NUM40 A nazir shall not let himself become spiritually impure even in the event of the death of his closest relatives. The reason for this mitzvah: Although a Kohen (not a Kohen Gadol) is obligated to become spiritually impure when either of his parents die, such is forbidden to a nazir. The difference is that the Kohen’s sanctity is from birth, and it comes to him automatically, without his consent or expressed desire. Except for the fact that he is privileged to serve Hashem in the Beis HaMikdash, he is just like all other Jews. We find him at home rejoicing with his loved ones, including his relatives, whom he invites to all happy occasions. Therefore, when one of his relative dies, his heart is aggrieved. Accordingly, the Torah allows him to become spiritually impure in order to mourn his close relatives, for all the ways of the Torah are pleasant. By contrast, a person chooses to be a nazir, and having done so, he is holy to Hashem for the whole time. During his days as a nazir, he keeps himself above the mundane desires of the physical world. He does not participate in parties, friendly gatherings or family celebrations. By abstaining from wine he shows that his heart is set on afflicting himself, refining his soul and trying to attain deeper understanding of Hashem, all of which requires separation from the mundane aspects of everyday living. Having set his sights on the needs of his soul, and having resolved to set aside the desires of his body, he will not seek the company of his friends, family or relatives. He will find pleasure only in things spiritual, for his soul desirous holiness. Due to his high level of disassociation from his fellow man and his high level of sanctity, if one of his relatives dies--even his mother or father—the Torah does not allow him to become spiritually impure. [In this respect he is similar to the High Priest (Kohen Gadol)--see [[LEV876]] Leviticus 21:11 corpse CHINUCH 172]. After his time of being a nazir, is over, he again becomes like all other Jews and the danger arises that he might start chasing after his physical desires. On the other hand, having once been a nazir to Hashem, there is hope that he will sanctify himself and live out the rest of his days in purity.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

NUM41 See [[NUM47]] Numbers 6:14 offering AMEMEI 101

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

NUM42 The Torah does not make a direct evaluation of the Nazarite. On the one hand, it calls him "holy to God" [this verse]. On the other, it rules that when the period comes to an end the Nazarite has to bring a sin offering (Numbers 6:13-14), as if he has done something wrong. This led to a fundamental disagreement between the rabbis in Mishnaic, Talmudic, and Medieval times. According to R. Elazar, and later to the Ramban [Nachmanides], the Nazarite is worthy of praise. He has voluntarily chosen a higher level of holiness. The prophet Amos (2:11) says, "I raised up some of your sons for prophets, and your young men for Nazarites," suggesting that the Nazarite, like the prophet, is a person especially close to God. The reason he had to bring a sin offering was that he was now returning to ordinary life. The sin lay in ceasing to be a Nazarite. R. Eliezer HaKappar and Shmuel held the opposite opinion. The sin lay in becoming a Nazarite in the first place, thereby denying himself some of the pleasures of the world God created and declared good. R. Eliezer added: "From this we may infer that if one who denies himself the enjoyment of wine is called a sinner, all the more so one who denies himself the enjoyment of other pleasures of life" (Taanit 11a; Nedarim 10a). Clearly the argument is not merely textual. It is substantive. It is about asceticism, the life of self-denial. ... one of Rambam's [Maimonides] most original insights [is] that there are two quite different ways of living the moral life. He calls them respectively the way of the Saint (hasid) and the sage (hakham). The sage follows the "golden mean," the "middle way." The moral life is a matter of moderation and balance, charting a course between too much and too little. Courage, for example, lies midway between cowardice and recklessness. Generosity lies between profligacy and miserliness. ... The saint, by contrast, does not follow the middle way. He or she tends to extremes, fasting rather than simply eating in moderation, embracing poverty rather than acquiring modest wealth, and so on. ... The Nazarite has chosen, at least for a period, to adopt a life of extreme self-denial. He is a saint, a hasid. He has adopted the path of personal perfection. That is noble, commendable, and exemplary. But it is not the way of the sage -- and you need sages if you seek to perfect society. The sage is not an extremist, because he or she realizes that there are other people at stake. There are the members of one's own family and the others within one's own community. There is a country to defend and an economy to sustain. The sage knows he or she cannot leave all these commitments behind to pursue a life of solitary virtue. For we are call upon by God to live in the world, not escape from it; to exist in society, not seclusion; to strive to create a balance among the conflicting pressures on us, not to focus on some while neglecting the others. Hence, while from a personal perspective the Nazarite is a saint, from a societal perspective he is, at least figuratively, a "sinner" who has to bring an atonement offering. ... Rambam ... had to carry a double burden as a world-renowned physician and an internationally sought halakhist and sage. He worked to exhaustion.… Rambam was a sage who longed to be a saint – but knew he could not be, if he was to honor his responsibilities to his people. That seems to me a profound judgment, and one still relevant to Jewish life today.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

NUM43 There is a positive aspect of pride in one's body, lest he say: Since pride is such an evil trait I shall separate myself from it to the extreme--so that he will not eat meat, nor drink wine, nor take a wife, nor live in a comfortable home, nor wear becoming garments, but only sackcloth and stiff wool, and garments that are torn and besmirched, and he will use dirty, ugly utensils, and he will not wash his face, hands, and feet until he looks worse than other men--and all this to remove himself from pride and lust to the farthest possible extreme. One who follows this course is called a sinner, for it is written in relation to a Nazarite [this verse]: "And he shall make atonement for himself for sinning against his soul (Ta'anis 11a): "Now if a Nazarite who abstains only from wine is called the sinner, how much more so one who abstains from everything!" Our Sages have stated further (Yerushalmi Nedarim 9:1): "Is its not enough for you what the Torah forbade, that you have to forbid yourself other things?" About such courses and similar ones Shelomo wrote (Koheles 7:16): "Do not be overly righteous, and do not be overly wise--why should you destroy yourself?" (Continued at [[LEV114]] Leviticus 11:43 abominate TZADIK 35-7).

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

NUM44 … it may be stated that in the main Judaism rather discouraged the[] excesses [of asceticism). As a religion rooted in the optimistic spirit, it refused to regard matter as inherently evil, and it checked the tendency to other-worldliness and the "enjoyment" of unhappiness. On the contrary, it taught man the duty to be happy. Special benedictions were provided for every enjoyment. The rabbis frequently quote with approval the comment of R. Simeon ben Eleazar that the sin-offering of the Nazarite (this verse) was due to his abstention from the use of wine. Jer. Nedarim 1:1. Rab taught that "man is destined to give account for every legitimate pleasure which he denied himself." Jer. Kiddushim 4:12. A would-be aesthetic is told: "Hast thou not enough of the provisions of the Torah that thou addest new ones of thine own invention?" Jer. Ned. 9:3; H. Deot 3.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

NUM45 See [[NUM33]] Numbers 6:2 Nazarite MORINIS 179-80

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

NUM46 What is the meaning of the verse, “He [the Nazarite—See Numbers 6:11] shall atone for him for having sinned against the soul”? Against which soul did he sin? Rather, because he deprived himself of wine. Now, there is an a priori argument: If the one who deprived himself only of wine is called “a sinner,” then how much the more so someone who deprives himself of all things. Babylonian Talmud Nazir 19a

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

NUM47 These two classical Jewish approaches, achieving holiness through abstention (Rashi) and achieving holiness by sanctifying the physical fulfillment of bodily desires (Maimonides) are both legitimate and have been argued by authorities throughout the ages. The controversy still continues today. Both refer to bodily desires such as sex and food, one claiming that abstention achieves the holiness and the other asserting that fulfillment under the proper circumstances and purpose achieves the holiness. Perhaps the classical mitzvah that typifies this clash is the two views of the nazir, the person who voluntarily abstains from drinking wine, cutting one's hair, and coming in contact with the dead. One talmudic approach (Taanit 11a) is that indeed the nazir is holy because he chose to abstain from more things than everyone else. The other opinion in that passage is that the nazir is wrong in his action because he chose to deny himself that which God permitted him. This argument about the nazir continued until the Middle Ages. At the end of the period of abstention, usually thirty days, the nazir brings a sacrifice. One of the sacrifices is a sin offering [this verse]. Maimonides (Hilchot De'ot 3:1) uses this sin offering as proof that the Torah looks at the nazir as a sinner because he should not have taken the oath to begin with. Maimonides continues to rail against the entire philosophy of fasting and using other physical denials by Jews to achieve holiness, as a perversion of the intended Torah path, quoting the verse (Ecclesiastes 7:16) admonishing the Jew not to be "too righteous." Nachmanides (commentary on this verse), who believes the nazir's act is to be praised, explains that the reason for the sin offering is because when the person stopped being a nazir, he lowered himself from a higher status of holiness to a lower status. In fact, the Torah does call the nazir holy (Numbers 6:8). According to Maimonides and his camp, the only reason the Torah permitted the concept of nazir is that it recognizes that there are some misguided individuals who think that they can become holy by denying themselves more and more. Rather than letting these people "go on their own," as is often the case with individuals who have improper tendencies, the Torah takes these feelings and channels them into the most acceptable and legitimate Torah structure. Thus, the lines of both sides are clearly drawn. There are numerous talmudic statements supporting both sides. On the one hand, the Talmud (Jerusalem Talmud, Kiddushin 48b) says that a person will have to answer in heaven for all the permitted things he could have partaken of in this world but did not. On the other hand, there is a conflicting statement (Avot DeRabbi Natan 28:5) that says that anyone who denies himself the pleasures in this world will receive pleasures in the next world and, conversely, he who partakes of physical pleasures in this world will be denied pleasures in the next world. Thus, the argument is still not resolved, but both approaches are authentically Jewish.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

NUM48 See [[NUM42]] Numbers 6:8 holy SACKS 221

SHOW FULL EXCERPT

NUM49 The Kohanim shall bless the people every day. Out of His infinite goodness, Hashem wants His nation to be blessed every day by His servants in the Beis HaMikdash, the Kohanim, whose every thought is about fear of Hashem and devoted service of Him. In their merit, the blessing will imprint itself upon His nation, and all of their efforts will be blessed. Because of His goodness, He commands us to request that His blessing come to us through words uttered by the Kohanim, for all this brings merit to our souls, and thereby we become more worthy to receive of His good.

SHOW FULL EXCERPT