Parashat Nasso

THIS WAS THE DEDICATION OFERING FOR THE ALTAR FROM THE CHEIFTAINS OF ISRAEL UPON THE DAY OF ITS BEING ANOINTED: SILVER BOWLS, TWELVE; SILVER BASINS, TWELVE; GOLD LADLES, TWELVE.

(Bemidbar 7: 84)

 

TOTAL OF HERD ANIMALS FOR SACRIFICES OF WELL-BEING, TWENTY-FOUR BULLS; OF RAMS, SIXTY; OF HE-GOATS, SIXTY; OF YEARLING RAMS, SIXTY. THAT WAS THE DEDICATION OFFERING FOR THE ALTAR AFTER ITS ANOINTING.

 (Bemidbar 7:88)

 

 

Unity is Possible When the Good of the Whole is Preferred to Tribal Interests

This was the dedication offering for the altar upon the day of its being anointed - Could the entire dedication of the altar have been performed on the [first] day?

Rather, the verse comes to teach you that all of the tribes are equal and beloved before God. [So much so] that scripture relates to them as if they had all brought offerings on the first day, in order to fulfill the verse, Every part of you is fair, my darling, there is no blemish in you (Shir Ha-Shirim 4:7).

(Bamidbar Rabbah 14: 12)

 

What do the words upon the day of its being anointed come to teach us? Nahshon brought his offering on the very day of its anointing. Could it be that Nahshon brought his offering before it was anointed? We learn [that Nahshon's offering followed the anointment] from the words, This was the dedication offering for the altar upon the day of its being anointed. If it [Nahshon's offering] followed the anointment, could it have been made much later [not on the same day]? We learn from the verse, upon the day of its being anointed, [that Nahshon made his offering that same day].

We learned: In the day it was anointed, that very day the chieftains made their offerings, after it was anointed.

From the chieftains of Israel - [Here] Scripture tells us that just as all of them shared the same intention, so they all shared equally in merit.

(Bamidbar Rabbah 14:13)

 

Midrash Rabbah says that scripture accounts it as if they had all brought their offerings on the day of its anointment. And so it was as if they all brought their offerings [immediately] after its anointment, as it is written in verse 88 [the verse refers collectively to the total sum of all the chieftains' offerings as the dedication offering for the altar after its anointing]. This means that, as it has been written, they each brought offerings for all of Israel, and not that each brought offerings for his own tribe [alone].

(Ha'amek Davar Bamidbar 7:87)

 

 

The Nazirite: Saint or Sinner?

Jonathan Chipman

 

According to the "conventional wisdom" of modern Judaism, the Nazirite is an extreme type who has deviated from the "high road" of Judaism—the balanced, "middle path" celebrated by Rambam in Hilkhot Deot and Shemonah Perakim. It is for this reason that, when he completes his course of Naziritehood, he is required to bring a sin-offering in atonement. Thus, we read in Nedarim 10a:

Our Rabbis taught: Rabbi Eleazar ha-Kappar said: "And he shall make atonement for him, because he sinned regarding the soul" (Num 6:11). And regarding what soul did he sin? But because he pained himself [i.e., abstained] from wine. And is it not an a fortiori? If one who only abstained from wine is called a sinner, one who abstained from every other thing, all the more so! It follows from this, that whoever constantly fasts is called sinner.

On the face of it, this is seemingly conclusive proof that asceticism is frowned on; nay, that one who habitually refrains from enjoying the good things of this world is himself a sinner. Yet is this really so? Another Rabbinic homily (b. Ta'anit 11a), based upon a turn of phrase a few verses earlier in the same chapter, arrives at the diametrically opposed conclusion:

Rabbi Eleazar said: Whoever constantly fasts is called holy. As is said: "He shall be holy; he shall let the locks of his hair grow long" (Num 6:5). And if one who only abstained from one thing is called holy, one who does so from everything, all the more so!

What is the institution of Naziritism all about? In this week's reading (Numbers 6:1-21), the Torah seems to be providing a fixed framework for the person seeking a life of asceticism or withdrawal from the normal course of life. The Nazirite is a man or woman who voluntarily takes an oath to live in an out-of-the-ordinary manner (ki yafli lindor neder nazir), involving abstention from three kinds of activity: contact with the dead, cutting one's hair, and consuming wine and other grape products. (It is interesting that, unlike the monasticisms of Christianity or the Far Eastern religions, which are also designated in modern Hebrew by the word nazir, Biblical Naziritism does not involve abstention from sex.)

The institution of the Nazirite combines two interrelated themes: the desire for more intense religious life, in which one's life as a whole is devoted to God; and a certain rejection of civilization and a return to the primitive. The Nazirite casts off some of the external trappings and conventions of urban civilization, hearkening back to the pristine simplicity of the desert; a kind of "you walked after Me in the wilderness, in an unsown land" (Jer 2:2). There is something wild in his very appearance, a rejection of concern with external appearance, with propriety and the opinions of others—with all those things that loom so large in the life of the respectable, sophisticated urbanite. Indeed, an ancient Nazirite sect, the Rechabites, lived in a manner that eschewed many of the appurtenances of the civilization of their day, as they had been instructed by their forebear, Yonadav son of Rechab: "Do not drink wine, neither you nor your sons forever; and do not build a house, nor sow seeds, nor plant or have a vineyard, but you shall live in tents all your days" (Jeremiah 35: 6-7). One can imagine these Rechabites wearing rude homespun clothing, or even simple animal skins like Elijah. The growing of long hair also symbolizes rejection of the city dweller's concern with appearance. Wine, too, is an archetypal product of sophisticated, anti-nomadic civilization, requiring elaborate preparation—not to mention the danger of intoxication as a result of drinking to excess. More than anything, it would seem, the Nazirites sought a return to essentials, to an unadorned, simple life.

Examples of this impulse come to mind in a variety of cultures and religions. In early Christianity, there were those who lived a monastic life in wild, inaccessible places such as the mountain sides of Wadi Kelt; or Simon of the Desert, who stood on a pillar for twenty years; or, in medieval times, the Trappists, who eschewed all speech. In more recent contexts, such models as the Amish, who live in families, but reject much of modernity and insist on living off the land, come to mind. Early Hasidism, too, included a certain anarchistic element—a rejection of conventional, proper behavior, and a return to the essentials of the inner life of service of God in every moment of life. One might even argue that the hippie culture of the 60's, notwithstanding its many failings involved in its core a quest for a purer, more honest life, with more direct relationships between people, and less obsession with the accumulation of things.

Returning to the controversy between Rabbi Eleazar ha-Kappar and Rabbi Eleazar: in the first chapter of Hilkhot Deot (1.5), Rambam draws a contrast between the "wise man," who follows the balanced, middle path, and the "pious" man.

But he who is very particular with himself, and distances himself somewhat from the middle path to one side or another, is called a pious man (hasid). How so? One who avoids pride to go the other side and is very humble is called a hasid, and this is an exemplary trait. But if he distances himself from it only to the middle and is modest, he is called a wise man (hakham), and this is the trait of wisdom. And so on regarding all the traits. But the pious men of old would incline their traits from the middle way, towards one or another of the extremes... and this is called "beyond the requirement of the law." But we are commanded to walk in these intermediate ways, and these are the good and upright ways, as is said, "and you should walk in His ways" (Deut 28:9).

What is the attitude expressed here toward hasidut, exemplary piety? As I see it, there is a certain element of ambivalence. On the one hand, the pious man is clearly deserving of praise and admiration (and indeed, at least with respect to the traits of anger and pride, everyone ought to act like a hasid; see ibid., 2.3); on the other hand, the proper path, that in which we are "commanded to walk," is the middle way—that of the hakham, not that of the hasid. The path of hasidut is a kind of voluntaristic path, freely chosen by those who desire it, not part of the normative requirements that the Torah places upon the ordinary person.

In an important essays, Gershom Scholem describes what he calls "Three Types of Jewish Piety" (In his On the Possibility of Jewish Mysticism in Our Time and Other Essays (Philadelphia: JPS, 1997) 176-190. First published in Ariel 32 (1973).) - three different ideal human types expressed in Judaic sources. The first type, the talmid hakham, represents the intellectual ideal of comprehensive knowledge of the tradition, clarity and power of mind in expounding and interpreting it. While a talmid hakham may also embody qualities of piety, religious emotion, and exemplary ethical behavior (and, in a certain sense, is even be expected to do so), these are not defining components of the type per se. The other two types - the tzaddik and the hasid - embody an ethical and spiritual ideal. (Note: Scholem uses here the classical Rabbinic terminology: in Hasidism, for reasons we needn't go into here, the respective ranking and meaning of these two terms was inverted 180 degrees.) The tzaddik is the Jew who fulfills his duty according to the Law. There is a certain sobriety in this ideal, an absence of emotionalism, a sense of balance and calm, reminiscent of Soloveitchik's "halakhic man." There is also a sense of normality in this ideal: it is an ideal for which the ideal ba'al bayit, the family man and good citizen of the community, may reasonably strive.

The hasid, by contrast, is the exceptional, extraordinary Jew. He is a person who, in following the call of the spirit, may go to extremes and perform unusual, even bizarre acts. He lives outside of the routine norms, above and beyond its stipulations; he strives to realizes the ideal of lifnim mishurat hadin, "beyond the call of the law." He is not interested in merely following the law, but in serving God in the maximum possible way, taking the words "with all your heart, soul and strength" quite literally. His life is dominated by the passionate pursuit of and single-minded dedication to his goal. There may also be an element of anarchism in the hasid, and rejection of the solid, conventional values of the bourgeois. Thus, R. Menahem Mendel of Kotzk is reported to have commented on the Maimonidean ideal of balance and "the middle way" with the quip: "A horse goes in the middle of the road; a person goes by the side."

This tension between the ideal of the hakham or tzaddik vs. that of the hasid, is also reflected in the attitude toward the Nazirite. Indeed, it may even be seen, in a certain sense, within the thought of Maimonides himself. In Deot 3.1, Rambam is outspoken in stating that Judaism rejects asceticism or what James calls "world-rejection." All one's acts should be for the sake of heaven—but within a worldly context:

Lest a person say to himself: "Since jealousy and lust and [pursuit of] honor and the like are a bad path and remove a person from this world, I shall separate from them greatly and go to the other extreme." So much so, that he does not eat meat, nor drink wine, nor take a wife, nor dwell in a pleasant home nor wear nice clothing, but sackcloth and rough wool and the like, like the pagan priests. This too is an evil path which it is forbidden to follow, and one who goes in this way is called a sinner. For it says regarding the Nazirite, "and he shall make atonement for him, because he sinned regarding the soul" (Num 6:11). Our Sages said: If the Nazirite, who only abstained from wine, is called a sinner, one who abstained from every thing, all the more so! Therefore our Rabbis commanded that a person should only refrain from those things that the Torah prohibited, and not bind himself with vows and oaths concerning permitted things. Thus did our Sages say, "Is it not sufficient for you what the Torah forbade, that you prohibit to yourselves other things?" And this includes, that those who constantly fast are not on a good path. And our Sages forbade a person to afflict himself with fasts. And concerning all these things and the like Solomon commanded, saying, "Do not be overly righteous, and do not make yourself overly clever; why should you be desolate?!" (Eccles 7:16).

On the other hand, at the conclusion of "Laws of Naziritehood," Rambam presents a more nuanced, complex view. (Incidentally, these perorations of books or groups of halakhot often serve as occasions on which Maimonides makes statements about his overall world-view or philosophy of mitzvot.). In Hilkhot Nezirut 10.14, we read:

One who says, "Behold, I shall be a Nazirite if I do such-and-such, or if I do not do such-and-such, and the like—such a one is a wicked person, and his Naziritehood is a Naziritehood of the wicked. But one who takes a vow to the Lord in a manner of holiness, this is pleasing and praiseworthy. And concerning this it is said, "the crown [nezer] of his God [or: his separation to God] is on his head [...] he is holy to the Lord" (Num 6:7,8). And Scripture equated him with the prophet, as is said, "And I raised up of your sons to be prophets, and of your young men to be Nazirites" (Amos 2:11).

Here everything depends upon the Nazirite's intention. If the Nazirite takes his oath because he is weak-willed, as a kind of artificial means of assuring that he will follow the good and the upright path—this is seen in a negative light, as a misuse of Naziritehood. But if, on the other hand, his motivation is pure, rooted in a simple, sincere desire for holiness and to draw closer to God, then this is praiseworthy.

One might say the same with regard to any kind of piety, whether expressed through fasting or any other kind of supererogative religious behavior. In our own day, when many seem to be pursuing a path of intense, seemingly extreme piety, we might say that, insofar as it derives from a negative constellation of inner forces—then the path itself is suspect; if, on the other hand, it seems to come from a fresh, pure desire for holiness, then it is much to be praised and encouraged.

Rabbi Jonathan Chipman is a translator by profession, and a scholar in Jewish studies. He writes a weekly sheet (in English) on the portion of the week and the Haftara, titled "Hitsei Yehonatan". (Anyone interested in ordering a sample of subscription can write via email to: yonarand@internet-zahav.net.)

 

 

External and Internal Peace: the Juxtaposition of Sections in Parashat Naso

...It would seem that this passage (5:5-8; the section dealing with the guilt-offering for theft) is intended to remove from the camp an evil that could encourage fights and disagreements; that is - that one must be careful not to unjustly damage the property of others, or try to exploit the weakness of others who lack avengers.

...and so this section (pertaining to the sotah, 5:11-31) follows upon a passage intended to remove controversy and conflict from Israel in general, for this [the sotah] passage is meant to remove conflict from the household, and household peace comes before the nation's peace...

...and this section (regarding the nazir, 6:1-21) follows sotah passage, whose purpose is to remove conflict and loss from the household, because the point of this [the nazir] section is to calm the individual's internal conflict and loss that is associated with physical desire that can lead to sin...

...and after it recalled that which removes strife between a person and himself, and that which removes conflict and disagreement and loss from the household and from the entire nation, it brings up this passage, which is that of the priestly blessing, thus making a wonderful comment about perfection and genuine peace.

(RaLaBaG, as quoted by Nehamah Leibowitz, z"l's Iyyunim le-Sefer Bamidbar, 45-6)

 

And Grant You Peace

So great is peace that God changed His words for the sake of peace, as it says, [God told Abraham that Sarah had laughed, thinking to herself,] Shall I in truth bear a child, old as I am? (Bereishit 18:13) [while Sarah had actually thought Now that I am old shall I have enjoyment - with my husband so old (18:12)]. Great is peace, for the angel changed his words to Manoah for the sake of peace, for to the woman he said, You are barren and have borne no children (Shoftim 13:3), but he did not tell Manoah. So great is peace that God said to have the Divine Name that was written in holiness erased into the water in order to bring peace between husband and wife [in the Sotah ceremony].

Rabbi Eliezer said: So great is peace that the prophets only placed 'peace' in the mouths of all creatures.

Rabbi Shimon ben Halaftah said, "Great is peace, for there is no vessel that can contain a blessing besides peace, for it is said, The Lord bless His people with peace (Tehillim 29:11). Even in the priestly blessing, all of the blessings are capped with peace, [as is written,] and grant you peace (Bamidbar 6:26). This tells you that all the other blessings are to no avail if they are not accompanied by peace.

Rabbi Elazar Ha-Kafer says: Great is peace, for peace concludes every blessing, and the priestly blessing is concluded with peace. Great is peace for it is given to the humble, for it is said, but the humble shall inherit the land, and delight in abundant peace (Tehillim 37:11). Great is peace, for it is weighed against everything else, as we say [in the blessing before Shema], "He makes peace and creates everything."

(Bamidbar Rabbah 11:7)

 

The numerical value of shalom is asu [the plural imperative, make! i.e., make peace!], which hints that one should always be first to greet another person with "shalom," even to a gentile.

(Ba'al Ha-Turim Bamidbar 6:26)

 

 

 

 

If you enjoy Shabbat Shalom, please consider contributing towards its publication and distribution.

• Hebrew edition distributed in Israel $1000
• English edition distributed via email $ 100

Issues may be dedicated in honor of an event, person, simcha, etc. Requests must be made 3-4 weeks in advance to appear in the Hebrew, 10 days in advance to appear in the English email.

Tax exempt contributions to Oz VeShalom may be made through the New Israel Fund or PEF.

Contributions should be marked as donor-advised to OzVeShalom/Netivot Shalom, Shabbat Shalom project.

PLEASE NOTE THAT THE NEW ISRAEL FUND IS NO LONGER ACCEPTING DONATIONS UNDER $50. FOR DONATIONS BETWEEN $50 AND $999 THEY ARE CHARGING A $50 SERVICE CHARGE. DONATIONS ABOVE $1000 ARE CHARGED A 5% FEE.

New Israel Fund, POB 91588, Washington, DC 20090-1588, USA

New Israel Fund of Great Britain, 26 Enford Street, London W1H 2DD, Great Britain

PEF will also channel donations and provide a tax-exemptions. Donations should be sent to P.E.F. Israel Endowment Funds, Inc., 317 Madison Ave., Suite 607, New York, New York 10017 USA

 

About us:

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom is a movement dedicated to the advancement of a civil society in Israel. It is committed to promoting the ideals of tolerance, pluralism, and justice, concepts which have always been central to Jewish tradition and law.

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom shares a deep attachment to the land of Israel and it no less views peace as a central religious value. It believes that Jews have both the religious and the national obligation to support the pursuit of peace. It maintains that Jewish law clearly requires us to create a fair and just society, and that co-existence between Jews and Arabs is not an option but an imperative.

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom's programs include both educational and protest activities. Seminars, lectures, workshops, conferences and weekend programs are held for students, educators and families, as well as joint seminars for Jews, Israeli Arabs and Palestinians. Protest activities focus on issues of human rights, co-existence between Jews and Arabs, and responses to issues of particular religious relevance.

9,000 copies of a 4 page peace oriented commentary on the weekly Torah reading are written and published by Oz VeShalom/Netivot Shalom and they are distributed to over 350 synagogues in Israel and are sent overseas via email. Our web site is www.netivot-shalom.org.il

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom's educational forums draw people of different backgrounds, secular and religious, who are keen to deepen their Jewish knowledge and to hear an alternative religious standpoint on the subjects of peace and social issues.

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom fills an ideological vacuum in Israel's society. Committed both to Jewish tradition and observance, and to the furthering of peace and coexistence, the movement is in a unique position to engage in dialogue with the secular left and the religious right, with Israeli Arabs and with Palestinians.