The Nazzir, his Sin, and Chumrot
Adapted from Rabbi Braun’s sermon in 5770
It often seems that the Jewish world has become obsessed with chumrot, or stringencies.
It certainly is true and thus we ask: is this a good thing or a bad thing?
The answer to that question might well depend upon a similar question raised in this morning’s Parsha. The Nazir swears not to drink wine or have any grape products, not to cut his hair and not to become Tameh (ritually impure) via contact with a corpse.
The Torah itself does not give a clear indication. On the one hand the Nazir is called Kodesh Lashem (holy to God), yet on the other hand after the completion of the period of Nezzirut the Nazir must bring a sin offering.
We find a fascinating argument between Nachmonides (Ramban) and Maimonides (Rambam) regarding that sin offering.
Ramban- the sin offering is because you are ceasing your Nezzirut and returning to the taavot (desires) of the world.
Rambam- the sin is the Nezzirut itself; God said that it is permitted, and you went and rendered it prohibited?!
You may or may not agree with Ramban but at least his position is clear and understandable. It assumes that ideally one should live a life devoid of the pleasures of the world. That is not the halacha because no one could deal with it but opting to remove yourself from the hedonistic pleasures of the world is good and once you revert you bring a chatat, a sin offering.
The Rambam’s position is far less clear. I am an admitted foodie and carnivore, but I would have a hard time arguing that just because it is permitted, that there is spiritual value in these pleasures. What is really so bad about prohibiting the permitted? The Rabbinic halacha does it all the time. And if it could help teach me self-control or some other value, is it bad enough to warrant a sin offering?
I found two different ideas that might help us explain the Rambam’s position.
The first I found in the commentary of the Meshech Chochma, authored by Rabbi Meir Simcha of Dvinsk. He writes that it is not true that all you are doing is swearing off the permitted. One who can’t drink wine can’t recite Kiddush over it. If a relative dies during your Nezzirut you will miss out on the mitzvah to be metameh (become impure) for a relative.
Here your stringent righteousness in one area affects your ability to perform certain mitzvoth and for that you are liable. I will not spell them out, but I think that idea is very true in today’s chumra- crazed world.
The second idea seems to me to be what the Rambam means. To explain it I want to look at one of today’s Chumra’s and the advice of the Shulchan Aruch regarding it.
Each pair of Teffilin has 4 parshiot (sections) from the Torah written inside them. Rashi and Rabbeinu Tam argue regarding the order in which the last 2 parshiot are placed in the Teffilin.
The Shulchan Aruch (OC34) records the argument, tells us that the halacha follows Rashi and then says that a God-fearing person should wear two pair of teffilin, one Rashi and one Rabbeinu Tam, in order to fulfill both options.
Then comes the all-important qualifier, the only person who should do this is a person well known and established as a righteous person.
Why should that be? Why shouldn’t everyone try and fulfill all the opinions?
The Chafetz chaim in his Mishna Berura explains that it reeks of yuhara- loosely translated as spiritual arrogance.
It is as if the person is saying “I have done everything else that I must do and now I am looking to go beyond that and see what else I can do.” Not only does that look bad but it is spiritually damaging as well. It demonstrates hubris before our creator and negatively impacts out spiritual wellbeing.
That, I believe is what the Rambam means when he says, God has permitted it and you want to forbid it. It is a question of attitude. Have you really done everything that God has asked of you that you are ready to start doing more and doing even what God has not commanded? That attitude renders a person liable for a sin offering.
With that I return to the Nazzir and try to answer the question- is this a good or bad thing?
The answer is that it depends on the person. One who is truly righteous and has done everything the halacha demands of him or her, be my guest. For the rest of us, it is simply yuhara.
In general, I am a big believer in trying to keep the halacha. It is important to know what is halacha and what is chumra but once you have done that the first step is to simply, or not so simply, keep the halacha! When you have mastered that, you can worry about what to do next.
Addendum: I have oversimplified the concept of chumra or stringency. It is true that not all chumrot are the same and that with regard to a portion of the stringencies the above analysis would not apply. Unfortunately, that is beyond the scope of this sermon.
