:10
[Nazir 2a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/2a:10)

בַּמָּה אִשָּׁה יוֹצְאָה וּבַמָּה אֵינָהּ יוֹצְאָה, וּמְפָרֵשׁ ״לֹא תֵּצֵא אִשָּׁה״ בְּרֵישָׁא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
A third example of this style is in the following mishna (*Shabbat* 57a): **With what** items may **a woman go out** into the public domain on Shabbat **and with what** items may **she not go out? And** the mishna **explains** the items with which **a woman may not go out first,** before providing examples of items with which she may go out.


###### Nazir 2a:11
[Nazir 2a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/2a:11)

וְהָתְנַן: בַּמֶּה בְּהֵמָה יוֹצְאָה וּבַמָּה אֵינָהּ יוֹצְאָה, וּמְפָרֵשׁ ״יוֹצֵא גָּמָל״ בְּרֵישָׁא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara challenges this explanation: **But didn’t we learn** in a mishna (*Shabbat* 51b): **With what may an animal go out** into the public domain on Shabbat, **and with what may it not go out? And it explains** the items with which **a camel may go out first,** before providing examples of items with which it may not go out.


###### Nazir 2a:12
[Nazir 2a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/2a:12)

יֵשׁ נוֹחֲלִין וּמַנְחִילִין, נוֹחֲלִין וְלֹא מַנְחִילִין, מַנְחִילִין וְלֹא נוֹחֲלִין, לֹא נוֹחֲלִין וְלֹא מַנְחִילִין, וּמְפָרֵשׁ ״אֵלּוּ נוֹחֲלִין וּמַנְחִילִין״ בְּרֵישָׁא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Similarly, it is taught in another mishna (*Bava Batra* 108a): **There are** some relatives who **inherit and bequeath,** e.g., a father and son, who are heirs to each other; some who **inherit but do not bequeath;** some **bequeath but do not inherit;** and some **do not inherit and do not bequeath. And** the mishna **explains** the cases of **those** who both **inherit and bequeath first,** before providing examples of the other categories that were mentioned later in the opening clause of the mishna.


###### Nazir 2a:13
[Nazir 2a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/2a:13)

אֶלָּא, לְעוֹלָם תָּנֵי הָכִי וְתָנֵי הָכִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** the mishna **actually teaches** in **this** manner at times, **and** it **teaches** in **that** manner at other times. There are instances where the *tanna* begins by elaborating on the first principle mentioned in the mishna, while on other occasions he first elaborates upon the last principle mentioned.


###### Nazir 2a:14
[Nazir 2a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/2a:14)

אֶלָּא: הָתָם, דְּאִיסּוּרָא דְנַפְשֵׁיהּ הוּא — מְפָרֵשׁ אִיסּוּרָא דְנַפְשֵׁיהּ בְּרֵישָׁא. גַּבֵּי בְּהֵמָה, דְּאִיסּוּרָא אַיְּידֵי בְּהֵמָה הוּא דְּאָתֵי — מְפָרֵשׁ הֶיתֵּירָא בְּרֵישָׁא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**However,** there is a rationale as to when the *tanna* employs each style. **There,** in the passages concerning the fuels one may use to light the Shabbat lamp, the materials one may use to insulate a pot on Shabbat eve, and the items with which a woman may go out on Shabbat to the public domain, **where it is** the individual’s **own prohibition** that is being discussed, the *tanna* **explains** the cases pertaining to the individual’s **own prohibition first.** By contrast, **with regard to** the mishna that addresses **an animal** carrying into the public domain on Shabbat, **where the prohibition comes by means of** the **animal,** the *tanna* **explains** what is **permitted first.**