(Mishnah): If a man told two Nezirim 'I saw that one of you became Tamei, but I do not know which', they shave and bring (together) the Korbanos of a Tahor Nazir and a Tamei Nazir;

One of them says 'if I was Tamei, Korban Tum'ah is mine, and Korban Taharah is yours. If I was Tahor, Korban Taharah is mine, and Korban Tum'ah is yours.'

They count 30 [more] days [of Nezirus], and bring Korban Taharah. He says 'if I was Tamei, [last time] Korban Tum'ah was mine, and Korban Taharah was yours, and this (what we bring now) is my Korban Taharah. If I was Tahor, Korban Taharah was mine, and Korban Tum'ah was yours, and this is your Korban Taharah.'

If one of them died, R. Yehoshua says, [Ploni, i.e. the other,] finds someone willing to vow corresponding to him;

Ploni says 'if I was Tamei, you are a Nazir starting now. If I was Tahor, you will be a Nazir after 30 days.'

They count 30 days [of Nezirus]. They bring (together) Korban Tum'ah and Korban Taharah. Ploni stipulates 'if I was Tamei, Korban Tum'ah is for me, and Korban Taharah is for you. If I was Tahor, Korban Taharah is for me, and Korban Tum'ah was Safek (brought due to the doubt).

They count another 30 days. They bring (together) Korban Taharah. Ploni stipulates - if I was Tamei, Korban Tum'ah was for me, Korban Taharah was for you, and this (what we bring now) is my Korban Taharah. If I was Tahor, Korban Taharah was mine, and Korban Tum'ah was Safek, and this is your Korban Taharah.'

Objection (Ben Zoma): Who will consent to accept Nezirus corresponding to him [on such conditions. He must observe the Isurim for 60 days, but he is credited only with 30 days of Nezirus!]

Rather, Ploni brings [after 30 days] Chatas ha'Of and Olas Beheimah. He says 'if I was Tamei, I fulfill my obligation with the Chatas, and the Olah is a Nedavah (voluntary Korban). If I was Tahor, I fulfill my obligation with the Olah, and the Chatas is Safek.'

He counts [another] 30 days and brings Korban Taharah, and says 'if I was Tamei, the first Olah was Nedavah, and this is my Chovah (obligation, i.e. Korban Taharah). If I was Tahor, the first Olah was Chovah; the current Olah is a Nedavah, and this is the rest of my Korban [Taharah].

Objection (R. Yehoshua): [If he was Tahor,] he brings his Korban [Taharah] in halves (the Olah now, and the rest after 30 days)!

However, Chachamim agreed to Ben Zoma.

(Gemara): This is not only when he told them 'I saw that one of you became Tamei, but I do not know which.' Rather, it is even if he says 'I saw that one of you accepted Nezirus, but I do not know which.' They both observe Nezirus based on his mouth. (They bring one Korban Taharah, and stipulate that it is for the Nazir.)

Limitation: This is when they do not contradict him. If they contradict him, it is not so.

If there were two [who saw them] and [the possible Nezirim] contradict them, the law is like the following [Mishnah. We explained this like SEFER NIR];

If one witness says '[Reuven] became Tamei', and he says 'I did not become Tamei', he is Tahor;

If two say 'you became Tamei', and he says 'I did not become Tamei', they are believed against him, R. Meir says so;

Chachamim say, he is believed about himself.

(Rav Yehudah citing Rav): The Mishnah should say that R. Meir is Metamei, and R. Yehudah and Chachamim are Metaher.

(R. Yochanan): The Mishnah should say that R. Meir is Metamei, and R. Yehudah is Metaher.

The words of the following Rabanan support R. Yochanan;

(R. Guryon citing R. Yosi ben Chaninah): R. Yehudah said (was Metaher) only for an old Tum'ah, for [he has a Migo.] He could say 'I was Tamei, and I became Tahor.' (They did not mention Chachamim, for they hold that only R. Yehudah was Metaher.)

Support (Beraisa): And Chachamim agree with R. Yehudah about [one who contradicts witnesses who say that he is liable for] eating Chelev, and the same applies to Bi'as Mikdash, but not to Tum'ah.

Question: [Chachamim] should agree [to R. Yehudah also] about Tum'ah!

Answer: [They do not,] due to Tum'as Nazir. If [he will say 'I was Tamei, and I became Tahor'], one says [back] to him '[if so], where is the Korban [Tum'ah] that you brought?!'

Note: Must one who brings Korban Tum'ah appoint witnesses who can testify that he brought it?! Perhaps they say that he became Tamei recently, so had he shaved Tiglachas Tum'ah, his hair would not be as long as it is now. Or, the Kohanim who served since then are sure that they did not offer Korban Tum'ah. Normally, one who has no reason to be mindful about something is prone to forget it (Bavli Shevu'os 41b). If Korban Tum'ah is very rare, or all Kohanim were nervous about eating it (see Bavli Nedarim 9b), this does not apply. (PF)

Question: [Chachamim] should agree [to R. Yehudah also] about Terumah! (PNEI MOSHE - they say that he ate b'Shogeg, and he must return Chulin with an added Chomesh. He has a Migo; he could say that he ate b'Mezid. If we discuss another's Terumah, he says that he ate another's Chulin, and he will pay for it (PF). Alternatively, they say that he ate his own Terumah, e.g. what he inherited from his mother's father.)

Until here, R. Chaninah [asked when Chachamim agree with R. Yehudah, and] left this difficult. R. Mana learned from the Seifa [that in every case there is a Migo - SEFER NIR].

(Seifa): [Chachamim] said [to R. Meir, witnesses cannot obligate him a Korban if he denies it, for] he can say 'I was Mezid' (so I am exempt from a Korban)!

Question: Regarding [Bi'as] Shifchah, what [Migo] do you have? If he was Shogeg, he is Chayav [Asham]. If he was Mezid, he is Chayav [Asham]!

Answer #1: He can say 'I did Ha'ara'ah (the first stage of Bi'ah), but I did not finish [the Bi'ah.' One is liable for her only for a full Bi'ah. Surely the witnesses merely saw them behave like people having Bi'ah, but did not see how far the Ever entered!]

Answer #2: He can say 'I was forced [to have Bi'ah with her] through witchcraft that she did to me.' (OHR SOMAYACH, Hilchos Ishus 24:19 - surely if one was warned not to do an Aveirah, and he transgressed, he is not believed afterwards to say that he was forced through witchcraft.)

Question: Regarding Nezirus, what [Migo] do you have? If he was Shogeg, he is Chayav [Korban Tum'ah]. If he was Mezid, he is Chayav. If he was Ones, he is Chayav!

"B'Fesa" includes Shogeg. "Pis'om" includes Mezid and Ones.

Answer: [He can say, when I accepted Nezirus,] there was a Tenai (stipulation) in my heart, that when I will become Tamei, Nezirus will be uprooted from me. [Even if he intended] 'and a new Nezirus will take effect on me', in any case he was not obligated in Nezirus until now (PNEI MOSHE).

Question: Regarding Shevu'os, what [Migo] do you have? If he was Shogeg, he is Chayav [Korban Tum'ah]. If he was Mezid, he is Chayav!

[You cannot say that he had a Tenai, for] there is a Tenai in Nedarim, but there is no Tenai in Shevu'os! (SHIREI KORBAN questions this, for also Shevu'os require that his mouth and heart are united.)

Answer: It is like R. Ba said in the name of Rav Yehudah - whether he was Shogeg about (he did not know that a false oath obligates) the Korban or Mezid about the Korban (he is liable), but if he said 'I thought that this is not a Shevu'ah', he is exempt.

All other matters, a Tenai does not help, but here, he can stipulate (he says, 'on condition that this is not a Shevu'ah' - SHIREI KORBAN).

(R. Yosi): [If a witness says] 'Ploni ate Chelev, and I warned him', he is not lashed. If one person told him 'this is Chelev', and two witnesses warned him, he is lashed;

Is the primary testimony not through one witness (to establish the Isur)?

(R. Yehudah): [If a witness says] 'Ploni the Nazir became Tamei, and I warned him', he is not lashed;

If one person told him 'you are a Nazir', and he conducted Nezirus based on his words, if he drank wine or became Tamei Mes, and two witnesses warned him, he is lashed. Is the primary testimony not through one witness?

(R. Mana): [If a witness says] Plonis is a Kohenes, and she was Mezanah, and her husband, a Kohen, had Bi'ah with her, and I warned him, he is not lashed [for Zonah];

If she was secluded in front of two, and one says 'I saw that she was defiled', and her husband (a Kohen) had Bi'ah with her, if two warned him, he is lashed. Is the primary testimony not through one witness? (SEFER NIR, Sotah 6:2 - he establishes it to discuss a Kohen, so he is lashed even according to R. Yosi ben Kiper, who says that there is no Lav for a Sotah.)

(Mishnah): They bring (together) Korban Tum'ah and Korban Taharah.

Limitation: This is when [both] are at the end of the 30 [days], but if [one] is during the 30, [the other] waits for him until 30 (perhaps he is Tahor, and he cannot bring Korban Taharah before 30).

Limitation: This is when this one was a Nazir for 30, and this one was a Nazir for 30, but if this one was a Nazir for 30, and this one was a Nazir for 100, he waits for him until 100.