daf bit: Nedarim 83

[cellio]

One who vows to become a nazarite must, at the completion of the period (typically at least a month), bring three korbanot (sacrifices): a sin offering, a burnt offering, and a peace offering. What if a woman made this vow and then her husband anulled it? The gemara rules that she must still bring the korbanot for the brief period when she was under the vow; the anulment is not "as if it never was". (83a)

(Oh, and by the way, apparently women can be nazarites. I didn't know that. I still don't understand why anyone (male or female) would do so.)

Comments

[magid.livejournal.com]

Women can definitely be nazarites. I think the famous case is Heleni ha-Malka, the queen who made the vow so that her son would be safe (in war? something like that; a bargaining with Fate, as it were). She's got a street in Jerusalem named after her.

In general, it's not really something I grok. The explanation I heard was that there are people drawn to greater privation of the soul (a la monk/nun/other solitaries), and this is there for them to be able to express that within the system.

[cellio]

It doesn't seem to be working in modern times, at least -- people who are seeking more piety seem to go in for new chumrot (stringencies) rather than using the ones already built into the system.

It's my impression that Judaism doesn't really go in for self-denial as a way to improve one's soul (or relationship with God, or whatever). I wonder about nazarites every year when we read that passage. It makes sense to have something in the space of "if you must do something, do this", but I wonder if it ever worked.

[magid.livejournal.com]

I think there's a double-whammy here: nazirites were seen by at least a number of rabbis as a negative thing to do, plus vows in general are frowned upon. There's no way to bring the korban at the end of the nzirut period (which I believe includes a sin offering, which is quite interesting). I have the impression that this is something that fell out rather early, and the chumra-seekers seem rather later.
(Heck, the mishna talks about whether one should worry about the bread dough in the cracks of a wooden bread trough when making matza. I can't imagine the horror of Jewish homemakers everywhere on that one today!)

I agree that Judaism doesn't tend towards self-denial especially.

[chaos-wrangler.livejournal.com]

I also remember hearing that it was meant as a way to do self denial within Judaism, even though Judaism generally sees the world as something to be enjoyed rather than something to withdraw from. Note that one of the offerings at the end is a sin offering, with the implication that something wasn't quite the way it was supposed to be (goes with the translation of "chet" as 'missing the mark' rather than 'evil deed').

[geekosaur]

I recall reading an (MO, I think) interpretation that focused on the "no grapes/grape products" aspect and suggested that it was an early version of a "12 step program". (And, more generally, a way to "get a grip" if you came to realize that you were losing control.)

[zevabe.livejournal.com]

The famous comment on the juxtaposition of Nazir & Sotah (in the Torah, which is used as an explaination for their juxtaposition in the Mishna) is that a person who sees a sotah "in her shame" (Sota is a woman suspected of adultery because she was alone with a man she was warned not to be alone with...she is brought to the Temple and administered a test, such that if she did commit adultery she will die a gruesome death) should become a nazirite, because seeing such things will make it easier in a person's eyes to sin. It never seemed especially connected to me, because the sin one would be drawn towards is only vaguely related to those things from which a nazir abstains.

People today don't become nazirites because one can't bring the sacrifices at the end, and because one probably needs to be ritually pure to start off with, since a nazir must start over if he becomes ritually impure.

[cellio]

I didn't know about the connection between nazir and sotah. Interesting. I share your difficulty in really seeing the connection.

People today don't become nazirites because one can't bring the sacrifices at the end, and because one probably needs to be ritually pure to start off with, since a nazir must start over if he becomes ritually impure.

True. But in other areas where practice has been forced to change, connections are still made. Instead of performing the rituals we study them in the daily liturgy; the three daily prayers are at the same times as the korbanot; we put salt on the challah as a tie-in to the meat on the altar; and so on. So if people wanted to, they could come up with something that harkens to nazir without being nazir. I'm not saying I want people to do this; as I said before, I never really grokked nazir either.

[zevabe.livejournal.com]

Reading the Torah portion of the Tamid (daily sacrifice) is the best we can do today, because the Tamid is required unconditionally, as are musafim (additional sacrifice for Shabbat/holidays, etc) which we also read. However, the nazir sacrifices are required conditionally. If one becomes a nazir, he must bring these sacrifices. Since it is not clear that reading the verses that discuss it really fulfills the requirement to bring the sacrifice, better not to obligate one's self in the first place. Also, the ritual purity issue still needs to be addressed.

A person cannot vow to be a nazir on condition that he need not bring sacrifices (this is called making conditions against the Torah, which are simply ineffective. The person would become a nazir & need to bring the sacrifices.) However, I see no reason he couldn't vow not to have grape products or cut his hair for a month and to shave himself nearly bald at the end. He could not however shave himself completely bald as a nazir does at the end of his nazirut. A lady nazir probably could though.