Nazir

Is not R. Mattena in conflict with this second clause?  — R. Mattena can reply: This must be interpreted in the light of the next clause, which says that the thirtieth day counts as belonging to both periods.  This is taken to signify then that part of a day is equivalent to a whole day. But has he [the Tanna] not stated this once already?  — It might be thought that this is only true for one naziriteship but not for two, and so we are told [that it is also true for two]. We have learnt: Should he poll on the day prior to the sixtieth, he has fulfillied his obligation. since the thirtieth day is included in the [required] number.  Now, this fits in well enough with the view of R. Mattena, but for Bar Pada what necessity is there [for this statement], since he says that [the normal duration] is thirty days less one? — He will say: This is the very passage on which I rely for my opinion. We have learnt: If a person says, 'I intend to be a nazirite' and contracts ritual defilement on the thirtieth day, the whole period is rendered void.  Now, this fits in well enough with the view of R. Mattena, but does it not conflict with that of Bar Pada? —