The discussion today begins with a question posed by Rav Asher concerning a Nazirite who accepted his Naziriteship while in a state of ritual impurity, specifically in a cemetery. The core of his inquiry was whether such a Nazirite is obligated to shave his hair as part of his purification process. To understand this, we first review the standard case of a Nazirite who becomes ritually impure during his Naziriteship. In this scenario, he must first count seven days to achieve ritual purity. Before he can restart his Naziriteship count, the law dictates that he must perform a shaving and bring sacrifices. The question then becomes: does a Nazirite who *begins* his Naziriteship in ritual impurity, such as in a cemetery, also need to shave before he starts his purification count?
The Gemara initiates its exploration by introducing a Baraita, which serves as a potential source of proof. This Baraita discusses the laws pertaining to a Mitzorah, a leper. A Mitzorah, after being confirmed by a Kohen, must undergo a seven-day purification process, which includes a shaving mandated by the laws of leprosy, followed by bringing sacrifices. The Gemara notes that the days spent in ritual impurity do not count towards a Nazirite's term. Similarly, it asks whether the seven days a Mitzorah spends in purification also do not count towards his Naziriteship if he is also a Nazirite.
To establish this, the Gemara employs a method of comparison known as a *Binyan Av*, which means finding a foundational principle in one law and applying it to another similar law. The commonalities between a Nazirite who became ritually impure and a Mitzorah are identified: both involve counting days, shaving, and bringing sacrifices. Therefore, the argument is made that just as a Nazirite's days of ritual impurity do not count towards his Naziriteship, so too, a Mitzorah's seven days of purification should not count towards his Naziriteship if he is also a Nazirite.
However, the Gemara immediately challenges this comparison. A crucial distinction is highlighted: when a Nazirite becomes ritually impure, it nullifies all his previous Naziriteship days, requiring him to restart his count from day one. In contrast, the state of a Mitzorah does not nullify previous Naziriteship days; it merely pauses the count. This difference, the Gemara argues, might invalidate the comparison, as the stringency of nullifying previous days for a Nazirite in ritual impurity could be the reason his purification days do not count.
The discussion then pivots to the specific case of a Nazirite who accepted Naziriteship in a cemetery. In this scenario, his hair is considered "fit for shaving" in the context of Naziriteship requirements, even though he is ritually impure. The argument is presented: if such a Nazirite, whose shaving is explicitly tied to his Naziriteship, still has his purification days not count towards his Naziriteship term, then certainly a Mitzorah, whose shaving is mandated by the laws of leprosy and not directly by Naziriteship, should also have his purification days not count. This *Kal Vachomer* (a fortiori argument) would imply that a Nazirite who accepts Naziriteship in ritual impurity *does* need to shave before restarting his Naziriteship count, seemingly answering Rav Asher's initial question.
Yet, the Gemara scrutinizes this proof. It raises a critical distinction regarding the shaving: is the Baraita referring to a shaving performed while still ritually impure (after seven purification days, *Tiglachat Tum'ah*), or a shaving performed when ritually pure (at the end of the Naziriteship term, *Tiglachat Taharah*)? If it refers to *Tiglachat Tum'ah*, the proof holds. However, if it refers to *Tiglachat Taharah*, the comparison with a Mitzorah becomes problematic, as a Mitzorah's shaving is specific to his leprosy and not a general "Tiglachat Taharah" of Naziriteship. The Gemara suggests that the Baraita might be referring to *Tiglachat Taharah*, thereby weakening the proposed proof.
Ultimately, the Gemara resolves Rav Asher's question by analyzing specific verses. It concludes that a Nazirite who was ritually pure and *then* became ritually impure during his Naziriteship (a "Nazir Tahor she-nitma") is indeed obligated to count seven purification days, shave, and bring sacrifices before resuming his Naziriteship. However, a Nazirite who *accepted* his Naziriteship while already in a state of ritual impurity (a "Nazir beKever") is exempt from this initial shaving and sacrifices after his seven purification days. The verses imply that the requirement to shave and bring sacrifices after ritual impurity applies only to one who had previous Naziriteship days to nullify, which is not the case for someone who began in ritual impurity. Thus, a Nazirite who accepts Naziriteship in ritual impurity simply counts his seven purification days and then immediately begins his Naziriteship count, without an intervening shaving or sacrifices.
The discussion then shifts to identify the author of a different Baraita, which states a distinction in when Naziriteship restarts. According to this Baraita, a Nazirite who became ritually impure restarts his Naziriteship on the eighth day, while a Nazirite who accepted Naziriteship in ritual impurity restarts on the seventh day. Rav Hisda attributes this Baraita to Rabbi Yosef (or Rabbi Yehudah). This is because Rabbi holds that the Naziriteship restarts on the eighth day, while Rabbi Yosef maintains it restarts on the seventh day.
The source of this dispute between Rabbi and Rabbi Yosef is found in verses. The verse states, "And he shall atone for him for that which he sinned concerning the soul, and he shall consecrate his head on that day." Rabbi interprets "and he shall consecrate his head" (meaning, begin growing his hair for Naziriteship) as occurring after the sacrifices are brought, which is on the eighth day. Hence, for Rabbi, the new Naziriteship begins on day eight. Rabbi Yosef, however, focuses on the seemingly superfluous words "on that day." Since it's already clear that the consecration happens on the day of the sacrifices, the extra words "on that day" come to teach a new point: that the Naziriteship actually begins the day before the sacrifices, on the seventh day, which is the day of shaving. Rabbi, in turn, explains the extra words "on that day" to mean that even if the sacrifices have not yet been physically brought, once the eighth day arrives and it is the *time* for sacrifices, the Naziriteship count begins.
The Gemara then introduces another Mishnah that discusses a Nazirite who became ritually impure multiple times but only brings one sacrifice. Rav Hisda again attributes this Mishnah to Rabbi Yosef (or Rabbi Yehudah). The case envisioned by Rabbi Yosef is one where a Nazirite, after undergoing the purification sprinkling on the seventh day, becomes ritually impure again *on that same seventh day*. According to Rabbi Yosef, since the new Naziriteship count begins on day seven, this second ritual impurity is considered a *new* impurity, separate from the first. However, since the sacrifices for the first impurity are only due on day eight (and have not yet been brought), the Nazirite can combine the obligations and bring a single sacrifice for both impurities after a subsequent seven-day purification period. This explains the Mishnah's ruling of "multiple impurities, one sacrifice."
The Gemara then questions whether this Mishnah could also be understood according to Rabbi's view. If the Nazirite became ritually impure on day seven, according to Rabbi, the new Naziriteship has not yet begun (it starts on day eight). Therefore, becoming ritually impure again on day seven would simply be an extension of the *same* initial ritual impurity, not "multiple impurities." If he became ritually impure on day eight, according to Rabbi, the time for the first sacrifice has already arrived. If he then becomes ritually impure again, he would be obligated to bring *two* sacrifices, contradicting the Mishnah's premise of "one sacrifice." Thus, the Mishnah cannot be reconciled with Rabbi's opinion.
A final attempt is made to reconcile the Mishnah with Rabbi's view by considering a scenario where the second ritual impurity occurs on the *night* of the eighth day. Since sacrifices cannot be brought at night, one might argue that the Nazirite is not yet *obligated* to bring the sacrifice, even though it is technically the eighth day. In this specific case, it could be considered two impurities requiring only one sacrifice. However, the Gemara rejects this, stating that if Rabbi holds that "night is not considered lacking in time" (meaning the obligation for the sacrifice takes effect at night, even if it cannot be performed), then becoming ritually impure again would still necessitate two sacrifices. Conversely, if Rabbi holds that "night is considered lacking in time" (meaning the obligation does not take effect until morning), then the new Naziriteship also would not begin until morning. In that case, becoming ritually impure at night would still be part of the *previous* Naziriteship, not a new one, thus failing to create a scenario of "two impurities" in the first place. Therefore, the Mishnah of "multiple impurities, one sacrifice" remains uniquely attributable to Rabbi Yosef.