מדרש על במדבר 6:4

(Bamidbar 6:4) "All the days of his Naziritism, of all that is made from the grape-vine, from the kernels to the husk, he shall not eat": Scripture hereby apprises us that if he ate an olive-size of all of them (kernel and husk combined), he receives forty lashes. And this serves as a paradigm for all of the prohibitions of the Torah, viz.: If (in the instance of) a Nazirite, whose prohibition (re wine) is not for all time, (but only for the period of his Naziritism), and whose prohibition does not extend to the derivation of benefit, and whose prohibition is subject to release (by absolution of his Naziritism), separate elements (in an injunction) combine with each other to (form the forbidden) olive-size, then the other prohibitions of the Torah, whose prohibitions are for all time, and whose prohibition extends to derivation of benefit, and whose prohibition is not subject to release — how much more so do they combine with each other to (form the forbidden) olive-size! "of all that is made from the grape-vine": I might think that leaves and sprouts, too, (are included); it is, therefore, written "from the kernels to the husk": Just as the specific instance is of fruit (kernel) and residue of fruit (husk), so, only these are included (in the prohibition), to exclude leaves and sprouts, (which do not satisfy these parameters). R. Eliezer says: Leaves and sprouts are also subsumed in "of all that is made from the grape-vine." "from the chartzanim to the zag he shall not eat": The minimum (amount for transgression) — two kernels, one husk. These are the words of R. Eliezer b. Azaryah. Which are the chartzanim and which are the zagim? "chartzanim" are the outer, and "zagim" are the inner. These are the words of R. Yehudah. R. Yossi says: So that you not err, (they are) like the bells ("zugim") of an animal: the outer (part) is the "zag"; the inner (the clapper) is the "inbal." "From the kernels to the husk he shall not eat": We are hereby apprised that "pained eating" (as in eating kernels and husk) does not free him from liability. For it would follow (otherwise), viz.: If for the graver — Yom Kippur — one is not liable for "pained eating," should this not be so for the lesser, Naziritism? It is, therefore, written "From the kernels to the husk he shall not eat.": Why is this written" (i.e., it may be derived from the preceding verse, viz.:) "of all that is made of the grape-vine … he shall not eat" — general. "From wine and strong drink he shall separate himself. Vinegar of wine and vinegar of strong drink he shall not drink" — particular. (We have here an instance of) general-particular. (The rule is:) There is subsumed in the general only what is in the particular. Just as the particular is "fruit (wine) and residue of fruit (vinegar)," so, I derive (as forbidden) anything which is "fruit and residue of fruit" — including kernels and husk, which satisfy that parameter! (Why, then is "from the kernels to the husk" needed?) — Perhaps, just as the particular is an "actual" fruit, so, I may derive only an "actual" fruit. — (No!) Which "actual" fruit has not been mentioned? You must revert, then, to the original formulation, (and the question remains:) If I can derive it from the rule, why need "from the kernels to the husk" be stated? We are hereby taught that (in the instance of) a "general" which adds to the "particular," what is to be derived is not (of necessity) to be of the same nature as the "particular" to remove it from the "general" (formulation) unless Scripture indicates it specifically, as it does in the instance of the Nazirite.

"thirty days": What is the nature of these (thirty days)? We are hereby taught that they mourned him for thirty days before his death. And whence is it derived that the days of Naziritism are thirty? It is written here "days" and elsewhere, (in respect to Naziritism, Bamidbar 6:4) "days." Just as "days" here is thirty, so, "days" there is thirty.