NASO_ NUMBERS IV,21 – VII

One of the topics highlighted in the biblical chapters refers to the Nazir, the person who makes the decision to refrain from eating grapes and drinking wine, promises not to cut his hair and avoid any contact with a deceased. (The state of Nazir lasts thirty days, unless a different lapse has been specified). We are probably faced with a personal decision to deprive ourselves of some of the pleasures of this world because they are probably conducive to undesirable behavior. Indeed, since an earlier chapter refers to the investigation process of a woman whose husband suspects her of adultery, our Chachamim conclude that the law of the Nazir is mentioned immediately, because the abuse of wine can also result in sexual levity.

The Nazi may consider some enjoyments to be unlawful and, therefore, compromise his moral and religious integrity. This concept is typical of many religions that probably think that depriving yourself of some joy is well seen by the gods. According to the commentator Ibn Ezra, human beings are slaves to their passions, and the authentically free individual rids himself from the yoke of passions. Abstaining from worldly pleasures can also be regarded as a self-imposed punishment for sins committed.

In a Braita, a rabbinical text not included in the Mishnah, we find a difference of opinions about our subject. Rabbi Eliezer Hakapar refers to the fact that the Torah requires the Nazir to offer a sacrifice at the end of his abstention period implies that it considers him a sinner; while Rabbi Elazar considers him a virtuoso, also relying on a different expression of the Torah. This difference reflects the tension that exists within Judaism regarding the pleasures of this world. On the one hand, we are aware that we must dominate our appetites, as expressed by Ibn Ezra and, on the other hand, our tradition teaches that those who have seen something that seems to be pleasurable and refrain from enjoying it will be responsible in the future world for their action.

There are those who see in our laws of Kashrut, for example, a system of regulations that aim to limit the free enjoyment of pleasure. The purpose of these standards may be to strengthen the mechanisms of self-control of a human being so that he does not give in immediately to instinctive desires. We have, on the one hand, then, the fragile will of the human who has to be restricted and, on the other hand, a world created by the Supreme Being that is all goodness and therefore, so must be His creation. (Indeed, man is also part of divine creation and according to the above argument must be equally good). 

The dialectic of our argument tends to be resolved by pointing out that both nature and human beings are potentially good. Mitsvot are the instrument that directs man’s instincts and inclinations toward goodness and nobility, toward fairness and altruism.

In Tanach we find two famous Nezirim. In both cases, it is the mothers who make the promise that their unborn child will be dedicated to worship, will be a Nazir. The two biblical characters inadvertently become Nezirim. (Possibly also, Avshalom, who refrained from cutting his hair, can be considered a third Nazir). The first of these, who has been the subject of numerous literary works, is Shimshon, who is prominently featured in the confrontation of our ancestors with the Philistines. In the biblical account Shimshon is a worthy leader of his people while fulfilling his status as a Nazir. However, his dedication to pleasures in the arms of the beautiful Delilah, leads him to fail in his promise of Nazir, symbolized by the cutting of his hair.

Shimshon is a tragic figure, because he possesses extraordinary physical strength, which could have been decisive in the confrontation with the Philistines. Unfortunately, his massive powers were not accompanied by spiritual strength capable of resisting Delilah’s charm.  

We are faced with an important lesson. First, the victory of the people cannot depend exclusively on the actions of one man. Second, abstention itself, at best, is a passing factor. The condition of Nazir can be beneficial and useful only as a passing condition, useful in molding a person’s character. But it cannot be the basis for a people’s salvation. It is clear that those who serve as leaders of society have to limit their appetites and personal desires. But one must also have a clear vision and a defined purpose, sagacity, and acumen to lead a nation’s destinies. At the heart of it all, Nazir is a manifestation of will, self-restriction and limitation, but cannot be seen as a decisive path to creativity and development.

The second biblical character to be a Nazir is the prophet Shmuel. This time we are in front of a spiritual and political leader who stamped his dominant personality in the formative period of our people.  Shmuel is clear in his purposes and understands fully his sacred mission of moral leadership. Shmuel agrees to the people’s desire to establish a monarchy by anointing the first King Shaul. But at the same time, he insists that the monarchy must be subjected to the “Supreme King”, to the ordinances, and to obedience to the word of God. And indeed, when Shaul, in his confrontation with Amalek, disobeys the instructions received, Shmuel predicts the end of his kingdom. The monarchy of Israel will have a new dynasty from that moment onwards, which will last, (although it was interrupted at the time of the Chashmonaim) until the messianic era and which focuses on the figure of the young hero David.

The Talmud reflects that tradition is very severe with Shaul and, in contrast, considers sympathy for David to be excessive. The latter is forgiven for numerous mistakes, while Shaul has his support withdrawn, at the first opportunity, as a result of disobedience. This is parallel to the fact that we tend to be tolerant and patient with our close relatives, while reacting violently to the transgressions of others. Why is Shaul punished while David is forgiven several times, while being assured that his descendants will obtain the royal crown forever? 

There are people whom we like us and are willing to apologise for their faults, while we are relentless with others. The charismatic young David had returned pride to the people by bringing down the gigantic Goliath with a stone. On the other hand, Shaul was a depressive and melancholic man who apparently did not enjoy the affection of the crowds.

Harav Yosef Dov Haleví Soloveitchik, my teacher, suggests that King David’s faultscorrespond to human weaknesses for which the Torah offers repentance and atonement. Shaul’s fault, on the other hand, is related to the exercise of the monarchy. Rambam lists the obligations of a king, including the defense of the country and that of its inhabitants. Shaul’s mistake had to do with royal leadership responsibilities, the defense of national interest and, therefore, his blunder is inexcusable. David’s mistakes, though many and serious, come from his fragility as a man. Shaul’s mistake lies in the realm of his role as monarch, that is, at the essence of his role as leader and is, therefore, unforgivable.

During the years of the existence of the Beit HaMikdash, the sect of Isi´im, the Essenes, apparently practiced asceticism and were probably not the only ones to do so at the time. The Chachamim did not exhort the goodness of abstaining from pleasures, although they did point out that excess enjoyment is harmful. Perhaps one of the main reasons for the opinion of our Chachamim is that people who practice abstinence and who are very severe with themselves tend to be ungenerous in their relationships with their fellowmen. The person who believes that abstinence from enjoyment of any pleasure is the correct behavior, cannot respond with magnanimity to the needs of others. 

We return to Shevil HaZahav, to the delicate balance required to enjoy the material without compromising the value of the spiritual. Everyone has the personal task of finding the delicate balance between things and ideas, between owning and being. A life that is governed by Mitsvot is the framework par excellence that our tradition offers to accomplish this task.

MITSVAH: TORAH ORDINANCE IN THIS PARASHAH

CONTAINS 7 POSITIVE MITSVOT AND 11 PROHIBITIONS

1. 362.Numbers 5:2 Sending the ritually unclean individual out of the field of Divine Presence
2. 363.Numbers 5:3 The ritually unclean individual should not enter the Temple
3. 364.Numbers 5:6 Confessing Sin
4. 365.Numbers 5:15 Complying with the laws of sotah (wife suspected of committing infidelity)
5. 366.Numbers 5:15 Do not include oil in the sotah offering
6. 367.Numbers 5:15 Do not include species in the sotah offering
7. 368. Numbers 6:3 The nazir should not drink wine or another strong drink derived from grapes
8. 369.Numbers 6:3 Nazir should not consume fresh grapes
9. 370.Numbers 6:3 Nazir must not consume raisins
10. 371.Numbers 6:4 Nazir should not consume grape seed
11. 372.Numbers 6:4 Nazir should not consume the bark of the grape
12. 373.Numbers 6:5 Nazir should not shave his hair
13. 374.Numbers 6:5 Allow nazir’s hair to grow long
14. 375.Numbers 6:6 Nazir must not enter the enclosure where a corpse lies
15. 376.Numbers 6:7 Nazir must not acquire ritual impurity through a corpse or any other source of ritual impurity
16. 377.Numbers 6:13 Shave Nazir’s hair and bring his offering (at the end of the period of his nazir promise, orif he acquires ritual impurity)
17. 378.Numbers 6:23 Recite the Blessing of the Kohanim
18. 379.Numbers 7:9 The tribe of Levi must carry the Aron HaKodesh, Holy Ark, on the shoulders