כְּסִיפָא לֵיהּ מִילְּתָא אָמַר הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר לִכְשֶׁיְּהֵא לִפְלוֹנִי בֵּן וְשָׁמַע חֲבֵירוֹ וְאָמַר וַאֲנִי מַהוּ מִי אָמְרִינַן שֶׁלֹּא בְּפָנָיו אַנַּפְשֵׁיהּ קָאָמַר אוֹ דִילְמָא הָכִי קָאָמַר לֵיהּ רָחֵימְנָא לֵיהּ כְּווֹתָיךְ תִּיבְּעֵי: should be understood in light of the fact that **the matter is embarrassing for him,** the second person is likely to mean that he will become a nazirite upon the birth of a child to the first person, as he will be embarrassed to seem indifferent about the birth of the child to the person standing before him, then the following question arises: If one **said: I am hereby a nazirite when so-and-so will have a son, and another heard and said: And I, what is** the *halakha*? **Do we say** that since the second person **did not** vow **in front of** the subject of the first person’s vow, he therefore **speaks of himself** when he says: And I, meaning that he will be a nazirite when he has a son of his own? **Or perhaps this is what he is saying to him: I love him as you do,** and I too will be a nazirite when he has a son. As in the previous cases, no answer was found for this question, and **the dilemma remains** unresolved.

**מַתְנִי׳** הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר וְנָזִיר כְּשֶׁיִּהְיֶה לִי בֵּן הִתְחִיל מוֹנֶה אֶת שֶׁלּוֹ וְאַחַר כָּךְ נוֹלַד לוֹ בֵּן מַשְׁלִים אֶת שֶׁלּוֹ וְאַחַר כָּךְ מוֹנֶה אֶת שֶׁל בְּנוֹ הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר כְּשֶׁיִּהְיֶה לִי בֵּן וְנָזִיר הִתְחִיל מוֹנֶה אֶת שֶׁלּוֹ וְאַחַר כָּךְ נוֹלַד לוֹ בֵּן מַנִּיחַ אֶת שֶׁלּוֹ וּמוֹנֶה אֶת שֶׁל בְּנוֹ וְאַחַר כָּךְ מַשְׁלִים אֶת שֶׁלּוֹ: **MISHNA:** In a case where one said: **I am hereby a nazirite** now, **and** I will be **a nazirite when I will have a son,** and **he began counting his** own term of naziriteship, i.e., his first vow, **and afterward** in the middle of this naziriteship period **a son was born to him,** he first **completes his** own initial term of naziriteship **and afterward he counts** the term of naziriteship he vowed on the condition **of** the birth of **his son.** However, if he reversed the order and said: **I am hereby a nazirite when I will have a son, and** I am hereby **a nazirite,** and he **began counting his** own term of naziriteship **and afterward,** during this period, **a son was born to him,** he **sets aside his** own term of naziriteship **and counts that** which he vowed on condition of the birth **of his son, and afterward** he **completes his** own term of naziriteship.

**גְּמָ׳** בָּעֵי רָבָא אָמַר הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר לְאַחַר עֶשְׂרִים יוֹם וּמֵעַכְשָׁיו מֵאָה יוֹם מַהוּ כֵּיוָן דְּהָלֵין מְאָה בְּעֶשְׂרִין לָא שָׁלְמִין לָא חָיְילִין אוֹ דִילְמָא כֵּיוָן דְּאִית לֵיהּ גִּידּוּל שֵׂעָר לְבַסּוֹף חָיְילִין **GEMARA:** In light of the ruling of the mishna, **Rava asks:** If one **said: I am hereby a nazirite** for a standard term of thirty days and will begin observing it **after twenty days, and** I am also a nazirite **from now** for **one hundred days, what is** the *halakha*? Should one say that **since these one hundred** days of naziriteship are **not completed within** those first **twenty** days, it could be said that the one hundred days of naziriteship **do not take effect** at all until after he has completed the thirty-day naziriteship? **Or perhaps, since he** still **has** at least thirty days of **hair growth at the end,** as after the thirty-day term he could observe an additional eighty days, therefore the one hundred days of naziriteship **take effect** from now, and he counts twenty days, pauses to observe the other term of naziriteship for thirty days, shaves, and then completes the final eighty days of the long term of naziriteship.

וְתִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ נְזִירוּת מוּעֶטֶת חֲדָא מִגּוֹ חֲדָא קָא מִיבַּעְיָא לֵיהּ The Gemara asks: **And let him raise** this **dilemma** with regard to **a short** term of **naziriteship,** when fewer than thirty days would remain if he suspended the first term of naziriteship in order to observe the other. The Gemara answers: **He raises one dilemma as a result of the other.** In other words, Rava’s question was an outgrowth of a different inquiry, which in turn led to his question. The full discussion is as follows: