וַיַּגֶּד־לָ֣הּ אֶת־כָּל־לִבּ֗וֹ וַיֹּ֤אמֶר לָהּ֙ מוֹרָה֙ לֹֽא־עָלָ֣ה עַל־רֹאשִׁ֔י כִּֽי־נְזִ֧יר אֱלֹהִ֛ים אֲנִ֖י מִבֶּ֣טֶן אִמִּ֑י אִם־גֻּלַּ֙חְתִּי֙ וְסָ֣ר מִמֶּ֣נִּי כֹחִ֔י וְחָלִ֥יתִי וְהָיִ֖יתִי כְּכָל־הָאָדָֽם׃
Lalu Simson membuka seluruh isi hatinya kepada perempuan itu dan berkata kepadanya: “Pisau cukur belum pernah menyentuh kepalaku, sebab aku seorang nazir Allah sejak dari kandungan ibuku. Jika rambutku dicukur, kekuatanku akan hilang dariku, lalu aku akan menjadi lemah dan menjadi sama seperti manusia pada umumnya.”
Rabbeinu Bahya
A kabbalistic approach: in connection with the words איש כי יפליא, I have already explained on Leviticus 21,10 what the High Priest represented. Here the Torah teaches that the Nazir is on a spiritually even higher level than the High Priest. The High Priest’s dominating attribute (emanation) is that of חסד, whereas the predominant attribute of the Nazir is בינה, which is ranked higher than חסד in the list of emanations. Seeing he is “crowned” with this attribute the Torah calls such a person נזיר, a reference to the נזר, crown, which is worn by the High Priest. This is the meaning of the words “the crown of his G’d is on his head,” (verse 7). Because of all this “a razor shall not cross his head” (verse 5), “the growth of his hair on his head shall continue growing” (verse 5), ”his head shall be sanctified” (verse 11). All of this is subsumed under the heading כי יפליא, “a display of superior wisdom.” Converting such wisdom into something concrete requires the attribute בינה and this is described in the Torah by the words לנדר נדר. The part of the brain in which vows originate is the part where the attribute בינה is located.
The Nazir is warned concerning three separate matters: 1) consumption of wine; 2) shearing the hair on his head; 3) becoming ritually impure through contact with a corpse directly or indirectly. The Torah divides these prohibitions into three separate ones by writing the words כל ימי נזרו, “all the days his vow is effective,” between each of them. The first time this expression occurs is in verse 4 in connection with the grapes. The second time it occurs in verse 5 in connection with the prohibition to shave or trim his beard. The third time it occurs in verse 6 in connection with observing mourning rites.
The reason the Nazir must not drink wine or become ritually impure is to keep his distance from forces which are beholden to the “left side” of the emanations, the part which is perceived of as representing spiritually negative influences. On the other hand, he is warned not to shave as hair represents strength as we know from Samson. The moment Samson agreed to have his hair cut his “spiritual” strength disappeared and he was no better than any other ordinary mortal. He regained his prowess only after his hair had grown back (Judges 16,17 as well as Judges 16,22). As I have mentioned previously, hair grows incessantly and continues to grow even after death if the corpse is in a moist environment. Each single hair is a symbol of the far-flung activities of the Lord, activities which deal with minute details, just as every single hair seems by itself insignificant. Hairs represent continuous develop- ment in all directions of the globe. As a reminder of this concept of G’d the “All-Present,” the Nazir is commanded to give the hair full and unrestrained opportunity to keep growing This is the mystical dimension of the words גדל פרע שער ראשו. The Nazir is cautioned not to destroy any part of his hair by means of a razor seeing that ”it is the crown of G’d on his head” (verse 7). Were he to cut this hair this would be equivalent to heresy practiced by an ordinary Israelite, something which the sages called קצץ הנטיעות “destroying saplings planted by G’d through cutting them (spiritually).” It is similar to separating the holy name of the Lord from His “branches.”
The Nazir is warned concerning three separate matters: 1) consumption of wine; 2) shearing the hair on his head; 3) becoming ritually impure through contact with a corpse directly or indirectly. The Torah divides these prohibitions into three separate ones by writing the words כל ימי נזרו, “all the days his vow is effective,” between each of them. The first time this expression occurs is in verse 4 in connection with the grapes. The second time it occurs in verse 5 in connection with the prohibition to shave or trim his beard. The third time it occurs in verse 6 in connection with observing mourning rites.
The reason the Nazir must not drink wine or become ritually impure is to keep his distance from forces which are beholden to the “left side” of the emanations, the part which is perceived of as representing spiritually negative influences. On the other hand, he is warned not to shave as hair represents strength as we know from Samson. The moment Samson agreed to have his hair cut his “spiritual” strength disappeared and he was no better than any other ordinary mortal. He regained his prowess only after his hair had grown back (Judges 16,17 as well as Judges 16,22). As I have mentioned previously, hair grows incessantly and continues to grow even after death if the corpse is in a moist environment. Each single hair is a symbol of the far-flung activities of the Lord, activities which deal with minute details, just as every single hair seems by itself insignificant. Hairs represent continuous develop- ment in all directions of the globe. As a reminder of this concept of G’d the “All-Present,” the Nazir is commanded to give the hair full and unrestrained opportunity to keep growing This is the mystical dimension of the words גדל פרע שער ראשו. The Nazir is cautioned not to destroy any part of his hair by means of a razor seeing that ”it is the crown of G’d on his head” (verse 7). Were he to cut this hair this would be equivalent to heresy practiced by an ordinary Israelite, something which the sages called קצץ הנטיעות “destroying saplings planted by G’d through cutting them (spiritually).” It is similar to separating the holy name of the Lord from His “branches.”
Rabbeinu Bahya
A rational approach (allegorical philosophy): This whole paragraph contains distinct allusions to the evil urge. It is this urge which causes man to sin on an ongoing basis and it usually approaches him in the guise of some irresistible female. This allure is employed by the evil urge to lure men into satiating their various cravings for the forbidden. When our sages in Kiddushin 21 said לא דברה תורה אלא כנגד יצר הרע, “that the Torah (in this paragraph) addressed specifically the danger of being seduced by the evil urge,” this is what they had in mind. They perceive the אשת יפת תאר as the personification of the evil urge. The Torah provides the antidote to the lure of the evil urge in the manner it suggests it be treated. One way of ridding oneself of it is that man strips the evil urge of his physical power which is represented by his hair (as we know from Samson). This is why the Torah commands that we shave off the hair of the יפת תאר. The word גלוח suggests destruction of the hair so that it does not grow back again. Prior to Adam’s sin, his clothing consisted of nails (a tough skin). When the Torah speaks about the אשת יפת תאר having to “do her nails,” this is an allusion to man’s objective to regain the status of Adam who wore “nails.” The contrast is the removal of the garments of the אשת יפת תאר, read: “evil urge. One is not to indulge in any of the pleasures of this world, unless they are specifically permitted, gratifying only those urges that are condoned by the Torah. The words וישבה בביתך, “she will sit in your house,” are a simile for keeping tight control of these urges just as one keeps control of everything under one’s roof. The way to accomplish all this is to first weaken the urges, i.e. to “weep for father and mother for a whole month.” Having sufficiently weakened these cravings, the words ואחר כן תבוא אליה apply, i.e. you may then gingerly make use of these urges provided it is within the framework of what is permissible under Torah law.
Pat Lechem
not to be (1) removed or (2) separated from themselves -- There are two ways a man can lose his benefits. Either (1) they can be removed from him and cease to exist such as in the death of his children or the burning down of his possessions. Or, (2) they can be separated from him and transferred to someone else.. In truth, they are different calamities. The first case is difficult in that there is no hope left for reattaining this thing which no longer exists unlike something which still exists but is in someone else's possession where one still sits and hopes perhaps it will someday return to him. On the other hand, the second case also has a harsher evil since (Shir 8:6) "Jealousy [is] cruel as the grave", that a man sees his hard earned work in someone else's hands, as written (Yeshaya 1:6) "your land, strangers devour it in your presence".