Two interesting tosafot TB Nazir 3

The first Mishnah of our massekhet lists seven yadot a person could say to become a nazir. Yadot literally means “handles.” Here the word refers to an incomplete vow that is nonetheless a sufficient declaration, example holding a vessel by the handle is enough to lift the entire vessel. If you remember the Gemara in Nedarim, it describes an acceptable incomplete sentence (יָד מוֹכִיחַ) as a vow because everybody can finish it correctly. If the incomplete sentence is so incomplete and people have no idea what the person is talking about, there is no vow. In between these two polar points, there is an ambiguous incomplete sentence (יָד שֶאֵינוֹ מוֹכִיחַ) and there is a disagreement whether this incomplete sentence is sufficient to create a vow or not.

The first yad (singular for yadot) is so ambiguous that Shmuel has to give it context for the vow to come into force. “הָאוֹמֵר "אֱהֵא"־ הֲרֵי זֶה נָזִיר-The mishna taught: One who says: I will be, is a nazirite. The Gemara asks: Perhaps he is saying: I will be fasting, i.e., his intention is to take a vow that will obligate himself to fast rather than to be a nazirite. The Gemara answers that Shmuel said: The mishna is describing a case where a nazirite was passing before him, so that it is clear that he is taking a nazirite vow.” (TB Nazir 2b, Sefaria.org translation)

The second yad is also so ambiguous that Shmuel has to give it context as well. “אֱהֵא נָאֶה" ־ נָזִיר-The mishna taught that if one says: I will be beautiful [na’e], he is a nazirite. The Gemara asks: But perhaps when he said: I will be beautiful, he meant: I will be beautiful before Him in mitzvot? As it is taught in a baraita: “This is my God and I will glorify Him [anvehu]” (Exodus 15:2). Anvehu has the same root as the word na’e; therefore, the verse means: I will be beautiful before Him in mitzvot. How is this done? I will make before Him a beautiful sukka, a beautiful lulav, beautiful ritual fringes. I will write before Him a beautiful Torah scroll, and I will wrap it in beautiful silk cloths [shira’in]. The Gemara answers that Shmuel said: The mishna is referring to a case where one is holding his hair and says: I will be beautiful. This clearly indicates that he is referring to naziriteship.” (TB Nazir 2b, Sefaria.org translation)

The Gemara raises a problem. Not everybody agrees that becoming a nazir is praiseworthy. In fact we shall learn that Rabbi Elazar HaKappar holds that one sins by vowing to become a nazir. On our daf TB Nazir 3, the Gemara qualifies Rabbi Elazar HaKappar’s position so that he agrees with Shmuel’s context.

“The Gemara answers: Yes, as even according to Rabbi Elazar HaKappar, who said that a nazirite is a sinner, that applies only with regard to a ritually impure nazirite. This is because it is necessary for him to void the days of his vow that have been observed and to begin his term anew, as the Merciful One states in the Torah: “But the first days will be void, because his consecration was defiled” (Numbers 6:12). It is there that Rabbi Elazar HaKappar called the nazirite a sinner, because perhaps he will come to transgress his naziriteship now that he is a nazirite for a longer period than he originally intended. However, with regard to a ritually pure nazirite (נָזִיר טָהוֹר), Rabbi Elazar HaKappar does not call him a sinner.” (Sefaria.org translation)

There are two interesting tosafot on daf TB Nazir 2b that discusses these two yadot. The first tosafot ד"ה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: שֶׁתָּפוּס בִּשְׂעָרוֹ explains why the Mishna needs both yadot, "אֱהֵא" and “אֱהֵא נָאֶה” even though they look very similar. The contextual clues are very different. In the case of "אֱהֵא", the person points to a nazir who is walking by him and says to the effect I want to be like him. In the case of “אֱהֵא נָאֶה”, the person is holding his hair signifying that he wants to become a nazir who was forbidden to cut his hair. Since the contextual clues are so different, the Mishna feels obligated to include both those yadot.

The second tosafot ואמאי נְזִירָא מִילְּתָא דַעֲבֵירָה raises a very good question. Since everywhere else in the entire Talmud Rabbi Elazar HaKappar holds that even a pure nazarite (נָזִיר טָהוֹר) is a sinner, how can we explain our Gemara’s explanation of Rabbi Elazar HaKappar that a pure nazir is not a sinner? The answer is quite sophisticated. Thinking of a nazir in binary terms, as somebody praiseworthy or as a sinner, is incorrect. There are aspects of a nazir that are positive and there are aspects of a nazir there are sinful. In fact at the conclusion of his nazirut, one of the sacrifices he must offer is a sin offering. If we see being a nazir as a mixture of both good and bad with the good outweighing the bad, then even in our Gemara Rabbi Elazar HaKappar can see the positives in a pure nazir like Shmuel.