by Rabbi Avi Billet
Parshas Naso is addressed by the Midrash Rabba more than any other Parsha in the Book of Bamidbar, and likely more than any other parsha in the other the Torah other than Parshas Bereishis.
Surprisingly, the most repetitive portion of the Torah, the 12 presentations of gifts and offerings of the princes, has so much Midrashic commentary, one could read through the Midrash Rabba for hours and still not get through all of what it has to say on these repeated 6 verses, while at the same time the reader would discover so much about each tribe, each prince, as well as what it means to dedicate to the Mishkan and to donate things towards the service of God.
Before it gets there, however, the Midrash does go through the other portions of the parsha as well, and not surprisingly, when it comes to the portion of the Nazir it jumps to the tale of Shimshon, arguably the most famous Nazir, whose tale also happens to be the Haftorah for the parsha.
Through the lens of the Midrash we learn a few things about Shimshon’s family, such as that his mother was on a higher level than his father (and thus had an angel appear to her twice), that his parents would get into arguments as to which of them was infertile (she was the infertile one, as the angel clarifies for them), that Manoach’s father was from the tribe of Dan but his mother was from the tribe of Yehuda (note that both Dan and Yehuda are, in the different blessings given to them by Yaakov and Moshe, referred to as גור אריה), and Shimshon’s mother (Manoach’s wife) was also from the tribe of Yehuda. This gives Shimshon much “Danite blood” and much “Judean blood.” Shimshon’s mother was named הצללפוני based on the idea that an angel (צלל) would turn (פונ) to her.
The name Manoach (מנוח) is even assigned to his father in the text based on the idea that the concept of receiving prophesy is an experience called מנוחה, indicating it may not be his real name, but more a reflection of his role in this story.
There is further discussion about how they were unaware that the angel who appeared to them was an angel, as the Midrash suggests prophets during their time would often appear angel-like and would bring an aura about them that would render people awestruck, leading them to think he was a prophet.
Shimshon’s mother was told that in his being a Nazir from birth ומורה לא יעלה על ראשו, that a razor should never go on his head, to cut his hair. The Midrash asks why the word מורה is used for a razor? “Because מורה means ‘fear,’ and there is nothing the hair ‘fears’ more than a razor which will destroy the roots of the hair.” Even more than that, however, in Shimshon’s case, “God knew very well that Shimshon would be following his eyes, and thus the Nazir was further warned against drinking wine, because wine leads to licentiousness. It would be bad enough if the Nazir (e.g. Shimshon) were to be enticed by what his eyes saw! Were he to also drink wine, he’d have no hope whatsoever.”
Perhaps this is another reason for the longer hair, as it would be a constant reminder that “You are a Nazir and prohibited from certain indulgences.”
As a Nazir from conception, he was on the same level of Yirmiyahu the prophet, about whom God said, “Before you were even created in the womb I knew you” meaning that the relationship between prophet and God, or in Shimshon’s case between Shofet (judge) and God was ordained well before his birth.
It is certainly worthy of discussion as to whether the Nazir was a more popular or less popular mode of personal practice. It is also worthy of note that the Midrash suggests that all of what happens in the rest of the Bible (Neviim and Ketuvim) was known to Moshe and therefore hinted to in the Torah.
את מוצא שרמז משה בפ' זו לנזירות שמשון ללמדך שאין לך דבר כתוב בנביאים וכתובים שלא רמזו משה בתורה
That line itself opens up the Midrash to everything that we subsequently find in Midrash and in all of commentary. How often does Midrash use verses from the Torah to prove certain ideas in later works of Tanakh? (Hint: ALL THE TIME)
The Torah is a fascinating work that spans time and space. It crosses over and through generations to speak of events that no human could have conceived of without Divine assistance. There are Midrashim that speak of where Haman and Esther and Mordechai are spoken of in the Torah! This is just a small microcosm of this macro issue of God’s hand throughout recorded Biblical history, which includes an awareness of the future.
Were there many Nezirim? There are a few notable ones in the texts of Navi, such as Shimshon, Shmuel, Avshalom. It is hard to know for sure how prevalent this undertaking was in Biblical times and post Biblical times, despite there being a Mesechta in the Talmud dedicated to the subject.
Our takeaway is to appreciate the breadth of knowledge the Midrash imparts to us, as well as the challenge it presents to us in our expanding our own knowledge base to become more familiar with knowing the context of all of its cross references and its attempts to connect different narratives and texts with passages elsewhere.
In particular the narrative referenced at the beginning of this essay, the six verses repeated almost verbatim for each tribal Prince has so much in the Midrash indicating there is much more beneath the surface of something than what seems. It is another reminder that taking things at face value alone and not scratching past the surface is an inadequate way to study the Torah.
May we be blessed to challenge ourselves to greater heights through our growth in Torah.
No comments:
Post a Comment