HOW DOES HAFARAH WORK? (cont.)
Answer #4 (Beraisa): If a woman accepted Nezirus and became Teme'ah, and later her husband annulled her Nezirus, she brings Chatas ha'Of (a bird), but not Olas ha'Of.
If a husband cuts off a vow, she should also bring Olas ha'Of!
Objection: If he uproots it, she should also be exempt from Chatas ha'Of!
Resolution: (Really, he uproots.) The Beraisa is like R. Elazar ha'Kapar:
(Beraisa - R. Elazar ha'Kapar) Question: "He sinned on the soul" - against which soul did he sin?
Answer: (He sinned against his own soul.) He pained himself by abstaining from wine; for this he is called a sinner. (The Chatas is for this, even though she was never truly a Nezirah.)
One who pains himself by abstaining from only one thing is called a sinner, and all the more so, one who fasts and denies himself all food!
Answer #5 (Beraisa): If Leah accepted to be a Nezirah and Rachel said 'and I', and Leah's husband annulled her vow, Leah is not a Nezirah, but Rachel is.
This proves that he cuts off a vow. (This is like Chachamim. We proved above that R. Elazar Hakapar holds that he uproots. Alternatively, perhaps all agree that he cuts, and "V'Hezir... and he will bring" teaches that one brings Olas ha'Of only if he must still observe Nezirus - Rosh).
(Continuation of Beraisa - R. Shimon): If Rachel said 'I am like you', when Leah's Nezirus is annulled, Rachel's is also. (R. Shimon can agree that Hafarah cuts. Rachel intended to be forbidden only when Leah is forbidden.)
DOES HATFASAH APPLY TO THE BEGINNING, OR TO THE END? [line 1]
(Mar Zutra, son of Rav Mari): From Chachamim (who say that Rachel remains a Nezirah after Leah's Nezirus is annulled) we can resolve Rami bar Chama's question:
Question (Rami bar Chama): If one said 'this is forbidden to me like meat of Shelamim', what is the law?
Is a person Matfis in the original Kedushah (i.e. before Zerikah (throwing the Korban's blood on the Mizbe'ach), when the meat was forbidden to all)?
Or, is he Matfis in the final Kedushah (i.e. after Zerikah, when the meat is permitted?
(Understood Answer: Chachamim forbid Rachel because one is Matfis in the original Kedushah.)
Version #1 - Objection: Our case is unlike Rami's case!
There, even though the meat is permitted after Zerikah, it may not be eaten outside the Mikdash! (It still has some Kedushah. Perhaps one is Matfis in the final Kedushah!)
Here, Rachel cannot intend to be Matfis in the final Kedushah. After Hafarah, Leah is not a Nezirah at all!
Version #2: Indeed, from Chachamim we can resolve Rami's question.
Question: If Leah accepted Nezirus, and Rachel said 'I am a Nezirah in your footsteps', what is the law?
Does Rachel intend to always have the same status as Leah, and if Leah's Nezirus is annulled, Rachel will also be permitted?
Or, does she intend to follow in Leah's path before Hafarah (but Rachel will remain forbidden)?
Answer (Mishnah): If Leah said 'I am a Nezirah', and her husband said 'and I', he cannot annul her Nezirus.
If one intends to be Matfis before Hafarah, he would be able to annul her Nezirus, and he would still be a Nazir!
Conclusion: We must say that he wants to always have her status. Therefore, he cannot annul her Nezirus (for this would permit his own Nezirus).
If someone else was Matfis in her Nezirus, he would become permitted after Hafarah.
Rejection: Really, a person is Matfis before Hafarah;
Her husband cannot annul her Nezirus, because saying 'and I', is like Kiyum;
If he regrets his Kiyum, and a Chacham permits the Kiyum, he may then annul his wife's Nezirus. If not, he cannot annul it.
ONE WHO PROMPTED HIS WIFE TO BE MATFIS IN HIS NEZIRUS [line 22]
(Mishnah): If Reuven said to his wife 'I am a Nazir, and you?', and she answered 'Amen', he can annul her Nezirus, and he is still a Nazir.
Contradiction (Beraisa): If Reuven said to his wife 'I am a Nazir, and you?', and she answered 'Amen', they are both Nezirim. If not, neither is a Nazir, because he made his Nezirus contingent on hers.
Answer #1 (Rav Yehudah): Correct the Beraisa to say 'he can annul her Nezirus, and he is still a Nazir' (like the Mishnah. Rosh - the Seifa teaches that his Nezirus is contingent on her acceptance, but it does not depend on her continuing to be a Nezirah.)
Answer #2 (Abaye): We need not alter the Beraisa. The case is, he said 'I am a Nazir, and you?', i.e. do you want that we will be Nezirim? (Ha made his Nezirus dependent on hers.)
In the Mishnah he said 'I am a Nazir. And (what about) you?' (Do you also want to be a Nezirah
Therefore, he can annul her Nezirus, and his Nezirus stands.