Commentary for Nazir 55:12

Rather, is it not referring to a lengthy naziriteship, and nevertheless it teaches: He starts counting immediately - from the day that he is presently, and he finishes that series of days that began before he was confirmed [a leper]. But the days in which he was confirmed [a leper] do not count for him.

What, is it not that Rabbi holds that they decreed impurity on it with regard to the air - and as for this case, since the air enters from above when they are open, or through openings, he would be impure, since he has entered the airspace of the land of the nations.

To a naziriteship of fifty days etc. [where he sat and observed twenty days and developed leprosy. He shaves on account of his leprosy and the days in which he was confirmed do not count for him] - because if you will say that they do count for him, he won't have enough [time remaining] in order to grow his hair after his leprosy-related shaving. Therefore following that he will need to sit for thirty days of naziriteship so that he has hair growth.

And Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, holds with regard to the earth - and not with regard to the air -- and since the floor of the chest, box or cabinet interposes between him and the earth, he would be deemed pure.

Rami bar Ḥama raised an objection: a nazirite who has uncertain impurity and one whose status as a confirmed leper is uncertain - who possibly became impure on the first day of his term of naziriteship, or if it is uncertain if he was confirmed and healed on the first day of his term of naziriteship.

No, since everyone agrees [that the decree] is with regard to the earth - but here, they are arguing about the following: Rabbi, who declares him impure, holds that a moving tent is not called a tent, and it does not constitute a separation. Then [the nazirite] would be as one who is actually walking on the ground. And Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, holds that it is considered a tent.

But isn't it taught that Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says: A box that is full of utensils that one threw over a corpse in a tent is impure - as well as all the utensils inside it. Apparently he maintains that a moving tent is not called a tent, and it does not interpose at all.

And if it was placed down, it is pure - since it was placed down it is like a fixed tent, and it protects [the utensils] from the impurity, and it is not like a moving tent.

Rather, that everyone agrees that it is with regard to the air - and the following is the reason that Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, declares [him] pure: because he holds that entering the land of the nations in a chest, box or cabinet is an unusual case, and the Sages did not make decrees for unusual cases.

And it is taught - [this term] is being used as a support for [the previous statement].

One who enters etc. in a wagon, boat or raft -- that is to say, in a large boat which is equipped with an iskareya -- and is it called this [iskareya] because of its iskareya, which is a mast. And it is called POST or MAST in a foreign language. Because it is a frequently-occurring case, the Sages decreed regarding it. This baraita is according to Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda.

And if you wish, say - that everyone agrees it is with regard to the earth, and everyone also agrees that a moving tent is called a tent; and that which [Rabbi] declares him impure here is because he holds that the decree is lest he remove his head and the majority of his body from the chest, box or cabinet. Rabbi Yosei does not make such a decree.

And it is taught - as a support to the idea that Rabbi Yosei does not declare him impure until he removes his head and the majority of his body. And that which Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, taught above, that if one threw a box full of utensils over a corpse, [the box and everything inside it] is impure -- is not because he holds that a moving tent is not called a tent. Rather, since he threw it, he removes it from the status of being a tent, and equates it with the status of being a utensil. Actually, he holds that a moving tent is called a tent, since it teaches in the latter clause that "if it was placed down, it is pure" -- even though it is normally carried [around].

Rav Ḥisda said: they taught this - that his days of leprosy do not count toward his naziriteship.

Only with regard to a short naziriteship - when he accepted upon himself a naziriteship of thirty days, and contracted leprosy after he had done ten days, and was confirmed a leper -- those days do not count for him. Because if you say they do count for him, not enough time will remain for him to grow his hair after the leprosy-related shavings.

However, with regard to a lengthy naziriteship - [such as] where he accepted one hundred days upon himself, and contracted leprosy during his term of naziriteship before thirty days had passed, and was shaved with the two leprosy-related shavings -- since there will still be thirty days remaining for him in order to grow his hair, even the days in which he was confirmed [a leper] count for him, and he need only keep thirty days following his leprosy-related shavings, in order to grow his hair for his naziriteship in a state of purity.

Rav Sherevya raises an objection - can you infer that the mishna is referring to a short naziriteship? Doesn't it say "he starts counting immediately, and he does not negate the earlier [days]"? What kind of naziriteship could that be referring to? If we say [it is referring to] a short naziriteship of thirty days, can you say that it does not negate the earlier [days]?

Doesn't he require hair growth - after his shaving due to the leprosy? And he will not have that, because there is no "hair growth" in less than thirty days.