V'zos toras ha'nazir b'yom me'los yemei nizro yavee oso el pesach Ohel Moed v'hikriv es korbano l'Hashem keves ben shenaso samim echad l'Olah v'chavsa achas bas shenasa temima l'Chatas v'ayil echad tamim l'Shelomim (6:13-14)

A nazir is a person who voluntarily accepts upon himself three restrictions: not to cut his hair, not to come into contact with the dead, and not to consume wine or other grape products. At the conclusion of the period of his nazirite vow, which lasts thirty days unless he specifies otherwise, he is required to bring several offerings: a Korban Olah (Elevation-Offering), a Korban Chatas (Sin-Offering), and a Korban Shelamim (Peace-Offering).

The need for the Korban Olah is understandable, as the nazir accepted upon himself additional holiness in order to bring himself closer to Hashem, which fits the theme of the Elevation-Offering. Similarly, the Ibn Ezra explains that the Peace-Offering connotes satisfaction and happiness, and therefore the nazir brings it to express his joy at successfully completing his vow. However, the requirement to offer a Korban Chatas seems puzzling. What sin did the nazir commit for which the Torah obligates him to bring a Sin-Offering?

The Ramban posits that the reason the nazir must offer the Korban Chatas is for the very "sin" of ending his term as a nazir. After elevating himself through voluntarily relinquishing physical pleasures, he should have elected to maintain his lofty state, and it is for the "sin" of leaving this sanctified atmosphere behind in order to reenter the world of mundane earthly pleasures that the Torah requires him to bring a Sin-Offering.

As fascinating as the Ramban's explanation is, it presents a major difficulty: It seems to contradict the explanation given by Chazal. The Gemora (Nedorim 10a) also questions why the nazir must offer a Korban Chatas, and it answers that the sin he committed was his original decision to needlessly cause himself suffering by abstaining from wine. After the Gemora states clearly that voluntarily refraining from physical enjoyment is considered sinful, how can the Ramban write that the nazir's sin is his decision to return to those pleasures?

Rav Simcha Zissel Broide, who was the head of the Chevron yeshiva, explains that when the person initially elected to become a nazir, he was an average person, and as such, his decision was painful for him and was therefore viewed as sinful. However, during the course of his time as a nazir, he became uplifted. At the conclusion of his nazirite vow, he is no longer the same person who began it. The Torah's criticism of ordinary people who deny themselves items that Hashem permitted no longer applies to him in his new, elevated state, in which it is completely appropriate to abstain from physical enjoyment in order to live a more spiritual existence and bring oneself closer to Hashem. He has grown so much that the Ramban teaches us that it is now a sin to return to the level that it was originally a sin to leave, and leaving this lifestyle of heightened sanctity to revert to being an ordinary person requires atonement.

Most of us will never become a nazir or even meet a nazir. Nevertheless, the lesson of the nazir is still relevant to each of us. As we go through life, we are expected to grow and strive to reach higher levels of spiritual accomplishment. As we do so, we may find that certain activities or interests that we used to enjoy no longer seem appropriate for our new levels. When the power of our ingrained habits attempts to pull us back, it is important to be cognizant of the Ramban's message that as we grow and become more spiritually sensitive, we are judged according to our new states and more is expected of us.

Vayehi ish echad mi'Tzarah mi'mishpachas HaDani u'shemo Manoach v'ishto akarah v'lo yalada (Haftorah - Shoftim 13:2)

More than 60 years ago, a man and his young daughter entered a Beis Medrash in Yerushalayim and announced that they had just arrived from the city of Ostrovtza in Europe. The men gathered there knew that the Ostrovtzer Rebbe was a world-renowned miracle-worker and asked the man if he could share with them a story.

The man replied that he himself had been the beneficiary of one of the Rebbe's miracles, as his wife had given birth to several children, all of whom died shortly after birth. In despair, he approached the Rebbe for a blessing. The Rebbe advised him to name his next child based on a person mentioned in the parsha to be read the week of the child's birth. The man concluded by pointing to the living girl at his side as proof of the Rebbe's powers, and noted that she was born during the week of Parshas Nasso.

However, a quick perusal of Parshas Nasso, or even an in-depth one, reveals a big problem with following the Rebbe's advice: There are no women mentioned anywhere in the entire parsha! Armed with this dilemma, the man returned to the Rebbe, who suggested that although there no women appear in the parsha itself, the Haftorah indeed contains a bona-fide woman: Manoach's wife, the mother of Shimshon.

However, a study of the verses discussing her life reveals another problem: Her name isn't mentioned anywhere. Fortunately, the Gemora (Bava Basra 91a) comes to the rescue by teaching that her name was Tzlalponis. Although not exactly a common name, the Rebbe advised the man that giving this name to his daughter was her best hope for survival. Willing to try anything, the man named his daughter Tzlalponis, and was quite fortunate to be able to point to her as living proof of the Rebbe's powers.

Answers to the weekly Points to Ponder are now available!
To receive the full version with answers email the author at oalport@optonline.net.

Parsha Points to Ponder (and sources which discuss them):

1) The Gemora in Kesuvos (72a) derives from 5:18 that a married woman is obligated to cover her hair. Is a bride required to cover her hair at her wedding, and if not, at what point does the obligation begin? (Shu"t Rav Akiva Eiger 2:79, Shu"t Shevus Yaakov 1:103, Be'er Heitev Even HaEzer 21:5, Mishnah Berurah 75:11, Shu"t Yechaveh Daas 2:62, Halichos Bas Yisroel 5:8)

2) The Torah promises (5:28) that a suspected adulteress who is innocent will be blessed to bear children. The Gemora (Berachos 31b) relates that the barren Chana beseeched Hashem for a child, threatening that if she didn't conceive, she would seclude herself with another man without having relations with him in order to conceive a child as promised by the Torah. How could she threaten to transgress the prohibition again yichud - seclusion between a man and woman - even if she wouldn't have relations? (Mussar HaNevi'im, M'rafsin Igri)

  © 2014 by Oizer Alport. Permission is granted to reproduce and distribute as long as credit is given. To receive weekly via email or to send comments or suggestions, write to parshapotpourri@optonline.net