שהנזירות חל על הנזירות

that a term of naziriteship takes effect upon a previously accepted term of naziriteship. Consequently, if one became a nazirite and then again declared: I am hereby a nazirite, then when his term of naziriteship is completed he must observe a second term of naziriteship.

ולמאן דאמר דברה תורה כלשון בני אדם ונזיר להזיר דריש לעשות ידות נזירות כנזירות שהנזירות חל על הנזירות מנא ליה הניחא אי סבירא ליה כמאן דאמר אין נזירות חל על נזירות אלא אי סבירא ליה כמאן דאמר נזירות חל על נזירות מנא ליה

The Gemara asks: And according to the one who says that the Torah spoke in the language of men and therefore nothing can be derived from the phrase“ to utter a vow [lindor neder], ” and he expounds the phrase“ the vow of a nazirite to consecrate himself [nazir lehazir]” to render intimations of nazirite vows like nazirite vows, from where does he derive that a term of naziriteship takes effect upon a previously accepted term of naziriteship? This works out well if he holds in accordance with the one who says that a term of naziriteship does not take effect upon a previously accepted term of naziriteship; however, if he holds in accordance with the one who says that a term of naziriteship takes effect upon a previously accepted term of naziriteship, from where does he derive this halakha?

נימא קרא ליזור מאי להזיר שמעת מינה תרתי

The Gemara answers: Let the verse say: To consecrate himself [lizor]. What is the reason the verse expressed this same idea with the word lehazir? Learn two halakhot from this: That intimations of nazirite vows are considered nazirite vows, and that a term of naziriteship takes effect upon a previously accepted term of naziriteship.

במערבא אמרי אית תנא דמפיק ליה לידות מן לנדר נדר ואית תנא דמפיק ליה מן ככל היצא מפיו יעשה

The Gemara adds: In the West, Eretz Yisrael, they say: There is a tanna who derives intimations of vows from the phrase“ to utter a vow [lindor neder], ” as he holds that the Torah did not speak in the language of men. And conversely, there is a tanna who holds that the Torah spoke in the language of men, and therefore derives this halakha of intimations from the verse:“ He shall do according to all that proceeds out of his mouth” (Numbers 30:3). The inclusive formulation of this verse comes to include intimations of vows.

אמר מר ומה נדרים עובר בבל יחל ובל תאחר בשלמא בל יחל דנדרים משכחת לה כגון דאמר ככר זו אוכל ולא אכלה עובר משום בל יחל דברו

§ The Master said in the baraita cited earlier: Just as with regard to vows, one who breaks his vow transgresses the prohibition: He shall not profane, and one who does not fulfill his vow in time transgresses the prohibition: You shall not delay, so too, the same is true with regard to nazirite vows. The Gemara asks: Granted, you can find a case where one transgresses the prohibition: He shall not profane, in the case of vows. For example, where one said: I will eat this loaf, and he does not eat it, he violates the prohibition: He shall not profane his word.

אלא בל יחל דנזירות היכי משכחת לה כיון דאמר הריני נזיר הוה ליה נזיר אכל קם ליה בבל יאכל שתה קם ליה בבל ישתה אמר רבא לעבור עליו בשנים

However, with regard to transgressing the prohibition: He shall not profane, in the case of nazirite vows, how can you find these circumstances? Once he said: I am hereby a nazirite, he is a nazirite as of that moment. If he then ate grapes, he is liable for violating the prohibition: He shall not eat (see Numbers 6: 4), and if he drank wine, he is liable for violating the prohibition: He shall not drink (see Numbers 6: 3). When would he ever become liable for violating the prohibition against profanation? Rava said: The prohibition against profanation serves to render him liable for violating two prohibitions. Consequently, if he eats grapes or drinks wine, he transgresses the relevant prohibition in addition to the prohibition against profanation.

בל תאחר דנזירות היכי משכחת לה כיון דאמר הריני נזיר הוי ליה נזיר אכל קם ליה בבל יאכל באומר לכשארצה אהא נזיר ואי אמר כשארצה ליכא בל תאחר

The Gemara further asks: With regard to violating the prohibition: You shall not delay, in the case of nazirite vows, how can you find these circumstances? Once he said: I am hereby a nazirite, he is a nazirite as of that moment. If he then ate grapes, he is liable for violating the prohibition: He shall not eat. When would he ever become liable for violating the prohibition against delaying? The Gemara answers: It is when he specifically says: I will become a nazirite when I wish, in which case he does not become a nazirite immediately. The Gemara asks: But if he said: When I wish, there is no prohibition of: You shall not delay, as there is no particular time by which he must become a nazirite.

אמר רבא כגון דאמר לא איפטר מן העולם עד שאהא נזיר דמן ההיא שעתא הוה ליה נזיר מידי דהוה האומר לאשתו הרי זו גיטיך שעה אחת קודם מיתתי אסורה לאכול בתרומה מיד אלמא אמרינן כל שעתא ושעתא דילמא מיית הכא נמי לאלתר הוי נזיר דאמרינן דילמא השתא מיית

Rava said: It is, for example, when he said: I will not depart the world until I become a nazirite, as he is a nazirite from that time because he does not know when he will depart this world. This is just as it is in the case of a man who says to his wife: This is your bill of divorce that will take effect one hour before my death. If he is a priest and she is the daughter of a non-priest, she is prohibited from partaking of teruma immediately. Apparently, we say every moment that perhaps he is now dead and she is therefore already divorced. Here, too, with regard to naziriteship, he is a nazirite immediately, as we say that perhaps he is now about to die.