## Nazir Daf 61a

###### Nazir 61a:1
[Nazir 61a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/61a:1)

תָּנֵי רַבִּי חִיָּיא: זֶה לִפְנֵי בִּיאַת מַיִם (חַיִּים) וְזֶה לְאַחַר בִּיאַת מַיִם, זֶה לִפְנֵי זְרִיקַת דָּמִים וְזֶה לְאַחַר זְרִיקַת דָּמִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Ḥiyya teaches** the same *halakha*: The shaving of a leper does not count for the shaving of naziriteship, as **this** one, a leper, shaves **before immersion in water, and that** one, an impure nazirite, shaves **after immersion water. This** one, the leper, shaves **before** the **blood is sprinkled, and that** one, the pure nazirite, shaves **after** the **blood is sprinkled.**


###### Nazir 61a:2
[Nazir 61a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/61a:2)

שֶׁתִּגְלַחַת הַנֶּגַע וְכוּ׳. בָּעֵי רָמֵי בַּר חָמָא: הָנֵי אַרְבַּע תִּגְלָחִיּוֹת דְּקָאָמַר, מִשּׁוּם מִצְוָה, אוֹ מִשּׁוּם אַעְבּוֹרֵי שְׂעַר טוּמְאָה?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna taught **that the shaving of leprosy** overrides the shaving of a nazirite only when he is a confirmed leper. **Rami bar Ḥama raises a dilemma: Those four shavings about which** the *tanna* **spoke,** the four that a nazirite performs for his leprosy and impurity, are they all **due to** the **mitzva** of shaving, **or** are some of them not performed for the sake of a mitzva, but **for the sake of removing hair** that grew in **impurity,** so that other hair can grow?


###### Nazir 61a:3
[Nazir 61a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/61a:3)

לְמַאי נָפְקָא מִינַּהּ? לְעַבּוֹרֵי בְּנָשָׁא. אִי אָמְרַתְּ מִשּׁוּם מִצְוָה — לְעַבּוֹרֵי בְּנָשָׁא לָא, וְאִי אָמְרַתְּ מִשּׁוּם אַעְבּוֹרֵי שְׂעַר טוּמְאָה — אֲפִילּוּ סַכְיֵהּ נָשָׁא נָמֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What** is the **difference** whether he shaves for one reason or another? The Gemara explains: It is relevant with regard **to removing** hair **with a depilatory. If you say** that the reason is **due to a mitzva, removing with a depilatory** is **not** an option, as the mitzva is specifically to shave. **But if you say** the reason is **due to the removal of hair of impurity, even if he rubs it with a depilatory** that is **also** effective.


###### Nazir 61a:4
[Nazir 61a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/61a:4)

מַאי? אָמַר רָבָא, תָּא שְׁמַע: וּמְגַלֵּחַ אַרְבַּע תִּגְלָחִיּוֹת. אִי סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ מִשּׁוּם עַבּוֹרֵי שְׂעַר טוּמְאָה, אֲפִילּוּ בְּשָׁלֹשׁ נָמֵי סַגְיָא לֵיהּ! שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ מִשּׁוּם מִצְוָה: שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**What** then is the *halakha*? **Rava said: Come** and **hear** a resolution from a *baraita* (*Tosefta* 6:1): **And he shaves** with **four** acts of **shaving.** Now **if it should enter your mind** that the reason is **for the sake of removing hair of impurity, even three** shavings should **be enough for him,** two for his leprosy, and the last one for his naziriteship of purity. Since the third shaving is performed only to remove his hair of impurity so that he can start his pure naziriteship afresh, why is it included? **Conclude from** the *baraita* that all four shavings are **due to** the **mitzva** of shaving. The Gemara says: **Conclude from** the *baraita* that this is the case.


###### Nazir 61a:5
[Nazir 61a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/61a:5)

**הַדְרָן עֲלָךְ שְׁנֵי נְזִירִים**


###### Nazir 61a:6
[Nazir 61a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/61a:6)

**הַגּוֹיִם אֵין לָהֶם** נְזִירוּת. נָשִׁים וַעֲבָדִים יֵשׁ לָהֶן נְזִירוּת. חוֹמֶר בַּנָּשִׁים מִבָּעֲבָדִים, שֶׁהוּא כּוֹפֶה אֶת עַבְדּוֹ, וְאֵינוֹ כּוֹפֶה אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** **Gentiles do not have naziriteship,** i.e., the *halakhot* of naziriteship do not apply to gentiles. They are not subject to the prohibitions of a nazirite, nor does one accept their offerings at the end of naziriteship. However, **women and** Canaanite **slaves do have naziriteship.** The mishna adds: There is a greater **stringency in** the case of **women than in** the case of **slaves, as** a master **may force his slave** to drink wine, shave his hair, or become ritually impure from a corpse, despite the slave’s vow of naziriteship, **but** a husband **cannot force his wife** to transgress her naziriteship.


###### Nazir 61a:7
[Nazir 61a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/61a:7)

**גְּמָ׳** קָתָנֵי: הַגּוֹיִם אֵין לָהֶם נְזִירוּת. מְנָא הָנֵי מִילֵּי? דְּתָנוּ רַבָּנַן ״דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל״ — וְלֹא לַגּוֹיִם. ״וְאָמַרְתָּ אֲלֵיהֶם״ — לְרַבּוֹת אֶת הָעֲבָדִים. לְמָה לִי קְרָא? הָאָמְרַתְּ: כׇּל מִצְוָה שֶׁהָאִשָּׁה חַיֶּיבֶת בָּהּ — עֶבֶד חַיָּיב בָּהּ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The mishna **teaches** that **gentiles do not have naziriteship,** whereas women and slaves can be nazirites. The Gemara asks: **From where are these matters** derived? It is **as the Sages taught,** that the beginning of the passage about naziriteship, which states: **“Speak to the children of Israel”** (Numbers 6:2), serves to emphasize that these *halakhot* apply to Jews, **but not to the gentiles.** Furthermore, the continuation of the verse: **“And say to them,** when a man or woman shall clearly utter a vow,” serves **to include slaves.** The Gemara asks: **Why do I** need **a verse** to include slaves? **Haven’t you said** the following principle: **Any mitzva that a woman is obligated in** its performance, **a slave is** also **obligated in** its performance? Since the *halakhot* of naziriteship apply to a woman, they should likewise apply to slaves.


###### Nazir 61a:8
[Nazir 61a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/61a:8)

אָמַר רָבָא: שָׁאנֵי הָכָא דְּאָמַר קְרָא ״לֶאְסֹר אִסָּר עַל נַפְשׁוֹ״, בְּמִי שֶׁנַּפְשׁוֹ קְנוּיָה לוֹ. יָצָא עֶבֶד, שֶׁאֵין נַפְשׁוֹ קְנוּיָה לוֹ. הוֹאִיל וְאֵין נַפְשׁוֹ קְנוּיָה לוֹ, אֵימָא גַּבֵּי נָזִיר נָמֵי לָא. קָמַשְׁמַע לַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said: Here** it **is different, as** with regard to vows **the verse states: “To bind his soul with a bond”** (Numbers 30:3), and the Sages expounded that this is referring only **to one whose soul is in his possession,** i.e., who is under his own jurisdiction. This **excludes a slave, whose soul is not in his possession,** but who is under his master’s control. The verse from Leviticus is necessary, lest you say that **since** a slave’s **soul is not in his possession,** one should **say** that **with regard to** the *halakhot* of **a nazirite as well,** he **cannot** undertake this vow notwithstanding the principle that slaves have similar *halakhot* to women with regard to obligations, who can become nazirites. The aforementioned verse **teaches us** that a slave can in fact take a vow of naziriteship.


###### Nazir 61a:9
[Nazir 61a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/61a:9)

אָמַר מָר: ״דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל״, וְלֹא לַגּוֹיִם. וְכׇל הֵיכָא דִּכְתִיב ״יִשְׂרָאֵל״, גּוֹיִם לָא? וְהָא גַּבֵּי עֲרָכִין, דִּכְתִיב ״דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל״, וְתַנְיָא: בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל מַעֲרִיכִין, וְאֵין הַגּוֹיִם מַעֲרִיכִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara returns to the earlier exposition of the verse. **The Master said** in the *baraita* that the verse specifies: **“Speak to the children of Israel,” but not to the gentiles.** The Gemara asks: **And anywhere that “Israel” is written,** are **gentiles not** included in that verse? **But** there is a counterexample in the verse written **with regard to** the *halakhot* of **valuations, as it is written: “Speak to the children of Israel”** (Leviticus 27:2), **and it was taught** in a *baraita*: **The children of Israel can take a valuation vow but gentiles cannot take a valuation vow.** If a gentile declares: I undertake to donate the value of so-and-so, his vow does not take effect.


###### Nazir 61a:10
[Nazir 61a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/61a:10)

יָכוֹל לֹא יְהוּ נֶעֱרָכִין — תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״אִישׁ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: One **might** have thought that this means that gentiles **cannot be** the subject **of a valuation** either, i.e., if a Jew says: I am obligated to give the value of so-and-so the gentile, his vow would not take effect. Therefore, **the verse states** the inclusive expression: “When **a man** shall clearly utter a vow of persons to the Lord, according to your valuation” (Leviticus 27:2), to teach that in this regard, every “man,” even a gentile, is included in *halakhot* of valuations. Inasmuch as the Torah also states with regard to a nazirite: “When a man or woman shall clearly utter a vow, the vow of a nazirite” (Numbers 6:2), perhaps one should include gentiles in the *halakhot* of naziriteship as well.


###### Nazir 61a:11
[Nazir 61a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/61a:11)

שָׁאנֵי הָכָא, דְּאָמַר קְרָא: ״לְאָבִיו וּלְאִמּוֹ לֹא יִטַּמָּא״, בְּמִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ אָב, יָצָא גּוֹי שֶׁאֵין לוֹ אָב. לְמַאי? אִילֵימָא לְעִנְיַן יְרוּשָּׁה, וְהָאָמַר רַבִּי חִיָּיא בַּר אָבִין אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: גּוֹי יוֹרֵשׁ אֶת אָבִיו דְּבַר תּוֹרָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״כִּי יְרֻשָּׁה לְעֵשָׂו נָתַתִּי אֶת הַר שֵׂעִיר״!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **Here,** in the case of naziriteship, it **is different, as the verse states: “For his father, or for his mother,** for his brother, or for his sister, **he shall not defile himself”** (Numbers 6:7). From here it is derived that this mitzva applies only **to one who has a father.** This **excludes a gentile, who does not have a father.** The Gemara asks: With regard **to what** *halakha* does a gentile lack a father? **If we say** it is **with regard to inheritance, but didn’t Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Avin say** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan said: A gentile inherits** the estate of **his father by Torah law, as it is stated: “Because I have given Mount Seir to Esau as an inheritance”** (Deuteronomy 2:5)?


###### Nazir 61a:12
[Nazir 61a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/61a:12)

אֶלָּא בְּמִי שֶׁמּוּזְהָר עַל כִּיבּוּד אָבִיו. מִי כְּתִיב ״כַּבֵּד אָבִיךָ״ גַּבֵּי נָזִיר? אֶלָּא: אָמַר קְרָא ״לְאָבִיו וּלְאִמּוֹ לֹא יִטַּמָּא״ — בְּמִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ טוּמְאָה,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** this mitzva of naziriteship applies **to one who is warned concerning the honor of his father,** and as the mitzva to honor one’s father does not apply to a gentile, it is as though he has no father. The Gemara asks: **Is it written: Honor your father, in the context of a nazirite?** What is the connection between these two issues? **Rather, the verse states** with regard to a nazirite: **“For his father, or for his mother,** for his brother, or for his sister, **he shall not defile himself”** (Numbers 6:7), and it should be understood as referring **to one who has** the potential to become **ritually impure,**