Jerusalem Talmud Nazir 2:10:2-3

This is a complex sugya, touching on the mechanics of concurrent vows, the counting of days, and the consequences of impurity within the context of nezirut. Let's dive in.

Sugya Map

• Issue: The interplay between a conditional vow of nezirut ("I shall be a nazir if a son is born to me") and a concurrent, potentially overlapping nezirut of 100 days, specifically concerning the counting of days and the impact of impurity.
• Nafka Mina(s):
  • Determining the minimum duration of nezirut when vows overlap or are interrupted.
  • Calculating how many days are "lost" or invalidated due to the temporal overlap and the requirement of a 30-day interval between shavngs.
  • The effect of impurity, particularly death impurity, on concurrent vows.
  • Distinguishing between different types of "shaving" and their halakhic weight.
• Primary Sources:
  • Jerusalem Talmud Nazir 2:10 (Mishnah and Gemara)
  • Tosefta Nazir 5:2
  • Leviticus 6:13-16 (sacrifices)
  • Leviticus 14 (purification from scale disease)
  • Numbers 6:10-20 (laws of nezirut)

Text Snapshot

MISHNAH: Jerusalem Talmud Nazir 2:10:2 “I shall be a nazir if a son is born¹²³ to me and a nazir for 100 days.¹²⁴ If a son is born to him in less than 70 [days], he should not lose anything¹²⁵. After 70 [days], he reduces to 70 since no shaving is for less than 30 days¹²⁶.”

• Nuance: The Mishnah introduces a scenario where two nezirut vows are in play: one conditional (im yeeled li ben) and one absolute (100 days). The critical point is the temporal proximity of the son's birth to the completion of the 100-day vow. The logic hinges on the requirement of 30 days between shavngs (a halakha derived from the Torah, Numbers 6:18). If the son is born too close to the end of the 100 days, the father cannot fulfill the requirement of 30 days between his own shaving (completing the 100 days) and the shaving for his son's nezirut, leading to a reduction in the observed days.

HALAKHAH: Jerusalem Talmud Nazir 2:10:3 “...Is the start of a day counted as a full day¹²⁸? Is that not the Mishnah: “after 70 [days], he reduces to 70,” not even a part¹²⁹? This implies that the start of a day is counted as a full day. If he was born on the eightieth day, he eliminates ten¹³⁰...”

• Nuance: The Gemara immediately grapples with the precise counting of days. The statement "not even a part" suggests that fractional days are not counted for the purpose of the 30-day interval between shavngs. This leads to the conclusion that the start of a day is counted as a full day. The example of the son born on the 80th day ("he eliminates ten") illustrates this: if the father has 20 days left of his 100-day vow when the son is born, and he needs 30 days for the son's nezirut after his own completion, he effectively loses the last 10 days of his original 100-day count, as those days would fall within the 30-day period required for the son's nezirut.

Readings

Penei Moshe: The Interplay of Vows and the 30-Day Interval

The Penei Moshe explains the Mishnah's first clause: "If a son is born to him in less than 70 [days], he should not lose anything." He posits that when the father interrupts his own nezirut to count days for his son's nezirut, there are still 30 days remaining from his original 100-day vow. This 30-day period is sufficient for the growth of hair, a prerequisite for shaving. Therefore, he counts the days for his son, shaves, completes his son's nezirut, and then returns to finish his own 100-day vow, shaving again. The gap between these two shavngs is 30 days, satisfying the requirement, and thus he loses nothing.¹

Regarding the second clause, "After 70 [days], he reduces to 70": The Penei Moshe clarifies that if he counted more than 70 days of his own nezirut before his son was born, and then he interrupts to count for his son, the shaving for his son's nezirut will occur before the completion of his own 100-day vow. If the remaining days of his 100-day vow are less than 30, he cannot perform the second shaving within the required 30-day interval after the son's shaving. Consequently, he "loses" those days counted beyond the 70-day mark.²

Korban HaEdah: The "Loss" of Days and the 30-Day Minimum

The Korban HaEdah offers a similar explanation for the Mishnah. For the first clause ("until 70 days, he loses nothing"), he states that when he interrupts his nezirut to count for his son, and then shaves for his son, there are 30 days left of his original 100-day vow. This interval of 30 days between the son's shaving and his own allows him to complete his vow without loss.³

However, if he counted more than 70 days of his own vow before his son was born, the shaving for his son's nezirut will occur such that the remaining days of his 100-day vow are fewer than 30. Since it's impossible to shave for his own nezirut less than 30 days after the shaving for his son's nezirut, he loses all the days he counted after the 70th day of his original vow.⁴

Mareh HaPanim: Clarifying "70" and the Loss of Days

The Mareh HaPanim addresses the phrase "reduces to 70." He emphasizes that this is not an exact number but rather "up to 70 days." This aligns with Rambam's interpretation. He notes that the Gemara itself supports this, as it states, "if he was born on the eightieth day, he eliminates ten," implying that days beyond the 70th are potentially lost, not that the baseline is exactly 70. This contrasts with interpretations that suggest the entire count is lost.⁵

Sheyarei Korban: The Impact of Impurity on Concurrent Vows

The Sheyarei Korban delves into a more complex issue raised later in the Gemara concerning impurity. He grapples with the Rambam's understanding of a situation where an impure nazir is also a nazir for his son. He questions how, if the father's 100-day vow is considered "completed" even if the son's days don't count towards it, impurity within the last 20 days of the 100-day vow would not invalidate everything. He resolves this by suggesting that the 100-day vow is indeed considered complete once those days are finished, even if further observances are required (like the 30 days for the son). However, impurity occurring during the final 20 days of the 100-day vow would still invalidate the count, akin to impurity after the completion of a nezirut but before the final sacrifices.⁶ He also notes a potential discrepancy between the Rambam and Ra'avad regarding impurity within the last 20 days of the 100-day vow.⁷

Friction

The most significant friction point arises from the tension between the absolute requirement of a 30-day interval between shavngs (derived from Numbers 6:18 and interpreted by the Gemara as the minimum period for hair growth) and the practicalities of concurrent vows and impurity.

Consider the case where a nazir has completed his 100-day vow and is about to shave, but his son is born on that very day. The nezirut for the son begins immediately. If the father now has to observe 100 days for his son, and the 30-day interval must be maintained between his own shaving (which would have concluded his 100-day vow) and the shaving for his son's nezirut, this creates a complex calculation.

The Core Kushya: When a nazir who has completed his 100-day vow is about to shave, but his son is born, and the father must then observe nezirut for his son. The Gemara discusses whether he shaves once for both, or shaves twice. Rebbi Joḥanan states: "he shaves and then shaves a second time." This implies two distinct shavngs, maintaining the sanctity of the 30-day interval between them. However, a baraita (cited from Tosefta and Sifrei) questions this. In a scenario involving a nazir who is also a sufferer from scale disease (metzora), the question is posed: can one shaving count for both statuses? Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai's answer, and the subsequent debate, highlights the crucial distinction in the purpose and timing of the shavngs. The baraita eventually concludes that if the shavngs are for different purposes (e.g., removing hair for the nazir vs. regrowth for the metzora), or occur at different stages relative to purification rituals (sprinkling of blood, immersion), they cannot be combined.

The Best Terutz: The apparent contradiction between Rebbi Joḥanan and the baraita is resolved by understanding the specific context. The baraita deals with a nazir and a metzora, where the ritualistic implications of each shaving are distinct and tied to different purification processes. Rebbi Joḥanan, on the other hand, likely addresses the scenario of a nazir who is also a nazir for his son. In this case, the underlying act of shaving (removing hair that has grown during nezirut) is the same for both. The principle of "no shaving for less than 30 days" is paramount. Therefore, Rebbi Joḥanan's ruling that he shaves and then shaves a second time is a practical application of this principle: he concludes his first nezirut with a shaving, waits the requisite 30 days, and then shaves again to conclude the nezirut for his son. This ensures that even with overlapping vows, the ritualistic and temporal requirements are met independently. The final sentence of the Yerushalmi, "That is, if he was a nazir and sufferer from scale disease. But if he was a nazir and nazir, he may shave once for both," appears to support the idea of a single shaving for two nezirut vows, contradicting Rebbi Joḥanan's explicit statement. However, this may be a misunderstanding or a problematic textual variant, as the surrounding discussion and the Babylonian Talmud's approach lean towards distinct ritualistic acts or at least distinct counting periods even when one shaving occurs. The Yerushalmi then attempts to reconcile this by saying Rebbi Joḥanan disagrees with R. Shimon ben Laqish, implying the baraita reflects a minority opinion.⁸

Intertext

Babylonian Talmud Nazir 15a: The Principle of Day Counting

The Jerusalem Talmud's discussion about whether the start of a day counts as a full day finds a parallel in the Babylonian Talmud. The Yerushalmi states: "Is that not the Mishnah: 'after 70 [days], he reduces to 70,' not even a part? This implies that the start of a day is counted as a full day." The Babylonian Talmud, in the context of a vow of nezirut, attributes a similar principle to Rav: "Rav said: The beginning of the day is like its end."⁹ This highlights a shared understanding in both Talmudim regarding the counting of days in vow-related contexts, where a partial day is treated as a full day to ensure the fulfillment of the vow and to avoid technical loopholes. This principle is crucial for determining when vows begin and end, and therefore, when subsequent obligations commence.

Rambam, Hilchot Nezirut 4:4-5: Codifying the Rules of Overlapping Vows

The Mishneh Torah codifies the principles discussed in our sugya. Rambam states that if a nazir vows to be a nazir upon the birth of a son and also vows to be a nazir for 100 days, and the son is born while less than 30 days remain of the 100-day vow, the father "forfeits some until [it is counted that he observed] 70 [days]."¹⁰ This directly reflects the Yerushalmi's logic that the 30-day interval is paramount, and if the overlap prevents its observance, days are lost. He further clarifies: "If his son was born on the eightieth day, he should count the vow associated with his son, complete that vow, perform the shaving, and begin counting 30 days after that shaving. Thus he loses the ten days that [immediately] preceded [the birth of] his son, i.e., the days from the seventieth day until the son's birth."¹¹ This precise calculation of lost days, based on the 70-day mark and the 30-day interval, demonstrates the practical application of the sugya's intricate reasoning.

Psak/Practice

The primary halakhic implication from this sugya revolves around the strictness of the 30-day interval between shavngs for a nazir. This interval is not merely a suggestion but a fundamental component of fulfilling the nezirut vow.

1. Concurrent Vows: When one vow is conditional (im yeeled li ben) and another is absolute (like the 100-day vow), the temporal overlap must be carefully managed to ensure the 30-day gap between the respective shavngs. If the overlap would necessitate shaving sooner than 30 days after a previous shaving, then days are "lost" from the earlier vow.
2. Counting of Days: The principle that the start of a day counts as a full day is critical for precise calculation. This prevents technical arguments about "partial days" and ensures a clear start and end for observances.
3. Impurity: The discussion on impurity, particularly the baraita concerning the metzora, highlights that even when multiple ritual statuses are present, the specific halakhic requirements for each must be adhered to. Combining rituals is generally not permissible if their timing or purpose conflicts. In the case of two nezirut vows, even if one shaving could theoretically conclude both, the requirement of a 30-day gap between the completion of each nezirut implies distinct counting periods, thus necessitating separate ritual actions or at least distinct periods of observation.

The meta-psak heuristic here is one of chumra (stringency) in fulfilling vows and observing ritualistic intervals. The Gemara actively seeks to uphold the integrity of each nezirut vow, even when they are intertwined, by ensuring that no ritualistic requirement is bypassed or truncated.

Takeaway

The intricate dance of intersecting vows and ritualistic timelines demands meticulous calculation, prioritizing the sanctity of each distinct obligation. Even in seemingly overlapping observances, the Torah's prescribed intervals, like the thirty days between shavngs, remain inviolable pillars of halakha.

---

¹ Penei Moshe on J.T. Nazir 2:10:1:1. ² Penei Moshe on J.T. Nazir 2:10:1:2. ³ Korban HaEdah on J.T. Nazir 2:10:1:1. ⁴ Korban HaEdah on J.T. Nazir 2:10:1:1. ⁵ Mareh HaPanim on J.T. Nazir 2:10:1:1. ⁶ Sheyarei Korban on J.T. Nazir 2:10:1:1. ⁷ Sheyarei Korban on J.T. Nazir 2:10:1:1. ⁸ J.T. Nazir 2:10:3. ⁹ B.T. Nazir 15a. ¹⁰ Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Nezirut 4:4. ¹¹ Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Nezirut 4:5.