Nazir 4:6-7

Nazir 4:6

A man can impose nezirus on his son, but a woman cannot. Let’s say that the son shaved or other family members shaved him, or the son or other family members objected, indicating that the son does not accept the nezirus, and the father had already designated animals for the son’s sacrifices. An animal designated for a sin offering must be left to die, while one for a burnt offering and one for a peace offering must be offered, the peace offering being eaten in one day, without bread. (See mishna 4:4 for details.) If he put aside money to purchase offerings but did not specify which money was for which offering, it is given as a donation to the Temple. If money was designated for a sin offering, it is thrown into the Dead Sea; one is not permitted to benefit from it and using it constitutes misappropriation. Money designated for a burnt offering must be used to purchase a burnt offering and using it otherwise constitutes misappropriation. Money designated for a peace offering must be used to purchase a peace offering, which is eaten in one day and brought without bread.

Nazir 4:7

A man may bring his sacrifices using money that had been designated for his (deceased) father’s sacrifices, but a woman may not, as follows: the father was a nazir and he put aside money for his sacrifices and then he died. The son says, “I am a nazir on the condition that I can bring my sacrifices using the money my father put aside.” Rabbi Yosi says the money is given as a donation to the Temple; the son may not use it to purchase his sacrifices. If so, who is the son who can use the father’s money for his sacrifices? That’s in a case where both the father and son were nazirs. The father put undesignated money aside for sacrifices then died. In such a case, the son may bring sacrifices using the father’s money.