Nazir

How do we know that [the rule] is correct? — It has been taught: And thou shalt bestow the money for whatsoever thy soul desireth  is a general statement, for oxen or for sheep or for wine or for strong drink a specification, and or for whatsoever thy soul asketh of thee a further general statement, making a general statement, a specification and a second general statement. Only what is similar to the specification may be inferred,  and so because the specification particularises the product of that which is itself a product,  whose sustenance is drawn from the earth,  whatever is a product of a product-bearing species that draws its sustenance from the earth [may be purchased]. Seeing that when there is a general statement, a specifications and a general statement, we infer whatever is similar to the specification, what is then the function of the second general statement? It is to add whatever resembles the things specified.  Again, seeing that when there is a specifications a general statement, and a specifications what is similar to the specification is inferred, what is the purpose of the second specification? — But for its presence it would be said that it is a case of general statement being added to the [first] specification.  Further, seeing that both when there are two general statements [separated by] a specification and when there are two specifications [separated by] a general statement, what is similar to the specification is inferred, what then is the difference between the two cases? — It is that whereas in the former case we include even things that resemble the specification In one respect only,  in the latter case we include only what resembles [the specification] in two respects, but not what resembles it in one respect. Seeing that when a specification is followed by a general statement, the general statement supplements the specification, all things being included, and again when a limitation is followed by an amplifying clause, this amplifies to the fullest extent, all things being included, what then is the difference between [the two cases]? — The difference is that whereas in the case of a specification followed by a general statement, both shoots and leaves [say],  would be included, in the case of a limitation followed by an amplifying clause, Only the shoots, but not the leaves [would be included]. R. Abbahu said: R. Johanan said that what is permitted is not reckoned together with what is forbidden  in the case of any prohibition of the Torah with the exception of the prohibitions of the nazirite where the Torah says explicitly, [Neither shall he drink] that which is soaked in grapejuice.