Nazir 13A

Study Nazir folio 13A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.

Text Excerpt

הפילה אשתו ⁠— אינו נזיר. רבי שמעון אומר: יאמר ״אם היה בן קיימא ⁠— הרי אני נזיר חובה, ואם לאו ⁠— הרי אני נזיר נדבה״.

However, if his wife miscarried he is not a nazirite, since his wife did not give birth to a live child. R' Shimon says: Since it is possible that the fetus was viable, in which case his vow of naziriteship takes effect, he should say the following: If this fetus was viable in terms of its development but died due to other causes, I am hereby an obligatory nazirite in fulfillment of my vow; and if it was not viable, I am hereby a voluntary nazirite. He then proceeds to observe naziriteship.

חזרה וילדה ⁠— הרי זה נזיר. רבי שמעון אומר: יאמר ״אם הראשון בן קיימא ⁠— הראשון חובה וזו נדבה. ואם לאו ⁠— הראשון נדבה וזו חובה״.

If, subsequent to this, his wife gave birth again, he is a nazirite, since the unattributed opinion in the Mishnah holds that the condition of his vow has now been fulfilled. R' Shimon says, following his earlier ruling: He must now accept upon himself an additional naziriteship and he should say: If the first fetus was viable then my naziriteship for the first child was obligatory, and this naziriteship is voluntary; and if the first child was not viable, then the naziriteship for the first one was voluntary and this naziriteship is obligatory.

גמ׳ האי מאי למימרא? משום סיפא: בת, טומטום ואנדרוגינוס ⁠— אינו נזיר. פשיטא! מהו דתימא: ״לכשאבנה״ הוא דקאמר, קא משמע לן דלא.

Talmud: With regard to the statement of the Mishnah that one who vowed to be a nazirite when a son is born to him is a nazirite when his son is born, the Talmud asks: What is the purpose of stating this ruling? Of course he is a nazirite. The Talmud answers: This halakha is stated due to the latter clause of that Mishnah, which states that if a daughter, a tumtum, or a hermaphrodite are born to him, he is not a nazirite. The Talmud questions this, too: Isn’t that obvious, since he specified a son? The Talmud answers: It is necessary lest you say he did not literally mean a son, but rather he meant to say: When I will be built up by means of any child, including the types listed. The Mishnah therefore teaches us that this is not the case.

Text data via Sefaria: William Davidson Edition - English and William Davidson Edition - Vocalized Aramaic, CC-BY-NC; edition provenance: Koren. Display terminology has been modernized for readability.