Еврейская мысль к Хавакук 2:4

(3) The Nazir legislation addresses itself to the often debilitating effect of wine or strong alcoholic drink. The repeated references to various grape products correspond to the various ways in which drunkenness affects man. Most instances in the Torah in which drinking is discussed, refer also to the undesirable after effects of drinking wine. (Genesis 9,21, 43,34, the story of Lot and his daughters) We have numerous other examples in the books of the prophets. 1) The first effect of drunkenness usually is a loosening of inhibitions. A person's behaviour becomes unrestrained, lawless. 2) A second effect is that when the lawmaker is drunk, he may legislate unfair laws while under the influence of strong drink. The misunderstanding of the teachings ascribed to Tzaddok and Bayssus are examples of heresy that may have been due to their having studied Torah while under the influence of wine. (Avot de Rabbi Natan chapter 5) Judges must not sit in Court after having drunk wine. This is alluded to in the words mishrat anavim a liquid in which grapes had been soaking. The Talmud illustrated this by the example of a Nazir who soaked his bread in wine. The Torah criticises the elders who, while having a vision of G'd, ate and drank at the same time. (Exodus 24,11) They are described as like people who while having an audience with the king, bite into their bread. (Exodus Rabbah 15) The fourth and worst result of drunkenness is the loss of one's religious faith. The allusion in our text is the reference to "either fresh or dried grapes." (6,3) This refers to the harbouring of as yet unripe thoughts. The former are the contemplating of sinful conduct, already at the surface of consciousness, awaiting only execution, whereas the "dried grapes" refer to those ideas that will need to incubate somewhat longer before being translated into deeds. Generally, these problems occur with advancing age, and the Torah lists them in corresponding order. Young people react negatively to any kind of restrictions imposed on them. Once they have become a little older, they realise the need for an ordered lifestyle, but they tend to draw their inspiration only from their own personal experiences. Still later in life, they get around to study other people's wisdom and experience, and they even study some of the proper sources, but not necessarily with a clear head. Finally, when facing death, and an accounting for the way they have lived their lives, they have to confront what is true faith and what is not. In order to distinguish between these different periods of their lives, the Torah each time commences with the words "all the days," to indicate that successive portions of one's life account for changing attitudes. The Torah tells the Nazir that the discipline imposed on his lifestyle by not touching grape products, does not by itself guarantee progress towards his objective, but that he must not use a razor or shears to remove his hair. The lesson is that no individual is free to decide arbitrarily by himself what disciplines to impose upon himself. If the Nazir is to avoid ritual impurity during the currency of his vow of abstinence, this is to enable him to receive the full benefit of Torah study during that period. If his mind is to concentrate on matters spiritual, success can be guaranteed only when his body remains in a state of purity. Man's crowning achievement is the attainment of serenity based on his complete and unshakable faith in the goodness of his Creator, and his acceptance of whatever fate seems to have in store for him. Many great men, though guilty of individual acts of sinful behaviour, were saved from being entrapped by sin due to their all embracing faith in G'd and His Torah. A splendid example is Samson, whose dealings with Delilah, though sinful, did not turn him into a heretic or otherwise undisciplined person. Until Samson revealed that his strength lay in the hair of his head, at Delilah's fourth attempt, and that it represented spiritual powers and faith, he had been able to cope with all of Satan's (read Delilah's) efforts to drag him down. Once he desecrated the focus of his purity, he fell victim to the machinations inspired by Satan. (The Talmud suggests that the very name DELILAH means "weakening," watering down his strength) Shimon the Just, who is reported to have eaten only one Nazirite offering in his long career as High Priest, tells of an incident which he describes as a legitimate reason for adoption of the Nazarite's vows. (Nedarim 9) From his description it is clear that the reason he did not eat from other such sacrifices is not that none were at hand, but that he considered any other person in his lifetime who had taken upon himself Nazirite vows as having been frivolous.

The statement of the Talmud quoted at the introduction to this chapter, should now be clear. Since a major function of reciting the keriyat shema is not what we address to G'd, but what we address to our own memory and faculties, unless we say it audibly, its purpose would remain largely unfulfilled. One would not discharge one's duty in such a fashion. On the one hand, it is not proper to raise one's voice, so as not to suggest that G'd is hard of hearing. (Berachot 24) On the other hand, one must arouse one's own senses sufficiently so that what the lips are saying accomplishes its purpose to remind one of the mitzvot.

We see, therefore, that the sons of Jacob displayed a total disregard for all these four character traits in their dealings with Shechem and his city. Aristo's lessons of self discipline are valid then for all those who have not had the benefit of the revelation at Mount Sinai, who have not heard the words G-d taught us in the Torah. Such people, if they want to attain wisdom and knowledge of G-d, must travel the path indicated by Aristo in his book of ethics. We Jews, however, are somewhat different trees inasmuch as instead of being rooted in the earth, we are rooted in heaven. Our roots, instead of going deeper into the ground, strive upwards. We learn the word of G-d as soon as we start learning how to walk: "The righteous lives by his faith" (Chabakuk 2,3). Our vital juices are our faith, and our body is the fruit nurtured by these Divinely inspired thoughts. This requires, on occasion, the very opposite of what Aristotele would call "ethical conduct." Abraham's unquestioning willingness to sacrifice Isaac, Jacob's subterfuge in securing the blessing intended for Esau, or his purchase of the birthright for a pittance, exploiting his brother's hunger, are all examples of this. In fact, practicing the finest human traits such as king Saul's pity for Agog, lost him the kingship (Samuel I Chapter 15). When the prophet (Kings I 20,35) says to his companion, "Strike me," and his companion refused, the companion was slain for his refusal to raise his hand against the man of G-d. The standards of ethical conduct for Jews are set from on high for the Torah oriented personality, and do not always correspond to the maxims espoused by mere human intellect, however well motivated. Generally speaking, there is no greater sin than disrespect for one's parents. King Chiskiyahu, who displayed that apparent disrespect when he dragged the remains of his father on a stretcher, may have referred to this publicly misunderstood action when he prayed for his survival on his deathbed, and referred to the upright ways of the Lord, invoking his own conduct as deserving recognition. Having obeyed G-d’s law, despite thereby creating a very unfavorable impression of himself amongst the people and thus having exposed himself to condemnation by his peers, he may have prayed for his survival as a sign from G-d that that conduct had been Divinely approved (Kings II 20,1-3). There are numerous examples of the truism (Proverbs 21,30) "No wisdom can prevail against the Lord." As long as the roots of our faith keep increasing and deepening, we will be nourished by the lifegiving waters of Torah, and need not be afraid of hostile phenomena around us, but we will be able to weather all onslaughts, as illustrated by the parable of the trees in the Mishnah we have quoted. Wisdom which is not based on the revealed will of G-d is apt to mislead its owner, and in times of stress may not protect him against the ravages of external forces. Since Jacob's sons’ roots were not in the earth, but were drawing their nourishment from heaven, they were able to defy all the normal rules of human conduct listed by Aristotele and yet succeed in their plan and its execution. Since the day Abraham had been commanded circumcision, his descendants had been set apart from those uncircumcised. They had, of course, been aware of all the trouble Abraham had gone to to avoid Isaac marrying a Canaanite girl, and the commandment of Isaac and Rebecca to Jacob not to marry a Canaanite. They had also observed that as a result of following these instructions, their father had established a family, all of whom were true to their heritage. Rape of their only sister then was a public desecration of G-d’s name, in the face of which ordinary rules of human conduct did not apply any longer. The brothers' deliberate flouting of all the four major rules of conduct was designed to impress the G-dly principles on which their lives were built, on the surrounding country. On all four occasions when the Torah describes the reaction of Jacob's sons to the rape, be it when they heard about it, when they negotiate with Chamor, when they slew the people in the city, or even when they reject their father's rebuke, each time they refer to the immoral act that had been perpetrated upon them, meaning their sister, and themselves by extension. The fact that the tum-ah defilement is mentioned only in connection with the brothers' reaction underscores that the Torah upholds their conduct (naturally, mention of the event and Jacob having heard about it prior to the brothers is a necessary part of the narrative).