Support (for Reish Lakish - Beraisa): If Reuven said 'I am a Nazir', Shimon paused Kedei Dibur, and said 'and I', Reuven is a Nazir, but Shimon is not.

Kedei Dibur is the time for a Talmid to greet his Rebbi.

Suggestion: The Mishnah also supports Reish Lakish.

(Mishnah): If Reuven said 'I am a Nazir'; another said 'and I'; and another said 'and I' (they are all Nezirim).

The Mishnah did not teach about more people, because it is after Kedei Dibur (four words were said after Reuven finished)!

Rejection: This is no support. The Tana is not a peddler (who announces everything he has. The Tana did not elaborate to teach every case!)

Question: If so, the Tana should have taught about only one other who said 'and I'!

Answer: Indeed, he should have taught only one;

However, the Seifa teaches 'if the first annulled his Nezirus, the Nezirus of all of them is annulled. If the last annulled his Nezirus, all except for him are Nezirim.' This implies that there is someone in the middle;

Therefore, the Reisha teaches that two people said 'and I.'

Question: Is everyone (after the second) Matfis in the first Nazir (accept to be Nezirim like him), or in the last one (who spoke)?

Question: What difference does this make?

Answer: It determines whether or not more people can be Matfis:

If each is Matfis in the last one, there is no limit to how many can be Matfis;

If each is Matfis in Reuven, all must begin Toch Kedei Dibur of Reuven's words.

Answer #1 (Mishnah): If Reuven said 'I am a Nazir'; another said 'and I'; and another said 'and I.'

Inference: No others can be Matfis.

We must say that each is Matfis in Reuven. If each is Matfis in the previous, the Tana should have listed more!

Rejection: The Tana is not a peddler!

Question: If so, the Tana should have taught about only one who said 'and I'!

Answer: The Seifa teaches 'if the first annulled ... if the last annulled ... This implies that there is someone in the middle. Therefore, the Reisha teaches about two.'

Answer #2 (to Question (f) - Mishnah): If the first annulled his Nezirus, the Nezirus of all of them is annulled.

Inference: If the middle one annulled his Nezirus, the Nezirus of the others is not annulled.

This shows that each is Matfis in Reuven.

Rejection: Perhaps each is Matfis in the last one;

The Tana wanted to teach that the Nezirus of all the others is annulled, therefore he had to teach that the first annulled his Nezirus.

If the second annulled his Nezirus, this would not annul the Nezirus of the first.

Answer #3 (Mishnah): If the last one annulled his Nezirus, he is not a Nazir, the rest of them are Nezirim.

Inference: This applies only to the last. If the middle one annulled his Nezirus, this would annul the Nezirus of the one after him!

This shows that each is Matfis in the last one.

Rejection: Perhaps each is Matfis in Reuven;

The Mishnah says 'last', but it means the middle!

Since the Reisha discussed the first, the Seifa says 'last'.

Answer #4 (Beraisa): If the first annulled his Nezirus, the Nezirus of all of them is annulled. If the last annulled his Nezirus, all except for him are Nezirim. If the middle annulled his Nezirus, those after him are not Nezirim, but those before him are Nezirim.

This shows that each is Matfis in the last one.

(Mishnah): If Reuven said 'I am a Nazir', and Shimon said 'my mouth is like his mouth', or 'my hair is like his hair', Shimon is also a Nazir.

Contradiction (Beraisa): If one said 'my hand is a Nezirah'; or, 'my foot is a Nezirah', these words do nothing;

If he said 'my head is a Nezirah' or 'my liver is a Nezirah', he is a Nazir;

The rule is, if he accepted Nezirus on a part of the body that is vital to life, he is a Nazir.

Answer (Rav Yehudah): He means 'my mouth is like his mouth regarding wine' or 'my hair is like his hair regarding cutting.'

(Mishnah): If Leah said 'I am a Nezirah', and her husband said 'and I', he cannot annul her Nezirus.

Question: When a husband annuls his wife's vow, does he uproot it retroactively, or cut it off from now on?

Question: What difference does this make?

Answer: If Leah said 'I am a Nezirah', Rachel heard and said 'and I', and Leah's husband annulled Leah's Nezirus:

If the vow is uprooted, Rachel's Nezirus is also uprooted.

If the vow is cut off from now on, Leah is no longer a Nezirah, but Rachel still is.

Answer #1 (Mishnah): If Leah said 'I am a Nezirah', and her husband said 'and I', he cannot annul her Nezirus.

If a husband cuts off a vow from now on, he should be able to annul her vow, and he will remain a Nazir!

Conclusion: We must say that he uproots it. (He cannot annul her Nezirus, for this would annul his own Nezirus, and he cannot do this.)

Rejection: Really, he cuts off a vow.

The reason he cannot annul her Nezirus is not because this would permit his own. Rather, saying 'and I' is like Kiyum (he shows that he wants her Nezirus to stand).

If he annuls his Kiyum, he may then annul her Nezirus. If not, he may not.

Answer #2 (Mishnah): If Leah accepted Nezirus, and designated an animal for Korbanos Nazir, and later her husband annulled her Nezirus:

If it was his animal, it may graze with the flock (i.e. it has no Kedushah);

If it was her animal, if it was the Chatas, it must die.

Inference: If a husband uproots a vow retroactively, even if it was her animal, it should have no Kedushah!

Conclusion: We must say that a husband cuts off a vow.

Rejection: Really, he uproots it;

Since she (does not - Tosfos (22a DH Ha) deletes this from the text) needs atonement, it is like a Chatas that was not offered before its owner died.

We have a tradition from Sinai that such a Chatas must die.

Answer #3 (Mishnah): If Leah accepted Nezirus, and drank wine or became Teme'ah, she receives 40 lashes.

Question: What is the case?

If her husband did not annul her Nezirus, this is obvious!

Answer: We must say that he annulled her vow.

Question: If Hafarah uproots, why is she lashed?!

Conclusion: We must say that Hafarah cuts off the vow.

Rejection: Really, Hafarah uproots;

Indeed, the Reisha is obvious (he did not annul her vow). It was taught due to the Seifa.

(Seifa): If her husband annulled her vow, and she did not know, and she later drank wine or became Teme'ah, she does not receive 40 lashes.