כב ארבעים שנה למאן תניא רבי נהוראי אומר משום רבי יהושע מקץ ארבעים שנה ששאלו להם מלך דתניא אותה שנה ששאלו להם מלך אותה שנה עשירית של שמואל היתה
22 and whatsoever is not the subject of a vow or a freewill dedication must not be offered on a private bamah'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Meg. 9b.');"><sup>37</sup></span> And it has been taught: 'Meal-offerings and offerings in connection with a Nazirite may be offered on a private bamah'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Zeb. 117b. We consequently see that a Nazirite is the subject of a vow etc. Otherwise one could not offer sacrifices of a Nazirite on a private bamah.');"><sup>38</sup></span> This is the teaching of R'Meir. - Delete<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Var. lec. insert: Said R. Joseph (v. Sh. Mek.) .');"><sup>39</sup></span> from here<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' From the cited Baraitha.');"><sup>40</sup></span> the case of a Nazirite.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So that although a Nazirite is the subject of a vow and a freewill dedication, this does not apply to the sacrifices which a Nazirite has to bring later on, these being obligatory, for the vow of a Nazirite at the outset only has reference to wine and the sacrifices come later automatically.');"><sup>41</sup></span> But is there an authority who holds that a Nazirite is not the subject of a vow or a freewill-offering? Lo, it is written: And it came to pass after forty years that Absalom said to the King, [pray thee let me go and pay my vow which I vowed unto the Lord in Hebron. For thy servant vowed a vow, etc.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' II Sam. XV, 7.');"><sup>42</sup></span> Now does this not refer to the sacrifice?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Implying that he will go to Hebron and pay his vows there. Now Absalom was a life Nazirite and every year he shaved himself and brought the appropriate sacrifice. Since he went to offer his sacrifice in Hebron where there were private bamahs, we can infer that a Nazirite is the subject of vows and freewill-offerings.');"><sup>43</sup></span> - No, it refers to the vow itself.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The word Hebron in the text means this: I will go to the place of a large bamah i.e., Gibeon and there pay my vows which I made at Hebron. But the text does not mean that Absalom actually fulfilled his vows in Hebron.');"><sup>44</sup></span> 'The vow itself' - was it made in Hebron? Was it not made in Geshur?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since Scripture says: 'For thy servant vowed a vow while I abode at Geshur'.');"><sup>45</sup></span> Said R'Aha, some say Rabbah son of R'Hanan: Absalom only went in order to bring sheep from Hebron.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The sheep there being large and fat and his intention being subsequently to offer them in Gideon on a large bamah. The text therefore does not mean that the vow was made in Hebron, only that he obtained the sheep at Hebron.');"><sup>46</sup></span> So indeed it stands to reason. For if you say that he went to Hebron to offer up, would he leave Jerusalem and go to offer up in Hebron? - Then what do you say? That he went to bring sheep from Hebron? Then why does it say: 'Which I vowed unto the Lord in Hebron'? It ought to say 'from Hebron'! - One can still say that he went to offer in Hebron,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For a Nazirite can offer his sacrifice on a private bamah.');"><sup>47</sup></span> and as regards your difficulty as to why he left Jerusalem and came to offer in Hebron, why not raise this same difficulty with reference to Gibeon which was a holy place?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For in that place there was an altar which Moses made. Why not go there?');"><sup>48</sup></span> This however is the explanation: Once it has become permissible to offer on the bamahs, he can offer wherever he wishes.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Absalom therefore went to Hebron and saw the sheep, and being there, he decided to offer in the same place (Wilna Gaon) . The Rabbis who differ from R. Meir, however, hold that a Nazirite is not the subject of vows and therefore Absalom went to Hebron for the sheep but the actual offering was in Gibeon, on a large bamah (Tosaf) . R. Dimi therefore who includes peace-offerings in connection with a Nazirite, agrees with the Rabbis who hold that a Nazirite is not the subject of vows and the Baraitha quoted above is the opinion of R. Meir.');"><sup>49</sup></span> It says: 'After forty years'. Forty years from what? - R'Nehorai reported in the name of R'Joshua: Forty years from when [the Israelites] asked for a king. For it has been taught: The year in which the Israelites asked for a king was the tenth year of Samuel's leadership.