## Nazir Daf 62a

###### Nazir 62a:1
[Nazir 62a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/62a:1)

יָכוֹל לֹא יְהוּ נְזִירִין — תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״אִישׁ״! הָאִיתְּמַר אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: הֲלָכָה הִיא בְּנָזִיר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
One **might** have thought that gentiles **cannot be nazirites** at all. **The verse** therefore **states: “Man,”** to teach that they can become nazirites. The Gemara answers: **Wasn’t it stated** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan said** that the *halakha* that a son may use his father’s nazirite offerings **is a *halakha*** transmitted to Moses at Sinai **with regard to a nazirite?** Since this *halakha* does not appear in the Torah, the verse cannot be coming to exclude it.


###### Nazir 62a:2
[Nazir 62a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/62a:2)

אִי הָכִי ״אִישׁ כִּי יַפְלִא נֶדֶר בְּעֶרְכְּךָ״, בַּעֲרָכִין, לְמָה לִי? מִכְּדֵי הָאִיתַּקַּשׁ עֲרָכִין לִנְדָרִים, דְּאָמַר קְרָא ״אִישׁ כִּי יַפְלִא נֶדֶר בְּעֶרְכְּךָ״, וְהָתַנְיָא גַּבֵּי נְדָרִים: ״אִישׁ״. מָה תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״אִישׁ אִישׁ״ — לְרַבּוֹת אֶת הַגּוֹיִם שֶׁהֵן נוֹדְרִים נְדָרִים וּנְדָבוֹת כְּיִשְׂרָאֵל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara asks: **If so, why do I** need the verse: **“When a man shall clearly utter a vow** of persons to the Lord, **according to your valuation”** (Leviticus 27:2), stated **with regard to valuations,** from which it is derived that gentiles are included in the *halakhot* of valuations? **After all, aren’t valuations juxtaposed to vows, as the verse states: “When a man shall clearly utter a vow** of persons to the Lord, **according to your valuation.” And isn’t it taught** in a *baraita* **with regard to** a verse dealing with **vows:** “Any **man [*ish*]** from the house of Israel, or of the strangers in Israel, who sacrifices his offering, whether it be any of their vows, or any of their gift offerings, which are sacrificed to the Lord as a burnt-offering” (Leviticus 22:18), **what** is the meaning when **the verse states** the extra emphasis: **“Any man [*ish ish*]”?** The *baraita* explains: This serves **to include the gentiles, that they can take a vow** for **vow** offerings **and gift** offerings **like a Jew.** It can be derived from this juxtaposition that gentiles are included in the *halakhot* of valuations.


###### Nazir 62a:3
[Nazir 62a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/62a:3)

״אִישׁ כִּי יַפְלִא״ בַּעֲרָכִין לְמָה לִי? אֶלָּא הַאי ״אִישׁ״, מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ לְאֵיתוֹיֵי מוּפְלָא סָמוּךְ לְאִישׁ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara now restates its question: In that case, **why do I** need the phrase **“when a man shall clearly utter** a vow” stated **with regard to valuations? Rather, this** term, **“man,”** does not include gentiles, but is **necessary to include a minor one year before** he or she **reaches majority.** If a minor takes a vow one year before coming of age, and shows a clear understanding of his statement, the vow takes effect. This individual is included in the *halakhot* of valuations as well.


###### Nazir 62a:4
[Nazir 62a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/62a:4)

הָנִיחָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר מוּפְלָא סָמוּךְ לְאִישׁ דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא. אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר דְּרַבָּנַן, ״אִישׁ כִּי יַפְלִיא״ לְמָה לִי? לְאֵיתוֹיֵי מוּפְלָא סָמוּךְ לְאִישׁ דְּגוֹי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara comments: **This works out well according to the one who says** that **a minor one year before** he or she **reaches majority** must fulfill his or her vows **by Torah law,** because the verse serves as the source for this *halakha*. **However, according to the one who says** that this *halakha* applies **by rabbinic law, why do I** need the verse **“when a man shall clearly utter** a vow”? The Gemara answers: The verse serves **to include a minor one year before** he or she **reaches majority who is a gentile,** that this *halakha* applies to gentiles by Torah law.


###### Nazir 62a:5
[Nazir 62a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/62a:5)

הָנִיחָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל נֶעֱרָכִין, וְאֵין הַגּוֹיִם נֶעֱרָכִין. יָכוֹל לֹא יְהוּ מַעֲרִיכִין, תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״אִישׁ״ — שַׁפִּיר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara comments: **This works out well according to the one who says** that it is inferred from the phrase: “The children of Israel” (Leviticus 27:2), that **Jews can be valuated but gentiles cannot be valuated;** and one **might** have thought that gentiles **cannot take a valuation vow.** Therefore, **the verse states: “Man.”** According to this opinion it is **fine,** as the phrase “when a man shall clearly utter a vow” can teach that if a gentile close to adulthood grasps the meaning of vows, he can take a valuation vow.


###### Nazir 62a:6
[Nazir 62a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/62a:6)

אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר: בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל מַעֲרִיכִים, וְאֵין הַגּוֹיִם מַעֲרִיכִים. יָכוֹל לֹא יְהוּ נֶעֱרָכִין, תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״אִישׁ״ — אֲפִילּוּ תִּינוֹק בֶּן חֹדֶשׁ בַּר עָירוּכִי הוּא, ״כִּי יַפְלִיא״ לְמָה לִי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**However, according to the one who says** that **the children of Israel can take a valuation vow but gentiles cannot take a valuation vow,** one **might** have thought that gentiles **cannot be valuated;** therefore, **the verse states** the additional term: **“Man,”** to teach that anyone, **even a month-old baby, can be valuated** according to the assigned value stated in the Torah. According to this opinion, it is of no importance how old the subject of the vow is, and therefore the verse clearly cannot be including a gentile on the verge of adulthood. Consequently, the question remains: **Why do I** need the phrase **“when** a man **shall clearly utter** a vow”?


###### Nazir 62a:7
[Nazir 62a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/62a:7)

אָמַר רַב אַדָּא בַּר אַהֲבָה: לְאֵיתוֹיֵי גּוֹי גָּדוֹל, דְּאַף עַל גַּב דְּגָדוֹל הוּא — אֵינוֹ יוֹדֵעַ לְהַפְלוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Adda bar Ahava said:** The verse is referring to all vows, and serves **to include,** i.e., to teach, the *halakha* of a type of **adult gentile, who although he is an adult, he does not know** how **to clearly utter** a vow. The verse teaches that his vows are invalid, as derived from the phrase “when a man shall clearly vow.” Vows of a gentile are valid only if he can express them clearly.


###### Nazir 62a:8
[Nazir 62a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/62a:8)

אֶלָּא: ״כִּי יַפְלִיא״ דִּכְתַב רַחֲמָנָא גַּבֵּי נְזִירוּת, לְמָה לִי? מִכְּדֵי הָאִיתַּקַּשׁ נְזִירוּת לִנְדָרִים, ״כִּי יַפְלִיא״ לְמָה לִי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Having clarified the verse concerning valuations, the Gemara asks: **However,** concerning the verse: **“When** a man or woman **shall clearly utter** a vow” (Numbers 6:2), **which the Merciful One writes with regard to naziriteship, why do I** need it? **After all, isn’t** the *halakha* of **naziriteship juxtaposed to vows; why do I** need the verse **“when** a man or woman **shall clearly utter”?**


###### Nazir 62a:9
[Nazir 62a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/62a:9)

לְאֵיתוֹיֵי יָדַיִם שֶׁאֵינָן מוֹכִיחוֹת. דְּאִיתְּמַר: יָדַיִם שֶׁאֵינָן מוֹכִיחוֹת, אַבָּיֵי אָמַר: הָוְיָין יָדַיִם. רָבָא אָמַר: לָא הָוְיָין יָדַיִם. לְאַבָּיֵי נִיחָא. אֶלָּא לְרָבָא, מַאי אִיכָּא לְמֵימַר?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: This verse serves **to include** the case of one who vowed by means of **ambiguous intimations,** i.e., he expressed only part of the formula of the vow, so that his meaning is unclear. **As it was stated** that *amora’im* had a dispute with regard to this issue: With regard to **ambiguous intimations, Abaye said** that **they are** considered **intimations** to vows, and the vows take effect, and **Rava said** that **they are not** considered **intimations** to vows, and the vows do not take effect. **According to** the opinion of **Abaye,** this answer **works out well,** as the phrase “when a man shall clearly utter,” serves to include all pronouncements indicative of vows, even ambiguous intimations. **However, according to** the opinion of **Rava, what is there to say?**


###### Nazir 62a:10
[Nazir 62a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/62a:10)

אֶלָּא: ״כִּי יַפְלִיא״ מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ לְכִדְרַבִּי טַרְפוֹן, דְּתַנְיָא, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי טַרְפוֹן: אֵין אֶחָד מֵהֶן נָזִיר, לְפִי שֶׁלֹּא נִיתְּנָה נְזִירוּת אֶלָּא לְהַפְלָאָה. הָנִיחָא לְרַבִּי טַרְפוֹן, אֶלָּא לְרַבָּנַן מַאי אִיכָּא לְמֵימַר?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** the Gemara explains that the phrase **“when** a man or woman **shall clearly utter”** is **necessary for that** which was stated **by Rabbi Tarfon, as it is taught** in the *Tosefta* (3:19) that **Rabbi Yehuda said in the name of Rabbi Tarfon:** If several people took a vow of naziriteship as part of a wager with regard to an uncertain occurrence, **not one of** them is **a nazirite, as naziriteship is imposed** upon someone **only if** his vow is **explicitly** enunciated. That is, one is a nazirite only if he vows in a definitive manner, not if there was any uncertainty involved. The Gemara asks: **This works out well according to** the opinion of **Rabbi Tarfon. However,** according **to** the opinion of **the Rabbis,** who disagree with his ruling, **what is there to say?**


###### Nazir 62a:11
[Nazir 62a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/62a:11)

אֶלָּא: מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ לְכִדְתַנְיָא: הֶיתֵּר נְדָרִים — פּוֹרְחִין בָּאֲוִיר, וְאֵין לָהֶן עַל מַה שֶּׁיִּסְמוֹכוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather,** the phrase “when a man or woman shall clearly utter” is **necessary for that which is taught** in a *baraita*: The *halakhot* of **dissolution of vows,** namely that one may request from a halakhic authority to dissolve them, **fly in the air and have nothing to lean upon,** i.e., these *halakhot* are not mentioned explicitly in the Torah.


###### Nazir 62a:12
[Nazir 62a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Nazir/r/62a:12)

רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: יֵשׁ לָהֶם עַל מַה שֶּׁיִּסְמוֹכוּ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״אִישׁ כִּי יַפְלִא״, ״כִּי יַפְלִא״, שְׁתֵּי פְעָמִים. אֶחָד הַפְלָאָה לְאִיסּוּר, וְאֶחָד הַפְלָאָה לְהֶיתֵּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Eliezer says:** The *halakhot* of dissolution of vows **have** a basis **upon which to lean, as it is stated: “When a man shall clearly utter** a vow” (Leviticus 27:2) and: **“When** a man or woman **shall clearly utter** a vow” (Numbers 6:2), **twice. One explicit utterance is for prohibition,** i.e., when one takes a vow, he is bound to keep it, **and one explicit utterance is for dissolution,** i.e., in the event that he provides a halakhic authority with a reason why the vow should no longer apply, the vow can be dissolved and he will no longer be bound by it. This is an allusion in the Torah for the dissolution of vows.