Midras Hakim-hakim 13:14: Bamidbar Rabbah

“Speak to the children of Israel” (Numbers 6:2), those who take the vow of the nazirite. “And say to them,” to caution the court regarding this, that they should not allow the nazirite to violate his naziriteship. If they see that he seeks to violate his naziriteship, they shall compel him to fulfill his statement. This is to teach you that the great are cautioned regarding the lesser, and they will be punished due to them if they do not rebuke them. Likewise it says: “They will stumble over one another” (Leviticus 26:37); one due to the iniquity of another. This is to teach you that the entire Jewish people are guarantors for one another.
“When a man or a woman will articulate [to take the vow of a nazirite]” – that is what is written: “There was [vayhi] a certain man from Tzora…” (Judges 13:2).⁵⁵This is the beginning of the chapter dealing with the birth and naziriteship of Samson. Rabbi Levi said: Every place that vayhi is stated, it is nothing other than an expression of suffering: “Vayhi in the days of Aḥashverosh” (Esther 1:1) – there was Haman. “Vayhi in the days when the judges [judged]” (Ruth 1:1) – there was a famine. “Vayhi when man began [to increase]” (Genesis 6:1) – “the sons of the great [saw the daughters of man]” (Genesis 6:2).⁵⁶This eventually led to the Flood. See Genesis 6:1–3. “Vayhi in the days of Amrafel” (Genesis 14:1) – “they waged a war” (Genesis 14:2). “Vayhi when Joshua was in Jericho…” (Joshua 5:13) – “[a man was standing before him] and his drawn sword was in his hand” (Joshua 5:13).⁵⁷Joshua was confronted by the commander of the host of the Lord. “Vayhi the Lord was with Joshua” (Joshua 6:27) – “the children of Israel committed trespass regarding the proscribed thing” (Joshua 7:1). “Vayhi when Samuel aged” (I Samuel 8:1) – “his sons did not follow his path” (I Samuel 8:3). “Vayhi David was successful in all his endeavors” (I Samuel 18:14) – “Saul was hostile to David” (I Samuel 18:9). “Vayhi a certain man from Tzora…” (Judges 13:2) – “Manoaḥ said to his wife, we will die” (Judges 13:22).
Vayhi, Rabbi Yudan said: Every place that this expression is stated regarding the righteous, he is the equivalent of thirty-one righteous men, the numerical value of vayhi.⁵⁸Vav – 6, yod – 10, heh – 5, yod – 10 = 31. “A certain [eḥad] man,” a great man. Wherever ehad is used it indicates greatness. With regards to the Holy One Blessed be He, one is said as it it written "God is One" (Deuteronomy 6:4); there is no one in the world who is His equal. Likewise, regarding Abraham: “Abraham was one [eḥad]” (Ezekiel 33:24); there was no one in those days who was his equal. Regarding Israel, it is written: “Who is like Your people, Israel, one [eḥad] nation on the earth” (I Chronicles 17:21); there is none among the nations that are its equal. Likewise, regarding Avimelekh it says: “One of [aḥad] the people almost lay with your wife” (Genesis 26:10); because he was king. Likewise regarding Elkana it says: “Eḥad” (I Samuel 1:1), as there was no one in his generation who was his equal.
“[There was a certain man] from Tzora [from the family of the Danite]” (Judges 13:2), anyone whose name and the name of his city are stated, it is known that he is from that city. His name, but not the name of his city, it is known that he is from Jerusalem. “From the family of the Danite,” because Tzora belonged to Judah, as it is written: “Eshtaol, Tzora, and Ashna” (Joshua 15:33), and Tzora belonged to Dan, “the border of their inheritance was Tzora, Eshtaol…” (Joshua 19:41), it was necessary to state that he was “from the family of the Danite.” It does not say “from the tribe,” but rather, “from the family of the Danite.” It teaches that his [Manoaḥ’s] father was from Dan and Manoaḥ’s mother was from Judah. In this regard, Jacob said: “Dan will judge his people, [as one of [ke’aḥad] the tribes of Israel]” (Genesis 49:16), like the most elite of the tribes; this is Judah. That is why Jacob juxtaposed him to Judah, as he was from the land of Judah and his mother was from Judah. Likewise Manoaḥ was from Dan and his wife was from Judah; consequently Samson emerged from the tribe of Dan and the tribe of Judah, as they said: The name of Samson’s mother was Hatzlelponi, and her lineage is ascribed to the tribe of Judah, as it is stated: “And the name of their sister was Hatzlelponi” (I Chronicles 4:3).
“And his name was Manoaḥ” (Judges 13:2). The wicked precede their name: “Naval was his name” (I Samuel 25:25); “Goliath was his name” (I Samuel 17:4); “Sheva ben Bikhri was his name” (II Samuel 20:21). But the righteous, their name precedes them: “And his name was Elkana” (I Samuel 1:1); “And his name was Yishai” (I Samuel 17:12); “And his name was Boaz” (Ruth 2:1); “And his name was Mordekhai” (Esther 2:5); “And his name was Manoaḥ.” They are similar to their Creator: “But My name, the Lord…” (Exodus 6:3). They raised an objection to it: But is it not written: “Rebecca had a brother and his name was Lavan”? (Genesis 24:29). Rabbi Yitzḥak said: He was conspicuous.⁵⁹Lavan was not his name, but rather, his whiteness was a conspicuous attribute of his. Rabbi Berekhya said: He was obvious [meluban] in his wickedness. They raised an objection: “And his name was Mikhaihu” (Judges 17:1) – because he received guests, his name was written like the names of the righteous. They raised an objection from the [verse regarding the] sons of Samuel: “The name of his firstborn son was Joel and the name of his second was Aviya” (I Samuel 8:2). The Rabbis said: Just as this one was wicked, so, too, that one was wicked. Rabbi Yudan said in the name of Rabbi Simon: Ultimately, they repented. That is why he [Samuel’s firstborn, Joel] is called: “Vashni” (I Chronicles 6:13), as they changed [shenishtanu] to good deeds.⁶⁰The full verse reads: “The sons of Samuel: his first-born, Vashni, and Aviya.” That is why they merited the Divine Spirit. That is what is written: “The word of the Lord that was to Joel son of Petuel” (Joel 1:1). This is Samuel. Why is he called Petuel? It is because he enticed [pita] the Holy One blessed be He with his prayer.⁶¹See Psalms 99:6.
Manoaḥ, why is he called Manoaḥ? It is because he was privileged to speak with an angel, and prophecy is called rest [menuḥa], as it is stated: “Seraya was the minister of Menuḥa” (Jeremiah 51:59). It teaches that Barukh ben Neriya⁶²He was Seraya’s brother and a disciple of the prophet Jeremiah. According to another opinion, Seraya was another name of Barukh. merited the Divine Spirit, just as it says: “The spirit of the Lord will rest [venaḥa] upon him (Isaiah 11:2).
“His wife was barren, she had not given birth” (Judges 13:2). This teaches that there was a dispute between Manoaḥ and his wife. He said to her: ‘You are barren; that is why you have not given birth.’ She said to him: ‘You are sterile and that is why I have not given birth.’ Manoaḥ was not sterile.
“An angel of the Lord appeared to the woman” (Judges 13:3). From here you learn that Manoaḥ’s wife was a righteous woman who merited having an angel speak with her, to introduce harmony between her and her husband and to inform her that she was barren and it was she who was preventing the pregnancy, not her husband; that is why he spoke with her. Because she saw the angel, she is called Hatzlelponi, because she addressed [pona] the angel. Tzelal is nothing other than an angel, just as it says: “As it is for this that they entered beneath the shelter [betzel] of my roof” (Genesis 19:8).⁶³Lot is referring to the angels who came to rescue him from the destruction of Sodom. There, because Lot was more righteous than his wife, the angels came to the shelter of his house and not the shelter of her house. However, here, where the angel came to her because she was righteous, that is why she is called Hatzlel. Why is it stated: Hatzlel, and it did not say Hatzel? It is because he appeared to the woman twice, once in the city and once in the field. “Behold now, you are barren and have not given birth” (Judges 13:3); he informed her that she was barren and that is why she had not given birth in order to introduce harmony between her and her husband, as she had been angry at her husband Manoaḥ because she was not giving birth. “But you will conceive, and you will bear a son,” (Judges 13:3), from here on you will conceive and you will bear a son.
“Now, please beware” (Judges 13:4); he cautioned her not to drink vinegar of wine and vinegar of intoxicating drink and the water in which grapes were soaked⁶⁴See Numbers 6:3.. These are nothing other than precautions for wine, so that the nazirite will not come to drink wine, that is why the verse prohibited them for him. “And do not drink wine or intoxicating drink" (Judges 13:4), just as it says: “From wine and intoxicating drink he shall abstain” (Numbers 6:3), “…and do not eat any impurity” (Judges 13:4). Impure is nothing other than prohibited, as the Torah cautioned the nazirite not to eat anything “that may be derives from the grapevine,” (Numbers 6:4), just as it says: “…and grapes, fresh or dried, he shall not eat. [Throughout his days as a nazirite] he may not eat from anything that may be derived from the grapevine” (Numbers 6:3–4). “For behold, you will conceive and bear a son” (Judges 13:5). From here, the semen from the night was kept in her womb and she had not expelled it. When the angel said to her: “For behold, you will conceive and bear a son,” the womb absorbed that drop.
“A razor [umorah] shall not come upon his head” (Judges 13:5), just as it says: “A razor shall not pass on his head” (Numbers 6:5). Why is a razor called morah? It is because the hair fears [mityareh] nothing other than the razor as it shaves a shave of destruction, just as it says: “Do not destroy the corner of your beard” (Leviticus 19:27).
“For the lad will be a nazirite to God from the womb” (Judges 13:5). It was revealed before the Holy One blessed be He that Samson was one who would follow his eyes. That is why He cautioned him as a nazirite that he should not drink wine, because wine leads to licentiousness. If, when he was a nazirite, he followed his eyes, had he drunk wine there would have been no rehabilitation for him as he would have constantly been pursuing licentiousness. What is it that is said: “From the womb”? It is to realize what is stated: “Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you” (Jeremiah 1:5). However, regarding the wicked what does it say? “The wicked are corrupt from the womb; liars go astray from birth” (Psalms 58:4). Likewise it says: “I was formed in iniquity; [in sin my mother conceived me]” (Psalms 51:7).
“He will begin to deliver Israel from the hand of the Philistines” (Judges 13:5). In him will be fulfilled the prophecy of Jacob , who said: “Dan will judge his people…Dan will be [a serpent]…[I await your deliverance, Lord]” (Genesis 49:16–18).
“The woman came and she told her husband, saying: A man of God came to me, and his appearance was like the appearance of an angel of God, very awesome…” (Judges 13:6). From here [we derive that] the Divine Presence would rest only upon those with a striking appearance. “He said to me: Behold, you will conceive [and give birth to a son]” (Judges 13:7), but what he said to her: “Behold now, you are barren” (Judges 13:3), she did not reveal to him, as she did not wish to reveal her inadequacy.
“As the lad will be a nazirite to God from the womb until the day of his death” (Judges 13:7). She added [the phrase]: “Until the day of his death,” as she did not know what was in the future. But the angel, who knew that he was going to lose his naziriteship by means of Delilah, that was why he did not say: “Until the day of his death.”
“Manoaḥ entreated [vayetar] the Lord, and said: Please, my Lord, the man [of God whom You sent, let him come again to us]” (Judges 13:8). Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: Why is the prayer of the righteous analogized to a pitchfork [eter]? It is to say to you: Just as the pitchfork overturns the grain in the field from place to place, so the prayer of the righteous overturns the attribute of cruelty to the attribute of mercy.
“God heeded the voice of Manoaḥ, [and the angel of God came again to the woman]” (Judges 13:9). Why did the angel of God return to the woman and did not come to Manoaḥ? It was in order to avoid invalidating his initial statements that he said to the woman. Alternatively, it was to endear her in his eyes.
“The woman hurried, ran, [and told her husband]” (Judges 13:10). It teaches that all actions of the righteous are with alacrity. “[Behold, the man] who on that day [bayom] came to me, [appeared to me]” (Judges 13:10). It does not say “today [hayom],” but rather, bayom. It teaches that the angel did not appear to her until the following day, because Manoaḥ did not pray until the morning prayer of the following day, just as it says: “Lord, in the morning hear my voice…” (Psalms 5:4). It teaches that the righteous seek clarity regarding their actions. “[Are you the man who spoke to the woman?] He said: I am” (Judges 13:11); I am initially and I am ultimately, as I am not changing my words.
“Manoaḥ said: Now, let your words come” (Judges 13:12). Manoaḥ said to him: ‘Until now, I have heard from the woman, and women are not qualified to instruct, and one may not rely on their statements. But, “now, let your words come,” I would like to hear from your mouth, as I do not believe her statements; perhaps she made changes in her statement, or subtracted or added.’ “What will be the guidelines for the lad?” (Judges 13:12); what naziriteship must he observe after he is born? “…and his actions?” (Judges 13:12); what shall his mother do all the days that she is pregnant with him? “The angel of the Lord said to Manoaḥ: “From everything that I said to the woman [let her beware]” (Judges 13:13), in order to accord honor to the woman and endear her to him. “Let her beware” (Judges 13:13), he said to him regarding vinegar of wine, vinegar of intoxicating drink, and the water in which grapes were soaked: “She shall not partake of anything that may be derived from the grapevine and she shall not drink wine or intoxicating drink” (Judges 13:14), in its plain sense. “And she shall not eat any impurity” (Judges 13:14), just as it says: “And grapes, fresh or dried, he shall not eat” (Numbers 6:3). “Everything that I commanded her, she shall observe” (Judges 13:14); what he said to her: “A razor shall not come upon his head” (Judges 13:5).
“Manoaḥ said to the angel of the Lord: Please let us detain [naatzera] you” (Judges 13:15). Manoaḥ said to him: ‘We had been obstructed, just as it says: “For the Lord had obstructed all wombs of the house of Avimelekh” (Genesis 20:18), and you brought us tidings of relief. Let us make a festival with you, just as it says: “On the eighth day it shall be an assembly [atzeret] for you” (Numbers 29:35). “And we will prepare a young goat before you” (Judges 13:15); you caused us to rejoice and we will rejoice with you with a goat, as rejoicing is only with meat.’
“The angel of the Lord said to Manoaḥ: If you detain me, I will not eat of your food” (Judges 13:16). The angel said to him: ‘It is not the way of the prophets of the Lord to receive payment for their prophecy.’ Regarding false prophets, what does it say? “You profaned Me among My people for handfuls of barley and for crumbs of bread, to kill…” (Ezekiel 13:19). But regarding true prophets, what does it say? “He⁶⁵Elisha. said: As the Lord before whom I have stood lives, I will not accept” (II Kings 5:16).
“If you would prepare a burnt offering, offer it up to the Lord” (Judges 13:16). The angel intimated to him that he needed to offer up a burnt offering to the Lord in response to the good tidings, just as Abraham did when the Holy One blessed be He said to him: “To your offspring, I will give this land” (Genesis 12:7). Immediately, Abraham built an altar in response to the good tidings, as it is written: “He built an altar to the Lord, who appeared to him” (Genesis 12:7), and an altar is for nothing other than an offering.
“For Manoaḥ did not know that he was an angel of the Lord” (Judges 13:16). Why is it stated? It is because his wife said to him: “His appearance was like the appearance of an angel of God, very awesome” (Judges 13:6); she was under the impression that Manoaḥ identified that he was an angel, but, nevertheless, he invited him to eat, as he was mistaken, believing that there is eating on High. That is why it is stated: “For Manoaḥ did not know that he was an angel of the Lord.” That is why he invited him to eat. But had he known that he was an angel, he would not have said to him to eat, as he was well-versed in the fact that there is no eating on High. Why did he not identify him? From here you learn that when prophets would go on a mission of the Holy One blessed be He, the Divine Spirit that would rest upon them would confer awesomeness upon them in the eyes of their beholders, as everyone feared them, as they resembled angels.
Why, then, did the angels who came to inform Sarah regarding pregnancy eat, but this one did not want to eat? It is because those angels, when they first appeared to Abraham, they appeared to him in the image of wayfarers, and he brought them into his house as he was accustomed to, and invited them to eat. They did not want to deprive him of the exercise of hospitality and they ate with him. After they ate, they stated their mission. It did not appear as though they received payment for their mission. But this angel, initially he stated his mission. Had he eaten with him, it would have appeared as though he received payment for his mission. That is why he refrained from eating.
“Mano’aḥ said to the angel of the Lord: What is your name?” (Judges 13:17). It is because he did not identify him as an angel, that is why he asked him regarding his name. “So that when your words come to pass we will honor you [vekhibadnukha]” (Judges 13:17); Manoaḥ said to him: ‘Tell me your name so that I will ask where I might find you when your prophecy comes to pass, and we will give you a gift.’ Vekhibadnukha is nothing other than a gift, just as it says: “For I will honor you [ki khabed akhabedkha]” (Numbers 22:17).⁶⁶Balak sought to convince Bilam to curse Israel on his behalf, and said he would honor him, meaning he would shower him with gifts of silver and gold.
“The angel of the Lord said to him: Why do you ask my name?” (Judges 13:18). The angel said to him: ‘You need not ask my name, as ultimately, you will never see me again.’ That is what is written: “It is inscrutable [vehu feli]” (Judges 13:18). Regarding himself, he said to him that he will be obscured from him, that he will never see him again, just as it says: “This knowledge is inscrutable to me. [It is sublime; I cannot reach it]” (Psalms 139:6). Alternatively, “It is inscrutable [vehu feli]” – the angel said to him: ‘I do not know to tell you my name as, in accordance with the mission upon which the Holy One blessed be He sends us, He calls us a name.’ That is: Vehu feli; in accordance with each and every wonder [pelia uflia] that He performs through us, He calls us a name. Alternatively, vehu feli, it is a name. The name of the angel is feli, based on his mission to render Samson a nazirite, just as it says: “For the lad will be a nazirite to God” (Judges 13:5). This is why He called him feli, like the matter that the verse said: “When a man or a woman will articulate [yafli] [to take the vow of a nazirite]…” (Numbers 6:2).

“On the ninth day, prince of the children of Dan, Aḥiezer son of Amishadai” (Numbers 7:66).
“On the ninth day, prince of the children of Dan, Aḥiezer son of Amishadai” – three tribes remained: Dan, Asher, and Naphtali. What was the reason for Dan to present his offering first among them? It was because his father juxtaposed him to Judah, just as it says: “Dan will avenge his people, as one [ke’aḥad] of the tribes of Israel” (Genesis 49:16) – like the most outstanding [kemeyuḥad] of the tribes; this is Judah. That is why he was at the head of those [tribes] who remained, just as Judah was at the head of all of them.
“His offering was one silver dish, its weight one hundred and thirty; one silver basin of seventy shekels, in the sacred shekel; both of them full of high-quality flour mixed with oil as a meal offering” (Numbers 7:67).
“His offering…dish…” – he presented his offering corresponding to Samson, because Jacob’s blessing of Dan was only regarding Samson. Samson’s strength, too, was dependent only upon his naziriteship. That is why the prince of Dan presented his offering in this order. That is what is written: “His offering was [one] silver dish.” This was a nazirite who remained ritually pure, and that is why it calls it a “dish,” because he would bring loaves.⁶⁰By contrast, a nazirite who became impure does not bring loaves. Loaves of bread are brought in a “dish” of some kind. Since almost no sacrifices require a dish in which to bring food with the sacrifice, the midrash here treats the dish brought as a sacrifice as alluding to the sacrifice of a nazirite who completes his naziriteship, who does bring a dish. “Its weight one hundred and thirty” – from “this is the law of the nazirite” (Numbers 6:13) until “then the nazirite may drink wine” (Numbers 6:20) is one hundred and thirty words.⁶¹It is 131 words. The last word, yayin, is referred to in the next sentence of the midrash.
“One silver basin [mizrak] of seventy…” – as at that moment, it becomes permitted to drink the wine, whose numerical value is seventy, that is drunk in the basin. Alternatively, why seventy? It corresponds to a nazirite who was impurified, whose naziriteship is void [shenizreka], just as it says: “The first days shall be void, as his naziriteship is impure” (Numbers 6:12). And there are seventy words from “all the days of his naziriteship he is holy to the Lord” (Numbers 6:8) until “as his naziriteship is impure.”
Another matter: Why seventy? It corresponds to the seventy letters in the blessing of Dan, from “Dan will avenge his people…” (Genesis 49:16) until “and his rider falls backward” (Genesis 49:17), regarding the judgeship of Samson, as the final verse, “for Your salvation, [I await, Lord]” (Genesis 49:18), Jacob said it only about Samson.⁶²Samson himself, not his judgeship. That is why it is called mizrak, because he was cast away [shenizrak] from his brethren, as he did not wish to marry a woman from the daughters of his brethren, but rather, from the daughters of the Philistines.
Another matter: “One…basin [mizrak]” – because it called him serpent and viper, which are cast onto the ground, as they had legs, but go on the belly. Likewise, Samson was lame in both of his legs.⁶³See Sanhedrin 105a. “Mizrak,”⁶⁴Lizrok means to throw. after: “His rider falls backward” (Genesis 49:17).
“Both of them full…” – as a nazirite who was impurified and a nazirite who remained pure both require unleavened loaves made of high-quality flour mixed with oil, because a nazirite who was impurified does not fulfill his obligation with the offering that he brings for his impurity and may not drink wine until he brings an additional offering as a nazirite who remained pure.
Another matter: “Both of them full of high-quality flour…” – because Samson, both before he shaved the hair of his naziriteship and after he shaved the hair of his naziriteship, he was like a nazirite who was impurified, as it was the fact he impurified himself with a gentile woman that caused him to have that shave, and after shaving, Samson killed the Philistines, as it is written: “The dead whom he put to death in his death were more than those he put to death during his life” (Judges 16:30).
“One gold ladle of ten shekels, filled with incense” (Numbers 7:68).
“One gold ladle of ten” – it corresponds to ten matters that are stated regarding wine that are forbidden to a nazirite. They are: “He shall abstain from wine and intoxicating drink” (Numbers 6:3) – that is two. “Vinegar of wine and vinegar of intoxicating drink he shall not drink” (Numbers 6:3) – that is four. “He shall not drink anything in which grapes were soaked” (Numbers 6:3) – that is five. “And grapes, fresh or dried, he shall not eat” (Numbers 6:3) – that is seven. “All the days of his naziriteship, from anything that may be derived from the grapevine” (Numbers 6:4) – this is eight. “From pits to skin, he shall not eat” (Numbers 6:4) – that is ten. Why was it of gold? It is because wine is red, just as it says: “Do not see wine in its redness” (Proverbs 23:31), and gold is red. Why was it filled with incense? It is because anyone who abstains from wine must do so for the sake of Heaven, as it is stated: “Shall articulate to take a vow of a nazirite, to abstain for the Lord” (Numbers 6:2).
“One young bull, one ram, one lamb in its first year, as a burnt offering” (Numbers 7:69).
“One goat as a sin offering” (Numbers 7:70).
“One young bull, [one ram, one lamb]” – there are three types of burnt offering corresponding to the three types regarding which a nazirite is cautioned: Drinking wine, eating grapes, and impurity imparted by a corpse. “One goat [se’ir izim] as a sin offering” – it corresponds to the prohibition regarding hair, just as it says: “He shall be holy; the hair [se’ar] of his head shall be grown long” (Numbers 6:5). Another matter: Three types of burnt offering corresponding to the three warnings that the angel cautioned Samson’s mother. That is what is written: “She shall not partake from anything produced from the grapevine; she shall not drink wine or intoxicating drink, and she shall not eat any impurity” (Judges 13:14). The goat [sa’ir], corresponding to the prohibition regarding hair; that is what is written: “A razor shall not come upon his head, for the lad will be a nazirite to God” (Judges 13:5).
“And for the peace offering, two bulls, five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year. This was the offering of Aḥiezer son of Amishadai” (Numbers 7:71).
“And for the peace offering, two bulls” – it corresponds to the two matters to which his father analogized him, a serpent and a viper, as it is stated: “Dan shall be a serpent on the road, a viper on the path…” (Genesis 49:17). Alternatively, corresponding to the fact that he was analogized to two matters by two people; Jacob analogized him to a serpent and a viper⁶⁵In this interpretation the midrash refers to a serpent and a viper as one matter., and Moses to a lion cub, as it is stated: “Dan is a lion cub” (Deuteronomy 33:22). Alternatively, it corresponds to the two times that it is written in his regard that he judged Israel for twenty years. They are: “He judged Israel during the days of the Philistines twenty years” (Judges 15:20) and: “He judged Israel twenty years” (Judges 16:31). It is to teach you that for twenty years he judged Israel in his lifetime, and for twenty years after his death, fear of Samson was upon the Philistines. and they lived in serenity. Alternatively, it corresponds to the two central pillars that he toppled.
“Five rams, five goats, five lambs in their first year” – why three species? It corresponds to the three types of offerings that the impurified nazirite would bring: Two doves or two young pigeons, one as a sin offering and one as a burnt offering, a sheep in its first year as a guilt offering. Why were there five of each? It corresponds to the five species that a nazirite who remained ritually pure brings: A sheep as a burnt offering, a ewe as a sin offering, a ram as a peace offering, loaves of high-quality flour and wafers of unleavened bread, and their meal offerings and their libations.
Another matter: Why three species? It corresponds to the three times that Samson smote the Philistines in his lifetime. They are: “He smote thirty…men” (Judges 14:19); “He smote them, calf over thigh…” (Judges 15:8); “He smote with it one thousand men” (Judges 15:15). They were three species, five each – fifteen corresponding to the miracle that was performed for him with the cheekbone. The spring was named for the miracle, as it is stated: “Therefore, he called its name: The spring of the caller, which is in Lehi to this day [ein hakoreh asher baleḥi]” (Judges 15:19). They are fifteen letters.
“This was the offering of Aḥiezer…” – since the Holy One blessed be He saw that he presented the offering in this order, He began lauding his offering: “This was the offering of…”