Nazir 30B

קא משמע לן הלכה.

the Mishnah therefore teaches us that it is a halakha that is unrelated to inheritance; there is simply a tradition that a son can use the offerings for his father’s naziriteship while a daughter cannot.

איבעיא להו: פליגי רבנן עליה דרבי יוסי, או לא פליגי? ואם תימצי לומר פליגי, ארישא או אסיפא? תא שמע: כיצד אמרו האיש מגלח על נזירות אביו?

§ A dilemma was raised before the rabbis: Do the Rabbis disagree with R' Yosei, or do they not disagree? If you say they disagree, do they take issue with the first clause or with the latter clause of his halakha? The Talmud suggests an answer: Come and hear the following baraita: How did the rabbis say that a man can shave by using his father’s naziriteship?

מי שהיה אביו נזיר, והפריש אביו מעות לנזירותו ומת, ואמר: ״הריני נזיר על מנת שאגלח על מעות אבא״⁠ — זהו שמגלח על מעות אביו. אבל מי שהיה הוא ואביו נזירים, והפריש אביו מעות לנזירותו ומת ⁠— הרי אלו יפלו לנדבה, דברי רבי יוסי.

With regard to one whose father was a nazirite and his father separated money for his naziriteship and died, and the son said: I am hereby a nazirite on the condition that I can shave by using my father’s money, this is the one who can shave by means of his father’s money. However, if a son and his father were both nazirites, and his father separated money for his own naziriteship and died, this money is allocated for communal gift offerings. This is the statement of R' Yosei.

רבי אליעזר ורבי מאיר ורבי יהודה אמרו: זה הוא שמגלח על מעות אביו.

R' Eliezer, and R' Meir, and R' Yehuda said: This is the one who can shave by using his father’s money. Their emphasis of: This is the one, indicates that they disagree with R' Yosei entirely. In other words, where R' Yosei rules that one can use his father’s money, they maintain that he cannot do so; and conversely, in a case where R' Yosei says that one cannot spend his father’s money for his nazirite offerings, the Rabbis rule that he can do so.