Numbers · Chapter 6

And Hashem spoke with Moses, saying:

According to the opinion of the sages of the Midrash, the legislation dealing with the Nazirite follows hard on the heels of that dealing with the Sotah, the woman suspected of marital infidelity, as what may have inspired the Nazirite to impose the vows upon himself he is described here as doing is that he had seen the disgrace which the Sotah had brought upon herself by giving in to her temptations. The Nazir, ideally speaking, uses his vows to reinforce his determination not to fall victim to excess consumption of alcohol, etc. We learn from Hoseah 4,11 that זנות, יין, ותירוש יקח לב, “lechery, wine, and even new wine destroy the mind.” Allowing the hair on one’s head to keep growing without restraint is a conduct diametrically opposed to the people, mostly young men, who style their hair excessively, something that Joseph was considered guilty of as the commentators say on the beginning of parshat vayeshev. Our sages have always objected to people who are overly concerned with their exterior. Extreme growth of one’s hair leads a person to worry that he may not contract ritual impurity; such a concern in turn leads one to strive for holiness. In practice, the Nazir voluntarily imposes upon himself a mode of conduct that every priest is duty bound to observe from his earliest youth. This brings us to the question of why the Torah demands that at the end of his term of such abstention the Nazir has to bring a sin-offering, חטאת; surely we would have expected the very opposite, that the Torah would compliment him on his vow! Nachmanides draws attention to the fact that the Torah does not offer an explanation for this. According to the plain meaning the reason appears to be clear. The person who had assumed the vow of being a Nazir would indeed have been lauded if he had not placed a time limit on his spiritual elevation. The fact that he is content to voluntarily lower his spiritual niveau is something that must be criticized. The sin offering is the vehicle by means of which the Torah calls such a Nazir to order. We know from Amos 2,11 ואקח מבניכם לנביאים ומבחוריכם לנזירים, “I will choose from amongst your sons some as prophets, and from amongst your young men some as Nazirites,” that the prophet equates the prophets with the Nazirites. Just as the former is appointed for lifetime, so it is expected that the Nazirite will maintain his status indefinitely. Seeing that the Torah wrote of the Nazir: כל ימי נזרו קדוש הוא לה', that he will remain holy only as long as he is a Nazir, it is clear that he requires atonement for voluntarily abandoning his lofty status.

Speak with the children of Israel and say to them: A man or a woman who expressly vows a vow of naziriteship, to separate himself before Hashem —

כי יפלא means, IF HE CLEARLY UTTERS (cf. Rashi on Leviticus 22:21 and Note thereon). — Why is the section dealing with the Nazarite placed in juxtaposition to the section dealing with the סוטה? To tell you that he who has once seen a סוטה in her disgrace should abstain from wine, because it may lead to adultery (Sotah 2a). נדר נזיר — The term נזר wherever it occurs denotes “keeping aloof from something” (cf. Rashi on Leviticus 22:2). Here, too, it means that he keeps away from wine (Sifrei Bamidbar 22). להזיר לה׳ means, TO KEEP HIMSELF ALOOF from wine FOR THE SAKE OF HEAVEN (God).

"Shall set apart" (יִפָּלֵא) — he shall separate himself, or do something wondrous, since most people follow their desires. "The vow of a nazirite" — the meaning is that he vows to be a nazirite, for "nazirite" is an adjectival noun. "Nazirite" derives from וַיִּנָּזְרוּ, meaning that he distances himself from desires, and he does this for the service of Hashem — for wine corrupts the mind and the service of Hashem. And in the passage of Ki Tetzei [I will hint to you a secret].

כי יפליא, he will separate himself from all the vanities and physical pleasures in life. לנדור נדר נזיר, to become a Nazirite and the life of self denial which comes with this. 'להזיר לה, to separate himself from all the pleasures in order to devote himself exclusively to the service of the Lord, to study His Torah and practice walking in His ways.

דבר אל בני ישראל ואמרת אלהם, "speak to the children of Israel and say to them, etc." Our verse repeated the form of address Moses was to use by calling it both the harsh דבר "speak" as well as the softer ואמרת, "and say." Why is that? Furthermore, why did the Torah switch to indirect speech when discussing the laws pertaining to a Nazirite? Perhaps the Torah wanted to address two kinds of Nazirite, the one kind being superior to the other. We learned in Nedarim 9 that Shimon the Just said that in all his years as High Priest he had only once eaten the guilt-offering of a Nazirite who had become ritually unclean during the term of his Naziriteship whose motivation for becoming a Nazirite he approved of. The Nazirite in question had described to him that he became a Nazirite as a means to fight off his evil urge. Concerning the Naziriteship of people similarly motivated the Torah used the term ואמרת, whereas concerning a Nazir who was motivated by less noble considerations the Torah used the term דבר when detailing the rules he had to observe. This is also why the Torah speaks of נזיר להזיר instead of merely saying להזיר לה׳. The Torah wanted to hint it speaks of two kinds of נזירות. The word נזיר refers to most kinds of Nazir, whereas the expression להזיר לה׳ refers to the Nazirite who is highly motivated such as the Nazirite mentioned by Shimon the Just.

כי יפלא, this is one of the words which occur in different contexts, having opposite meanings, such as “building” or “demolishing.” For instance, we find the phrase (Deut. 17,8) כי יפלא ממך דבר, where it means: “if something is too baffling for you, etc;” (the reference is to litigation between two parties) In our situation, our sages presume that the subject of the vow of Nazirite was not inserted here haphazardly, but that it teaches a valuable lesson in how to preserve one’s sin-free status. Our sages surmise that the reason that this subject follows on the heels of that of the wayward wife, is that man falling victim to sinning is related to imbibing too much wine, something that loosens not only one’s tongue, but also other restraints that would have served as protection against committing certain sins. [The reader may recall that Lot having been given too much wine by his daughters, resulted in the first instance of incest, so that the founder of the people of Moav’s founding father was at the same time also his grandfather through his mother. Eventually, 24000 Israelites were killed by a plague for having made an obeisance to a Moabite idol, Baal-Peor, after having drunk too much wine and slept with Moabite women who had been told by Bileam to find a way to seduce them. Ed.] According to our author, a woman who has not coiffed her hair properly is not in demand for sexual intercourse. (Based on Ibn Ezra) נדר נדר להזיר, “has uttered a vow to become a Nazirite.” The reason why the Torah chose such a cumbersome way of saying this is that it wanted to incorporate the three main aspects of the Nazirite’s vow: abstention from wine, etc; not shaving his hair, and avoiding contact with ritual impurity.

איש או אשה כי יפליא לנדור נדר נזיר, “a man or a woman who deliberately makes a vow involving abstinence, etc.” The reason that the Torah saw fit to append this paragraph to the previous one involving marital infidelity is to teach us that excess consumption of wine and resulting drunkenness may have led to the phenomenon of sexually frivolous conduct described in that paragraph. He who sees how the woman who had become guilty of such unrestrained behavior has been dealt with will take the lesson to heart, and may even decide to abstain from alcoholic drink altogether in order to avoid temptation (compare Sotah 2). The prophet Hoseah appeared to share this view when he said (Hoseah 4,11) “lechery, wine, and (even?) new wine destroy the mind of Your people.” The plain meaning of the text is that a Nazirite is warned not to consume wine seeing that anyone who allows his desire for wine and alcoholic drink to determine his actions will give in to other temptations involving matters which are forbidden even in moderate quantities, to lead him astray. The reason the Nazir has been commanded to grow his hair long is that long hair causes people to worry, and the Torah wants the Nazir to worry about not breaking the constraints of his vow. When he looks dishevelled due to his unruly hair he will also abstain from other activities which reflect dishonor upon man. Hair is perceived as the remnant and excess of “smoldering“ physical forces that the body emits. [I believe that the fact that both nails and hair have to be trimmed, (and are phenomena which continue to grow even after death for some time) are viewed as reflecting the preponderance of physical forces within us. It is interesting that we find in the Talmud Sanhedrin 21 that Jewish women were generally devoid of pubic hair and under-arm hair which was taken as a sign of their moral superiority in matters of chastity. See my article on hair in “The Just lives by his faith.” Ed.] The expression יפליא in our verse refers to the Nazirite doing something פלא, wonderfully different. Whereas all the world indulge their senses, the Nazirite has decided to not only repress his evil urge but to fortify his resolution by making a vow to abstain from wine, the prime cause of stimulating such temptations. The expression נזיר occurs first in connection with the Priests being commanded not to touch the holies of the Children of Israel when in a state of ritual impurity (Leviticus 22,2). In that instance the word means: “to separate, to withdraw.” Another instance where we have encountered this expression is Exodus 29,6 in connection with Aaron’s headgear. It is described as נזר הקדש — a sort of crown which set Aaron apart from the other Priests. Crowns are worn by Royalty, i.e. people in authority. A Nazir is so called because he is like a king in that he rules over his desires, unlike the majority of mankind who are slaves to temptation. להזיר לה', ”to abstain for the sake of the Lord.” The vow of abstinence is dedicated to the Lord whom one cannot serve to the full if one’s brain is befuddled by strong drink.

A man or a woman who sets themselves apart by making a vow of a Nazirite to abstain for the Lord. Even though the Torah has already equated women to men regarding all punishments in the Torah, it nevertheless specifies woman here because the passage of the Nazirite is juxtaposed to the passage of the Sotah [suspected adulteress] to tell you that anyone who sees a Sotah in her disgrace should abstain from wine (Sotah 2). This applies more to women than to men, because it is presumably women who will abstain from wine. And if you ask, it should have said “they will set apart” [in plural form] since it speaks about both of them, as it says A man or a woman, they who commit, etc. (Numbers 5:6). Rather, [the singular form is used] because wine is more harmful to women who are of weaker constitution than to men who are of stronger constitution. If a woman abstains from wine, she does not set herself apart so much, since she can easily fall into the stumbling block of immorality, as our Sages said (Ketubot 65a), “Even if it’s a donkey she desires etc.” But for a man, he certainly sets himself apart if he abstains from wine because he is stronger than it [i.e., can better withstand its effects], therefore it says who sets apart. Another explanation of ki yafli is that it means separation and removal. This can be explained in three ways. The first is that through wine one cannot separate holy and profane, as it is written Do not drink wine or strong drink (Leviticus 10:9-10) and adjacent to it, to differentiate between holy and profane. Therefore it says ki yafli — when one wishes to separate holy and profane, then he should abstain from wine lest he drinks and forgets what is decreed by the Torah (Proverbs 31:5). This excludes women who are not obligated in Torah study, so the language of “haflaa” [separation] does not apply to them. The second explanation is that it refers to separation from the pleasures of this world, of which wine is foremost, as explained regarding Manoach when it says, Why do you ask my name, seeing it is extraordinary [peli] (Judges 13:18). That is, his name is “Peli” because every angel is named according to his mission, and “I was sent to make the born child a Nazir, extraordinary and separated from all matters of this world.” And because it says ish ki yafli [when a man sets himself apart], therefore I am called “Peli.” And therefore it says “ki yafli” [singular] and not “yafliu” [plural] because even a woman’s vow depends on her husband, as it is written Any vow to afflict the soul, her husband may uphold it or her husband may annul it (Numbers 30:14). Therefore, her vow also depends on her husband. And the intention of this Naziriteship is not that one should abstain from wine for 30 days and then return to being among the drunkards as before, for if so, what has the righteous person accomplished? Rather, the intention is that one should gradually accustom oneself, for all beginnings are difficult, and in 30 days it becomes an established habit, so that afterwards one will not be so eager for it. The third explanation follows what our Sages said (Nedarim 22a), “One who makes a vow is as if he built a high place [bamah],” etc. You will find a very precious explanation of this statement later in Parashat Matot (30:3), see there. This agrees with the opinion that the Nazir is called a sinner (Nedarim 10a), and the sin is that he builds a high place for himself and separates himself from the entire world by practicing prohibition in a matter that everyone else practices as permitted. Therefore it says “ki yafli” — because he wants to be distinct and separated from others and builds a high place for himself. This is not common among women because they presumably do this [become Nazirites] because they see a wayward woman [sotah] in her disgrace, not in order to build a high place for themselves.

כי יפליא, If someone clearly utters, etc.” He either separates himself from the community or he does something mysteriously different, seeing that most people follow the inclinations of their greedy hearts. נדר נזזיר, “a vow of abstinence.” Generally this is a vow to abstain from wine, alcoholic drink. Some commentators relate the words נזר to ”crown,” i.e. the Nazirite adorned himself with a spiritual crown. He placed G’d’s “crown” on his head, so to speak.

from new wine and aged wine he shall abstain; vinegar of new wine and vinegar of aged wine he shall not drink, and any infusion of grapes he shall not drink, and fresh grapes and dried grapes he shall not eat.

מיין ושכר — Understand this as the Targum does: he shall abstain from new (יין) and old wine (שכר). The latter is called שכר, “intoxicating drink”, because wine makes one intoxicated when it is old. וכל משרת — The word משרת denotes “steeping” in water or any other liquid. In the Mishnaic language there are many examples of this, e.g., (Shabbat 17b): “One must not soak (שורין) ink-materials and dyes in water on the eve of Sabbath”; (Nazir 34b): “A Nazarite who steeped (שרה) his bread in wine".

The meaning of "from wine and strong drink" — if he vowed to be a nazirite and holy, he shall abstain from wine and strong drink (שֵׁכָר). In the opinion of the transmitters, שֵׁכָר is stronger than tiyrosh [new wine]; others say שֵׁכָר literally means any substance from which a person can become intoxicated. The meaning of "vinegar of wine, and steeping liquid, and grapes" is to set a fence so that he keep entirely away from wine. In [the passage of] the wife of Manoah it is interpreted: "any uncleanness — all that comes from the grapevine." "Steeping liquid" (מִשְׁרַת) has no parallel form; the tav is for the construct of the feminine, and its meaning is anything that dissolves together with grapes. Some say it means a cooked beverage.

מיין ושכר יזיר, he is not to flagellate himself, or practice fasting, but only to abstain from wine and intoxicating liquids. The former methods of self-denial would result in a diminished ability to serve the Lord with all one’s faculties. Flagellation, a common practice among certain types of monks and “holy men,” is not allowed, but becoming a teetotaler does reduce the urge to let oneself go and engage in demeaning activities due to drunkenness

מיין ושכר יזיר, “he must abstain from wine and alcoholic drink.” In this verse the word יין refers to wine which has aged appropriately, whereas the word שכר refers to new wine which has not yet fermented. According to Onkelos the meaning is exactly the reverse, and it would preclude the need to desist from alcoholic drink which does not originate from grapes. The Nazirite is forbidden the use of five grape-products: 1) wine; 2) grapes; 3) raisins; 4) the kernel; 5) the skin. Consumption of either of these five items is considered as a separate violation of the commandment legislated here. Unripe grapes are included under the heading “grapes,” whereas vinegar is considered part of the prohibition “wine,” seeing it had been wine before it turned into vinegar. The element causing it to be prohibited is not perceived as having departed from the liquid which deteriorated into vinegar. The Talmud Nazir 38 rules that if a Nazir ate fresh grapes together with dry grapes and kernels and skins and he squeezed out a cluster of grapes, he has violated 5 commandments and is liable for them separately. (to receive 5 times 39 lashes). 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.” When Samson allowed his hair to be cut his physical strength departed from him immediately and the prophet Samuel (himself a Nazir and author of the Book of Judges) describes what happened to him in these words: ותאלצהו, “she nagged him constantly.” The word has a connotation of the attribute of Justice, i.e. the sages suggest that when reading these words we should reverse the letters ל-צ to read the word as ותאצלהו, as if it meant that Delilah had succeeded in denying Samson the spiritual input which had been the source of his physical prowess. Once the time arrives for the Nazir to cut his hair at the end of the term of his abstinence, the Torah commanded that he should place his shorn hair “on the fire which is below his peace-offering” (verse 18), seeing that this hair had become sanctified and is a symbol of something holy. Regarding the rule of not being allowed to become ritually defiled, the Torah applied a more stringent ruling to the Nazir than to the High Priest. Though the High Priest must also not participate actively in the funeral of his father or mother, the Torah does not say anything about his hair being burned after it is trimmed, (which occurs frequently). This makes it plain to the people that the Nazir is a model of sanctity. Our sages (in Sotah 10) say that there are 5 types of people who, though they were created in the Divine image, were nevertheless punished. They were: Avshalom who was punished by being hung and subseqently speared by his hair. King Shaul who was killed by his neck (through the sword). Shimshon was punished by losing his physical prowess. King Assa of Yehudah was punished by being paralyzed in his legs. King Tzidkiyahu was punished by having his eyes gouged out by the Babylonians. Concerning the procedure prescribed for the Nazir, Solomon (Song of Songs 5,11) said קוצותיו תלתלים “his locks are curled.” Also Daniel 7,9 speaks about this hair when he said: “the hair of his head is like clean wool.” The meaning of the word שכר in our verse refers to any agent capable of causing man to become intoxicated. The word חרצנים is unique in the Bible just as is the word זגין. The former refers to the seeds inside the grapes, the latter to the skin on the outside. Rabbi Avraham Ibn Ezra thinks that it is the other way around.

משרת ענבים, according to Menachem the word משרת is derived from the root שרת, as in Numbers 8,26 ושרת את אחיו, “he (the Levite) will assist his brethren (the priests) in the service, i.e. he will not be allowed to substitute for him.” The letter מ at the beginning of the word משרת would then have to be understood like the letter מ in מרמס In Isaiah 10,6 or as in the word משמר in Genesis 40,3, i.e. as a letter which converts a verb into a noun. It is not possible to explain the word משרת as related to שרת, in the sense of assist, serve, except when it occurs in connection with service performed by human beings for their masters. Therefore, I believe that the word משרת belongs to a category of verbs which have the peculiarity that the last letter of their root disappears when the verb (or noun derived from it) appears in the construct mode. An example is the verb קנה, acquired, or מקנה, acquisition, which when in the construct form becomes מקנת, “acquisition of.” (compare Exodus 12,44) Although this expression is not found elsewhere in the Torah it does occur in the Talmud, always referring to something which had been soaked in water, such as in Nazir 36 where it describes a Nazirite who had soaked his bread in grape juice. We also find an expression in Jeremiah 15,11אם לא שריתיך לטוב, which is explained there by Rashi as similar to Daniel 5,12 משרא, being freed form shackles. The word שריתיך in Jeremiah is understood as “I have scattered you,” if instead of with the letter ש it had been spelled with the letter ז. Compare Maleachi 2,3 where it appears as “I will strew, scatter, etc.” You will find this word in this sense in Numbers 17,2 when Eleazar is told to scatter the fire which had been on the pans on which the congregation of Korach had offered their incense. משרת ענבים in our verse also means anything which separated from the actual grapes and fell down. It is like a person after he had been freed from the chains that had held him captive.

All the days of his naziriteship, from anything that is made from the grapevine — from the seeds to the skins — he shall not eat.

חרצנים are THE KERNELS.... זג are THE HUSKS (skins) outside. They are called זג (a term also used for a bell) because the kernels are inside them as the clapper is in the bell (cf. Siphre; Nazir 34b; 39a).

"From the pips" (מֵחַרְצַנִּים) — this word has no parallel, nor does זָג [husk/skin]. The commentators said that חַרְצַנִּים are the outer [parts] and זָג is the inner; others reversed the interpretation. The meaning of "from the pips" connects with "from all that is made" — that is, everything made from either of these two.

All the days of the vow of his naziriteship, no razor shall pass over his head, until the completion of the days for which he consecrates himself before Hashem; he shall be holy, letting the hair of his head grow freely.

קדש יהיה means HOLY SHALL IT (not “he”) BE viz., his hair shall be holy. inasmuch as he must let grow freely the hair of his head (lit., so as to let grow the over-growth, פרע, of the hair of his head) (Sifrei Bamidbar 25; Taanit 4a). פרע — The word פרע is punctuated (as to its first syllable) with Patach-Katan (Segol) because it is in construct state to שער ראשו and the meaning is: the פרע, the wild growth of שער ראשו — The meaning of the word פרע is over-growth of the hair; similar is (Leviticus 21:10) “He shall not let his hair grow wild (יפרע)”. Growth of the hair of less than thirty days’ duration does not come under the term פרע (Sifrei Bamidbar 25; Sanhedrin 22b).

"Growing a head of hair" (גַּדֵּל פֶּרַע) — this is the verbal noun of the intensive conjugation; its meaning is "grow" — he shall grow [his hair].

תער לא יעבור על ראשו, by not coiffing his hair through trimming it to certain shapes, he automatically abandons all manner of preening himself. קדוש יהיה, separate from base urges and addiction to the pleasures of the flesh.

גדל פרע, “the locks (of hair) growing wildly;” these are two words meaning almost the same, just as in Daniel 12,2: אדמת עפר, “dusty earth;”, “dusty earth

All the days that he consecrates himself before Hashem, he shall not approach any dead person.

"His separation" (הַזִּירוֹ) — this is the verbal noun of the intensive conjugation. "Over a dead soul" (עַל נֶפֶשׁ מֵת) — [מֵת] is an adjective modifying נֶפֶשׁ, or the word גּוּף [body] is implied.

על נפש מת לא יבא; he must not desecrate his sacred activities by honouring the dead and thereby downgrading his spiritual concerns. In this respect he is much like the High Priest. Our sages report that a father who had sent his son to study Torah in an advanced academy in Tiberias heard that his son was engaged in doing charitable deeds there. When the father heard about it he sent the following message to his son: “are there no opportunities to perform such charitable deeds in our town that I had to send you to Tiberias to do this?” (Jerusalem Talmud Chagigah 1,7) The point is that there are other people who can perform the charitable deed of burying the dead so that the services of the Nazirite are not required.

על נפש מת, “near a dead body;” the word על is used in the sense of אצל, “next to.” Examples of such uses are found in Exodus 40,3: וסכות על הארון את הפרוכת, “you shall screen the Ark with the veil next to it.” Compare also Genesis24,30,והוא עומד על הגמלים, “while he was standing next to the camels.”

For his father, for his mother, for his brother, and for his sister, he shall not defile himself upon their death, for the crown of his God is upon his head.

"For his father and for his mother" — and how much more so for his wife, his daughter, and others. Some say that the word נָזִיר derives from נֵזֶר [crown], the proof being "for the crown of his God is upon his head," and this is not far-fetched. Know that all human beings are servants of worldly desires — but the true king is the one who has a crown and royal diadem upon his head, meaning whoever is free from desires.

לא יטמא להם, “he must not defile himself on their account.” The addition of the word: להם on their account, means that he may or even should defile himself in order to bury a corpse who has no one else to attend to his being buried. (Talmud tractate Megillah folio 3.) במותם, “on account of their death;” however, he is not forbidden to become defiled through contact with living human beings afflicted with involuntary emissions from their sexual organs. (Sifri) [How could he be aware of their condition? Ed.]

All the days of his naziriteship he is holy before Hashem.

כל ימי נזרו קדש הוא ALL THE DAYS OF HIS NAZARITESHIP HE IS HOLY — This refers to the holiness of his body which consists in his abstaining from defiling himself by reason of a corpse (Sifrei Bamidbar 27).

'קדוש הוא לה. He will merit the light available for those enjoying eternal life, as well as be able to instruct the spiritual leaders of his generation. This may have been what Elkanah referred to when he said: “may the Lord keep His word” (Samuel I 1,23). What he meant was that he agreed with Chanah his wife’s vow that the child she would bear would spend his life on earth as a Nazirite. He did not add any additional request regarding the child that would be born to them. If G’d would allow Chanah’s prayer and vow to come true this would be more than enough satisfaction for him.

And if a person dies suddenly upon him, and he defiles the head of his naziriteship, he shall shave his head on the day of his purification; on the seventh day he shall shave it.

בפתע — This refers to a Nazarite who defiles himself thus by accident. פתאם — This refers to one who does so inadvertently (Sifrei Bamidbar 28:1; cf. Onkelos). — But there are some who say that פתע פתאום denotes one thing, viz., an occurrence of suddenness (by a sudden occurrence, suddenly). וכי ימות מת עליו AND IF A MAN DIES עליו — i.e., in the tent where he (the נזיר) happens to be. ביום טהרתו [THEN HE SHALL CLIP THE HAIR OF HIS HEAD] IN THE DAY OF HIS CLEANSING — i.e., on the day when he is being sprinkled with the מי חטאת, (the water containing the ashes of the Red Heifer; cf. Numbers 19:17). Or perhaps this is not so, but it means, on the eighth day when he is perfectly clean! It, however, continues: “on the seventh day [he shall clip it]”. But if it had written only “on the seventh day [he shall clip it]” I might have thought that he must clip his hair even if one had not sprinkled him for some reason or other! Scripture therefore also states “on the day of his cleansing [he shall clip the hair of his head]” (Sifrei Bamidbar 28:2).

"Suddenly, unexpectedly" (בְּפֶתַע פִּתְאֹם) — both words are close in meaning, as are אַדְמַת עָפָר ["dusty ground"]. "And he has defiled" — the dead person has defiled him. "On the day of his purification" — [he is purified] with the waters of lustration (mei niddah), for he is impure from [contact with] the dead.

וטמא ראש נורו, and he defile his consecrated head, etc. Both the letter ו in the word וטמא as well as the word ראש appear superfluous in our verse. The meaning may be that even if the ritual impurity contracted by the Nazirite was unintentional, not only does his body become ritually impure but also the hair on his head, as the Torah refers to his hair as "the crown of G'd which is on his head." Another detail which is revealed by this wording is that not only does the Nazirite have to make up the days following his becoming ritually impure, but even the days which he counted in purity are not accounted for him and he has to go back to square one. This is confirmed by the words והזיר לה׳ את ימי נזרו in verse 12 where the Torah specifically states that the days he observed prior to becoming defiled become void. The reason the Torah says once more כי טמא נזרו, that he defiled his Naziriteship, is intended to prevent us from making the error of thinking that he loses only the day on which he became ritually impure, i.e. the beginning of Naziriteship. The words והימים הראשונים reveal that when such a person has contracted impurity lasting not only one day but a minimum of two days he loses not only these two days but all the days he had already counted. It is what is known as גזרת הכתוב, i.e. the Torah did not bother to explain its reason for this ruling.

וכי ימות מת עליו, “and if someone dies suddenly beside him;” here the meaning of the word עליו is not “on him,” or “upon him,” but “beside him, next to him.” בפתע פתאום, “very suddenly;” a construction similar to גדל פרע in verse 5. וטמא ראש נזרו, “and he will defile his consecrated head;” this expression means that he has invalidated all the days of his being a Nazirite until now, and has to start the count anew.” The reason is that those days have to be counted consecutively, [generally the vow is valid for 30 days unless specified differently at the outset. Ed.] Any interruption of his status through ritual defilement cancels the whole period preceding it. [The word ראש in connection with counting has appeared repeatedly when the Israelites underwent a census. Ed.]

בפתע פתאם, “suddenly, unexpectedly;” the word means the same as אדמת עפר in Daniel 12,2. where he describes sudden resurrection of the dead. The Nazir, as opposed to most other instances when a sin-offering has to be brought, brings such an offering regardless of whether he defiled himself knowingly or unwittingly. This is what our sages said in Keritut 9: four people have to bring an offering both if they committed an intentional wrong and if they committed the same wrong unintentionally. They are: 1) the Nazir, 2) the person who swore an untrue oath concerning what happened to an item entrusted to his care. 3) Swearing a false oath through testifying to an event which did not take place as described. 4) A person who engaged in sex with a partially freed slave-woman. He receives 39 lashes and brings an offering. Concerning the impurity contracted by that Nazir the Torah wrote both the word פתע and the word פתאם. The reason is that the word פתע speaks of an inadvertently contracted impurity. The word פתאם speaks of an intentional defilement by the Nazir, something our sages derive from Proverbs 22,3 where Solomon writes ופתיים עברו ונענשו, “the fools kept going and were punished.” This indicates that both the willful and the merely foolish have to endure the punishment. As far as the other candidates for such offerings are concerned, the Torah added the words ונעלם ממנו, “it (the commission of a sin) was concealed from him,” in each example. The only exception to this rule is Leviticus 5,24. This proves that in the situation described in that passage it makes no difference if the error was committed knowingly or not. In both situations the guilty party has to restore the object, add 25% as punitive damages, and offer a guilt offering to expiate for what he had done. The laws pertaining to the other three examples we mentioned are all based on the law applying to the person who swore an oath denying he had trespassed against an article entrusted to him. The method used to do this is called gezeirah shavah, similar sounding words being used by the Torah in subjects which are not conceptually related to one another. It is presumed that the relevant expression was not needed to give us the plain meaning of the verse in question. The word in question is תחטא. In connection with the man who had sexual intercourse with the semi-free slave, the Torah adds the words ונסלח לו, “he will be pardoned,” again making the deed subject to an offering regardless of the awareness of the sinner at the time. Seeing that it is the function of the guilt-offering to obtain forgiveness for the sinner, it seems reasonable to see in the unnecessary mention of this result a reference to the fact that even a deliberate perjury can be wiped out through this offering.

And on the eighth day he shall bring two turtledoves or two young pigeons to the priest, to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting.

וביום השמיני יבא שתי תרים AND ON THE EIGHTH DAY HE SHALL BRING TWO TURTLES — On the eighth day, thus excluding the seventh. Or perhaps this is not so, but it is intended to exclude the ninth day (i.e., that the offering must not be brought later than the eighth day)? But Scripture has fixed a date for the animals which are to be offered (cf. Leviticus 22:27), and has also fixed a date for the persons who bring offerings (Exodus 22:29). How is it in the case of the animals offered as sacrifices? It declared the eighth day and any time from the eighth onward as fit for offering them! So, too, in the case of persons offering sacrifices “the eighth day” implies the eighth and any day from the eighth onwards and only excludes the seventh or any earlier day (Sifrei Bamidbar 29:1).

שתי תורים, “two turtle doves;” these plus a male sheep below the age of one year (verse 12) i.e. three animals symbolising the three major aspects of being a Nazirite, abstention from alcoholic drink, letting his hair grow wild, and avoiding contact with dead bodies.

And the priest shall offer one as a sin-offering and one as a burnt-offering, and he shall atone for him for having sinned over the dead, and he shall sanctify his head on that day.

מאשר חטא על הנפש [AND THE PRIEST … MAKE EXPIATION FOR HIM] FOR THAT HE HATH SINNED BY THE DEAD — i.e., that he has not been on his guard against defilement by a corpse. — R. Eleazer ha-Kappar said, “his sin consists in that he has afflicted himself by abstaining from the enjoyment of wine (Sifrei Bamidbar 30; Nazir 19a). וקדש את ראשו AND HE SHALL HALLOW HIS HEAD [THAT SAME DAY] by beginning again the counting of his Nazaritehood (i.e., he resumes his Nazaritehood).

AND THE PRIEST SHALL PREPARE ONE FOR A SIN-OFFERING. The reason why a Nazirite must bring a sin-offering when the days of his Naziritehood are fulfilled has not been explained. In accordance with the plain meaning of Scripture, [it is because] this man sins against his soul on the day of completion of his Naziritehood; for until now he was separated in sanctity and the service of G-d, and he should therefore have remained separated forever, continuing all his life consecrated and sanctified to his G-d, as it is said, And I raised up of your sons for prophets, and of your young men for Nazirites, where Scripture compares the Nazirite to a prophet, and as it is written, All the days of his Naziritehood he is holy unto the Eternal. Thus [when he completes his Naziritehood and returns to his normal life] he requires atonement, since he goes back to be defiled by [material] desires of the world.

"One as a sin-offering and one as a burnt-offering" — the secret [in this] is what the Sages said: "the reward of a transgression is another transgression." "Over the soul" — this refers to a dead soul, as in "and make a cut for a soul" (Lev. 19:28). For if it meant that he had sinned against his own soul, Hashem would not command him to return to his naziriteship.

מאשר חטא על הנפש, “for having sinned by reason of the dead.” (He should have made sure that the building he entered did not contain a corpse) The Torah had specifically warned him not to enter such a building in verse 6 of our chapter.

And he shall atone for him from what he sinned against the soul. [This means] that he was not careful from the impurity of the dead. Rabbi Eliezer HaKappar says [it’s] because he afflicted himself by abstaining from wine (Nazir 3a). And this is wondrous, because one should wonder about his words: if he was commanded to bring two turtledoves because he afflicted himself from wine, why does he bring this atonement specifically after he became impure from the dead? Furthermore, the scripture called him holy, so how can Rabbi Eliezer say that he is called a sinner? It seems that even Rabbi Eliezer agrees that throughout the duration of his nazirite vow, he is called holy and not a sinner, for he is a nazirite of God. However, if he becomes impure from the dead, his law is and the first days shall fall because his nazirite [vow] has become impure. From this point forward, the accounting [of his nazirite days starts anew], and it is retroactively revealed that the first days were not included in the nazirite vow, and it is as if he afflicted himself from wine during those days for no reason, outside the time of his nazirite vow. Therefore, he is called a sinner regarding those first days, in which he is nothing but one who afflicted himself without [the holiness of] a nazirite vow and sanctity. And this is a precious interpretation. However, I have room to interpret the words of Rabbi Elazar in a different way, and to say that this is why the nazirite is called a sinner, because if he were a completely straightforward and honest person who managed his affairs with good judgment, he would not need to make vows and become a nazirite. For who would prevent him from conducting himself with abstinence and avoiding excesses without a vow? And from the fact that he needed to bind himself with naziritehood, this indicates that he knows within himself that he has no restraint over his spirit, therefore he jumps and swears against the evil inclination, and in this he causes himself pain, because every thing which is vowed causes his desire for it to become even stronger. For this reason, anyone who makes vows is called a sinner, as they learned (Nedarim 77b) from the verse If you refrain from making vows, there will be no sin in you (Deuteronomy 23:23), because he provokes the evil inclination within himself, and they say to him: “Is it not enough for you what the Torah has forbidden to you in the prison of the evil inclination? Do not add to it!” For in everything the Torah has forbidden, even though it has caused the provocation of the evil inclination, as it is said that it provokes Israel more than the nations (Sukkah 52a), nevertheless, the two will stand against it: the Written Torah and the Oral Torah. However, one who transgresses by adding [to the Torah’s commandments], is increasing the provocation of the evil inclination. Perhaps with this addition, the Torah will not continue to provide strength to stand against it, because its power is only in matters that the Torah causes, for “the One who wounds is the One who heals.” Thus, this Nazirite is called a sinner from two perspectives: One, because before his Nazirite vow, he was like a breached city with no restraint to his spirit, until he needed to bind himself with the Nazirite vow; and two, because while being a Nazirite, he provokes the evil inclination within himself. Nevertheless, he shall be called holy if he stands against it, because all the schemes of the evil inclination are to breach his fence. And this is what [the Torah] says: And if someone dies near him suddenly (Numbers 6:9). This teaches that all this is the work of Satan, who arranged for this impure incident to happen to him suddenly, by accident and unknowingly, in order to defile his consecrated head. Therefore, he needed atonement for having sinned regarding the soul. And [he sinned by] afflicting himself from wine, because through this affliction he caused the evil inclination to be provoked within him and brought about circumstances to defile his Nazirite status. Furthermore, he needed atonement for afflicting himself and for not serving God with joy but with suffering. Joy indicates the perfection of the deed, as it is written: And see if there is a way of pain in me (Psalms 139:24). For if he had been joyful in his Nazirite vow, he would have been more careful to avoid impurity. But since he was not careful about it, this indicates that he was not happy with this Nazirite vow, and in this the evil inclination found a place to carry out whatever it planned to do. But the righteous shall rejoice and exult before God and shall be glad with joy (Psalms 68:4). The letter bet in with joy [b’simcha] means “in the merit of joy,” that they served God with joy as stated.

מאשר חטא על הנפש, “for having sinned through contact with a corpse ”The incident is best compared to Judges 20,16: קולע אל השערה ולא יחטיא, “warriors accurate sling a stone and not to miss a hair that their arrow was aimed at.” Just as there are no warriors that are so accurate, so for a person when imbibing wine, it is impossible not to be affected by its effect on the body. In our verse, the Nazir, if he had been more circumspect would not have exposed himself to contact with a dead body. [His guilt, of course, was not intentional. Ed.]

And he shall consecrate before Hashem the days of his naziriteship, and he shall bring a lamb in its first year as a guilt-offering; and the former days shall be void, because his naziriteship was defiled.

'והדר לה את ימי נזרו AND HE SHALL CONSECRATE IN HONOUR OF THE LORD THE DAYS OF HIS NAZARITEHOOD — i.e., he shall again count the days of his Nazaritehood as though for the first time (i.e., he must begin the counting of the period of his Nazaritehood from the first day, not resume it at the point where it was broken off). והימים הראשנים יפלו AND THE DAYS THAT WERE BEFORE SHALL BE LOST — i.e. shall not come into account.

"And he shall consecrate to Hashem the days of his naziriteship" — all the days he vowed to be a nazirite he now begins to count anew. "For his nazirite consecration was defiled" — because he vowed only that the days be complete, one after the other, with nothing cutting through or interrupting between them.

And this is the law of the nazirite: on the day when the days of his naziriteship are completed, he shall bring him to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting.

יביא אתו means, he shall bring himself. This (the word אתו) is one of the three cases of את with a pronominal suffix which R. Ishmael explained thus (as being reflexive and not accusative pronouns). Similar to it is (Leviticus 22:16): והשאיו אותם עון אשמה “and they will bring אותם the iniquity of trespass”, i.e., “and they will bring upon themselves”. Similar to it is, (Deuteronomy 34:6) ויקבר אתו בני “He (Moses) buried himself in the glen”, (Sifrei Bamidbar 32; cf. Rashi on Leviticus 22:16 and Note thereon).

"Upon its completion" (מְלֹאת) — this is the verbal noun of a root belonging to the alef-class, following the pattern of the heh-class [verbs ending in heh], as in "when you [refrained from] calling us." "He shall bring him" — meaning he shall bring himself, as in "and the shepherds fed them"; or it means the priest shall bring him by compulsion, to offer his sacrifice.

יביא אותו, our sages in B’rachot 8 have already explained this to mean that the Nazirite is to bring himself, as it were. Normally, when someone is being prepared for a higher status than that he had attained in the past, such a person is being “brought” to his new assignment by someone superior to himself. This is why the person afflicted with tzoraat is brought to the Temple. Here. the Nazir presents himself in the Temple instead of being brought, i.e. presented by someone superior. Compare Leviticus 14,2 concerning the צרוע, and concerning the Sotah where the Torah had also written in Numbers 5,15 that the husband was to bring his wife to the priest. Similarly, a Jewish servant, asking to extend his term of service beyond the original 6 years, is brought to the door post to have his ear pierced by his master. (Exodus 21,6). Contrary to all this, the Nazirite at the end of his term who will once more begin to shave the hairs of his face and head, thus becoming “a new man,” brings himself. The reason is simple. There is no one on a higher spiritual niveau who could act as the one “bringing” him, i.e. presenting him.

וזאת תורת הנזיר, “and this is the law of the Nazirite” up to now the Torah had dealt with problems a Nazirite encounters when he violated the terms of his vow; now it proceeds to inform us about the procedures he must follows upon successful completion of the terms of his vow.

ביום מלאת ימי נזרו, “on the day the days of his vow of abstinence are complete.” The Torah did not reveal a reason why the Nazir has to bring this offering on the day he completes his vow of abstinence. There is no other instance when the Torah legislated a sin-offering to be brought by a person unless he had first committed an error. In this instance the Torah speaks about these offerings in anticipation of the day when the vow is complete. Why would a person who had undertaken to abstain from the pleasures of this world be required to bring an offering in order to expiate? Behold this matter is wondrous and novel. Likewise our Sages, may their memory be blessed, said in Tractate Nazir, "It is a novelty that the Torah created about the nazirite." Nachmanides offers an interpretation in line with the plain meaning of the text. He views the very conclusion of the period of abstinence as a decline in the spiritual standard which the Nazir had imposed upon himself at the time he undertook the vow. It would have been appropriate for the Nazir to maintain the spiritual “high” he had achieved indefinitely, for the rest of his life. Seeing that the Nazir limited the time period during which he would try to be so “frum,” he has to bring this offering. He needs atonement. Even when we accept the reasoning of Nachmanides the uniqueness of this legislation remains unaffected by it. Unless we resort to a kabbalistic interpretation we will not truly understand this legislation. I have already pointed out that the very concept of the Nazir’s abstention reflects that he sought to attach himself to the celestial counterpart of the attribute רחמים. Now the same person desires to descend from this level of sanctity. The Torah, while demanding these sacrifices from the Nazir, does not mention that he is in need of forgiveness. There is no mention of the word atonement either. The idea of the sacrifice is to marshal celestial forces and to do this in preparation of returning to “normal” life and the permissible indulgences which are part of such a life. The very fact that the three offerings brought by the Nazir consist of burnt-offering, peace-offering, and sin-offering shows that we are not dealing with a sin. If there were a need to confirm this the fact that the Torah calls that person a Nazir even after he has completed the procedure and drunk wine again (verses 21-22) shows that the Torah does not view him as having been guilty of a spiritual come-down.

יביא אותו, the principal part of his sacrifice, as will be explained.

And he shall bring his offering before Hashem: one unblemished lamb in its first year as a burnt-offering, and one unblemished ewe-lamb in its first year as a sin-offering, and one unblemished ram as a peace-offering,

"A lamb" (כֶּבֶשׂ) — a male, as is the rule for every burnt-offering. "And a ewe-lamb" (וְכַבְשָׂה) — a female, as is the rule for every sin-offering. "And a ram for peace-offerings" — [it expresses] joy that he has fulfilled what he vowed.

כבש אחד, כבשה אחת, ואיל אחד, “one male sheep, one female sheep, and one ram;” the three animals represent the three major aspects of a Nazirite’s vow, i.e. to abstain from any grapebased drink, including any part of the untreated fruit; to let the hair of his head grow without trimming any of it; to avoid contact with dead bodies which would defile his ritual purity. In order to underline this symbolism even further, there are three stages concerning how the parts of the ram which serves as a “peaceoffering” and that are not burned up on the altar are to be consumed. One part is to be “consumed” by the altar; one part is to be consumed by the priest or priests on duty at that time; and the third part by the owner and his family, i.e. the Nazirite himself. ואיל אחד תמים שלמים, this last offering reflects the Nazirite’s joy at having been able to complete term of his vow successfully. Prior to offering this ram, the Nazirite must place his body weight on the animal as a gesture of dedicating it as a sacrifice, and the parts assigned to the priest or priests, must undergo the customary waving. These parts are to be given to the priests while still raw.

and a basket of unleavened bread — loaves of fine flour kneaded with oil, and unleavened wafers anointed with oil — and their meal-offerings and their libations.

ומנחתם ונסכיהם AND THEIR MEAL-OFFERING AND THEIR DRINK-OFFERINGS — i.e., those of the burnt-offering and the feast-offerings (mentioned in v. 14; no חטאת except that of a leper requires נסכים). Because these (the עולה and the שלמים of the Nazir) are included in (come under) the general rule governing עולה and שלמים and have here been excepted to become subject to a new matter, viz., that they require an offering of bread together with them. Scripture restores them to the general rule by expressly stating that they require drink-offerings (and meal-offerings) as is the law of עולה and שלמים in general (Sifrei Bamidbar 34). חלות מצות ורקיקי מצות (the word מצות must be connected with חלות too) PIERCED CAKES UNLEAVENED AND WAFERS OF UNLEAVENED BREAD — ten of each kind (Menachot 77b).

And the priest shall bring them before Hashem, and he shall perform his sin-offering and his burnt-offering.

"His sin-offering" — [the sin-offering is mentioned first here] because it was mentioned last [in the prior listing at v. 14], for that is the practice of the [Hebrew] language.

And the ram he shall offer as a peace-offering before Hashem, together with the basket of unleavened bread; and the priest shall perform its meal-offering and its libation.

זבח שלמים לה' על סל המצות [AND HE SHALL OFFER THE RAM] FOR A SACRIFICE OF A FEAST-OFFERING UNTO THE LORD, WITH THE BASKET OF UNLEAVENED BREAD — i.e., he shall slaughter the feast-offerings with the intention of sanctifying the bread by this very act (cf. Menachot 46b). את מנחתו ואת נסכו [THE PRIEST SHALL ALSO OFFER] ITS MEAL-OFFERING AND ITS DRINK-OFFERING — those of the ram.

And the nazirite shall shave the head of his naziriteship at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting, and he shall take the hair of the head of his naziriteship and place it upon the fire that is beneath the pot of the peace-offering.

וגלח הנזיר פתח אהל מועד AND THE NAZARITE SHALL CLIP [THE HAIR OF THE HEAD OF HIS NAZARITEHOOD] AT THE ENTRANCE OF THE APPOINTED TENT — One might think that he must cut his hair in the forecourt (for it states at the entrance of the appointed tent)! Surely, this would be treating the forecourt in a contemptuous manner! But the meaning is: the Nazarite shall cut his hair after the feast-offerings had been slaughtered of which Scripture writes, (Leviticus 3:2) “and he shall slaughter it פתח אהל מועד” (cf. Sifrei Bamidbar 35; Nazir 45a). אשר תחת זבח השלמים [AND HE SHALL TAKE THE HAIR … AND PUT IT IN THE FIRE] WHICH IS UNDER THE SACRIFICE OF THE FEAST-OFFERINGS — i.e., under the pot in which he boils it (the שלמים); because the feast offerings of the Nazarite were boiled in the forecourt since the priest had to take “the shoulder” after it had been boiled (cf. vv. 19 and 20) and to wave it before the Lord (cf. Nazir 45b).

"Hair" (שֵׂעָר) — [the word] takes two vowel patterns.

וגלח הנזיר, “and he shall shave of the hair of his head; from what we have read earlier in verse 5, we knew that this “shaving” is performed by a razor. Seeing that Jews are forbidden to shave by razor, this hair now has to be burned, [so that none of it can be used or enjoyed as the proceeds of a sin must not be enjoyed]. If it were not burned, innocent people not aware of its origin might use it for their own benefit. ונתן על האש, “and place it on the fire;” because it has been sanctified, as stated in verse 5 above. This is why it was fit for burning so as not to become an unwitting obstacle to people not knowing its origin. אשר תחת זבח השלמים, “which is under the peace offering.” Seeing that it is holy, it needs to be burned under the pot in which the meat of that offering is being boiled.

And the priest shall take the cooked foreleg from the ram, and one unleavened loaf from the basket, and one unleavened wafer, and he shall place them upon the hands of the nazirite after he has shaved his naziriteship.

הזרע בשלה [AND THE PRIEST SHALL TAKE] THE SHOULDER בשלה — i.e. after it has been boiled.

"When it is cooked" (בְּשֵׁלָה) — the meaning is "and it [the shoulder] is cooked." "The shaving of his consecrated hair" — here is a sign that "holy" (קָדֵשׁ) refers back to the shoulder (הַזְּרוֹעַ), since that is the main subject; or it refers back to the entire waved portion.

הזרוע, “the shoulder;” the word זרוע is a feminine noun as we know from Exodus 6,6: זרוע נטויה, “an outstretched arm.” This is why, when describing its adjective, the Torah wrote: בשלה, and not מבושל. Compare the words: כבידה, heavy, or שמנה, fat, or אבילה, in a state of mourning.

And the priest shall wave them as a wave-offering before Hashem; it is holy for the priest, along with the breast of the wave-offering and the thigh of the separation-offering. And after this the nazirite may drink wine.

קדש הוא לכהן IT IS HOLY FOR THE PRIEST — The cake, the wafer and the shoulder are a heave-offering for the priest. על חזה התנופה means: BESIDES THE BREAST AND THE SHOULDER which are due to him (the priest) from all feast-offerings, there is to be added to the portions assigned to the priest in the case of the Nazarite’s feast-offerings, this shoulder. Because the feast-offerings of the Nazarite are included in the general rule governing feast-offerings but were excepted to become subject to a new matter — the setting apart of the shoulder for the priest — it became necessary to restore them to the general rule of שלמים by expressly stating that they are subjected also to the setting apart of the breast and thigh as are שלמים in general (Sifrei Bamidbar 37).

על חזה התנופה ועל שוק התרומה, “together with breast of waving and the thigh of heaving;” in other words: together with the breast and the thigh.

This is the law of the nazirite who vows his offering before Hashem on account of his naziriteship, apart from what his means can provide. According to his vow that he vows, so shall he do, in accordance with the law of his naziriteship.

מלבד אשר תשיג ידו [THIS IS THE LAW OF THE NAZARITE WHO HATH VOWED, AND OF HIS OFFERING UNTO THE LORD …] BESIDES THAT WHICH HIS HAND SHALL GET — This implies that if he vowed: “Behold, I take upon myself to become a Nazir under the condition that I shall cut my hair (i.e. that I shall make the final ceremony) in connection with the offering of a hundred burnt offerings and a hundred feast offerings” (whilst really there is prescribed a single offering of each kind) — then כפי נדרו אשר ידור כן יעשה ACCORDING TO THE VOW WHICH HE HATH VOWED MUST HE DO, but “in addition to (על) what is prescribed in the usual law of the Nazarite”. In addition to it, but not omitting any of it — so that if he vowed: “Behold, I take upon myself to become a Nazir five times under the condition to cut my hair (i.e. to make the final ceremony once) in connection with the offering of only these three animals (i. e. one עולה, one שלמים and one חטאת, whilst after the elapse of each term an עולה and a שלמים offering are due), I do not read with reference to him (i.e. I do not apply to him the words): “According to the vow which he vowed, so must he do” [— but he must bring each of the offerings five times as prescribed] (Sifrei Bamidbar 38).

THIS IS THE LAW OF THE NAZIRITE WHO VOWETH HIS OFFERING UNTO THE ETERNAL FOR HIS NAZIRITEHOOD, BESIDES THAT WHICH HIS MEANS SUFFICE. The correct meaning of the verse is as if it had said: “This is the law of the Nazirite who voweth a vow of the Nazirite; his offering unto the Eternal for his Naziritehood shall be besides that which his means suffice.” Or it may mean: “This is the law of the Nazirite, and this is the law of his offering unto the Eternal for his Naziritehood.” It is possible that He is saying: “This is the law of the Nazirite, that he vow his offering unto the Eternal for his Naziritehood,” meaning to say that he should not specify a particular animal as an offering, but should vow: “I shall bring an offering for my Naziritehood,” or he should simply say: “I am a Nazirite,” for as soon as he vowed to be a Nazirite, it is [already] binding upon him as a vow [to bring] the offering mentioned [in the Torah]. He reverts and states, besides that which his means suffice, [meaning to say] that if he is rich he may [voluntarily] increase his offerings [i.e., the burnt-offerings and peace-offerings, as will be explained, but not the sin-offering]; and according to his vow which he voweth concerning these offerings, whether [he is] rich or poor, so he must do after the law of his Naziriteship — so that he may bring more, but not less [than what Scripture prescribes for him to bring]. He mentioned this in order to teach us that if the Nazirite was rich and wants to bring several offerings, or if he vowed at the beginning: “I am a Nazirite and I shall bring a thousand burnt-offerings and peace-offerings,” then he must bring them all on the day of completion [of his time as a Nazirite], and he may not drink wine until he has offered them all up, for they all constitute the law of his Naziriteship. It is possible that [the latter half of the verse means]: “besides that for which his means suffice so must he do according to his vow which he voweth.” This He mentioned because it is usually the rich who vow in this way.

The meaning of "beyond what his means afford" — he is obligated to give according to his wealth and also according to the number of days of his vow, whether many or few. The passage of the priestly blessing was placed adjacent to the passage of the nazirite because, having completed the law of the nazirite — who is holy — [Scripture] then mentions the law of the priests, who are likewise holy. The deniers said that this blessing was what the priest would recite for every one who brought a meal-offering, and the passage was placed here on account of "according to what the one who vowed can afford." But the truth is as transmitted by the Sages, and the proof is "And Aaron lifted his hands toward the people and blessed them" on the eighth day — and this passage was written because Hashem commanded at the erection of the Tabernacle that Aaron bless the people. There it is written "lifting of the palms" (nesi'at kappayim), for kappayim [palms] are like yadayim [hands], only "hands" is the more general term.

על נזרו, “on account of the vow which he shall pledge.” Compare this construction with: Leviticus 1,4: לכפר עליו, “to be acceptable to atone for him.” Compare also Psalms 44,23: כי עליך הורגנו, “since for Your sake we have been killed, etc. ”מלבד אשר תשיג ידו, “beside that which he can afford.” This is also a construction which we find elsewhere, as for instance in Leviticus 23,38: מלבד מתנותיכם, “beside your gifts.”

זאת תורת הנזיר, “this is the law with respect to the Nazirite.” Concerning the offering the Nazir has to bring at the end of the term of his vow of abstinence, Nachmanides writes that the unusual words קרבנו אשר ידור לה', ”his offering that he is to vow to Hashem,“ may mean that he must not have any additional thoughts in mind when bringing the prescribed offering, and the word זאת in the above verse may draw our attention to the fact that the relative value of the offering is not determined by his financial ability, as it is in the case of many sinners where the Torah settles for even a meal-offering when the party obliged to bring the offering is in financial difficulties, but is a fixed standard, involving three mammals and a meal-offering. He may even be expected but not be obligated to add another animal or two corresponding to his ability. It is also possible to explain our verse as saying that if at that time the Nazirite simply says: “this is my offering for my vow,” this is sufficient, seeing that as soon as he had made the vow to become a Nazirite he had been aware that at the end of the term he would have to bring the offerings in question. מלבד אשר תשיג ידו, “apart from what he personally is able to afford.” This is an encouragement to the wealthy Nazirite not to be content merely with the offerings specified in the Torah. על תורת נזרו, “in addition to the law governing his abstinence.” Here the Torah spells out once more that whereas it is commendable for the Nazirite at the end of his vow to voluntarily add more offerings, it is forbidden to present less than the offerings stipulated in our text. It may also mean that if this Nazirite had vowed at the beginning of his period of abstinence that he would offer X number of sacrifices at the conclusion of his term, then all these sacrifices fall due on the day his period of abstinence comes to an end. He would therefore not be allowed to drink wine until he had offered all these sacrifices. The above coincides largely with Rashi’s interpretation.

מלבד אשר תשיג ידו, if he had vowed to offer a number of sacrifices these have to be offered in addition to the mandatory offerings demanded by the Torah. This word מלבד is familiar to us in this context from Leviticus 23,38.

And Hashem spoke with Moses, saying:

Speak with Aaron and with his sons, saying: Thus shall you bless the children of Israel; say to them:

אמור is infinitive. Similar forms are זכור (Exodus 20:8), שמור (Deuteronomy 5:12); in O. F. disant, (English = saying). אמור להם SAYING UNTO THEM — so that all of them should hear the blessing (it would not suffice to pronounce the blessings upon the Israelites in their absence; cf. Sifrei Bamidbar 39). אמור is written plene (with ו after the מ) thus indicating: ye shall not bless them hurriedly and hastily, but devoutly and with a whole heart (Midrash Tanchuma, Nasso 10).

SPEAK UNTO AARON AND UNTO HIS SONS, SAYING: THUS YE SHALL BLESS. I have already mentioned in Seder Vayehi Bayom Ha’shemini that He commanded Aaron to lift up his hands towards the people and bless them on that day [i.e., the eighth day of the initiation of the priests, which was the day of the final erection of the Tabernacle], and here He commanded Aaron and his sons to do so throughout the generations, and He explained what the blessing was with which they are to bless them. He mentioned this blessing in connection with the setting up of the Tabernacle [discussed in the next chapter], for there the Eternal commanded the blessing, even life forever, just as our Rabbis have said: “In the Sanctuary [the priests pronounced the blessing] using the Divine Name [i.e., the Tetragrammaton], but in the provinces by a substitute Name. In the Sanctuary they pronounced it as a single blessing, but in the provinces [it was pronounced] as three blessings” [the people responding “Amen” to each of the three verses which comprise the priestly blessing], for the blessing in the Sanctuary was singled out by being pronounced with the Proper Name of G-d [i.e., the Tetragrammaton].

דבר אל אהרון ואל בניו, "speak to Aaron and his sons, etc." Why did the Torah repeat the word לאמור in this verse? Perhaps the Torah was afraid that the blessing described here was something that the priests could pronounce but were not obligated to pronounce. The Torah wanted to make sure that although the word כה at the beginning might be construed as something to be performed voluntarily, i.e. "if you bless you shall keep to this formula," the priests should know it is a positive commandment to bless the Israelites. The repeated use of the word לאמור may also mean that the commandment did not only apply to Aaron and his sons but to the priests in all subsequent generations. There is also an implied compliment to the priests here, i.e. the priests are privileged by G'd to transmit His blessing to the people by pronouncing G'd's wording.

דבר אל אהרן, “speak to Aaron, etc.;” the reason why the paragraph dealing with the priestly blessing has been inserted at this juncture, is that they are holy, just as the Nazirite was holy, though only for a limited period, and not from birth. (Ibn Ezra) ואל בניו, “and to his sons;” this teaches that not only the High Priest bestows blessings on the people but also the ordinary priest. כה תברכו, “thus you shall bless:” during the first year while Jewish people were encamped in the same spot (around Mount Sinai) the Canaanites did not become aware of them. But during the second year when they had been counted according to tribes, and each knew his family tree, and they had been assigned flags, trumpets, etc., in order to organise their journeys properly, the Canaanites surrounding them had taken note of them. At this point the Canaanites had first begun to fear the approaching armies of the Israelites, [though they were not really an army as they travelled with their whole families. Ed.] The Israelites, aware of the likelihood of military encounters in the near future, now felt in need of blessings by the priests. They worried of being guilty of sins that would make them casualties in the coming confrontation. The fact is that immediately after the death of Aaron, when the Canaanites felt encouraged to attack them, they captured some prisoners. (Numbers 21,1) [Seeing that encounter happened to the next generation after almost 40 years, it is hard to see the relevance at this point. Ed.] כה תברכו, “thus you shall bless!” You are to be in a standing position when conferring these blessings.” This is spelled out more clearly in Deuteronomy 27,12: אלה יעמדו לברך, “these are to stand in order to pronounce blessing!” אמור להם, “say to them!” this teaches that the reader in the synagogue has to call upon the priests to begin their blessings. This also teaches that the priest is not guilty of failing to carry out this commandment until he has failed to respond to the reader’s call to do so. [He can leave the Sanctuary prior to this. Ed.]

כה תברכו את בני ישראל, “thus you shall bless the Children of Israel.” According to the plain meaning of the text the words mean: “in this style you are to pronounce blessing.” We have the same expression כה being used in Numbers 8,7 where the Torah describes the procedure of purifying the Levites. A Midrashic approach based on Tanchuma Nasso 9: The words כה תברכו mean that G’d gave those words to the priests as a gift so that they would have the power to bless the Israelites. Seeing that in addition to this gift G’d would assign to the priests another 24 gifts from the Israelites themselves, with this gift they would dispose of 25 gifts corresponding to the numerical value in the letters of the word כה. In Sotah 38 we are taught additionally that the word כה contains a number of restrictions within it. 1) The language in which the priests are to bestow the blessing must be Hebrew. 2) It requires further that the blessing be administered while the priests are standing. 3) The priests are to raise their hands while performing the rite of blessing the congregation. They are to face the recipients of the blessing face to face. The blessing has to be pronounced loudly and the priests (in the Temple) were to pronounce the Ineffable Name while intoning the blessing. Some of these rules are based on Leviticus 9,22: “Aaron raised his hands and blessed the people.” The words ושמו את שמי, “they are to place My Name,” is the source of the Ineffable Name being invoked. The use of the expression את שמי in our verse and the same expression in Deut 12,5 לשום את שמו, serve as the basis for this halachah. Just as in Deut. the Ineffable Name was to be invoked in the Temple, the subject matter of the verse, so here too the priestly blessing with the Ineffable Name is used only in the Temple. A kabbalistic approach: The word כה in the sequence כה תברכו את בני ישראל, represents the tenth attribute (emanation), the one always employed by the prophets when they convey messages they have received from G’d to deliver to the Jewish people. [The normal wording we would have expected is כתברכו, “when you bless.”] The extra letter ה is reminiscent of the last letter ה in the tetragram, a letter we have several times described as the attribute of Justice in its tempered form. In Psalms 148 David began with the words הללויה, i.e. half the Ineffable Name, and then he continued with הללוהו במרומים, “praise Him in the celestial regions”; here he supplied the other two letters of the tetragram seeing that on earth at that time (and in our time) only half of G’d’s name is effectively king. The priests are asked to emulate Avraham in a sense. When G’d said to Avraham כה יהיה זרעך, “thus will be your descendants,” and Avraham realised that he did not have a claim to such a promise but that the comprehensive nature of this promise must be an act of חסד on the part of G’d, he responded: ויחשביה לו צדקה, “he (Avraham) considered this a charitable act by G’d.” The priests when blessing the people and directing G’d’s largesse in their direction are also to have in mind the last letter ה in the tetragram which is used to guide the fates of the Jewish people containing an element of the attribute of חסד within it. אמור להם, “saying to them:” The word אמור, though an infinitive, is spelled here with the letter ו, something quite unusual. The extra letter ו which stretches the word, makes it longer, is to suggest to the priests that they must not relate to the duty to bless the people as a burden imposed upon them by G’d, something they want do be done with as soon as possible, in a hurry. On the contrary, they should bless the people with all the concentration they are capable of. Another reason for the letter ו in the word אמור here is that the numerical value of the word including the digit 1 for the word itself is 248. The blessing is absorbed by all 248 limbs/organs of a person. If only one organ were left out this could be the heart upon which all other organs are so vitally dependent. The mystical element in the number is that it corresponds to the Shechinah which rests on the palms of the priests hidden there as if it were the heart of the heavens reciting the blessing. Both celestial and terrestrial forces receive their blessings from the לב השמים, the heart of the heaven. Another concept alluded to not only in the spelling of the word אמור but in the choice of that word instead of תאמרו, or something similar, is that the Torah insists by using this word in the spelling we have as an impersonal word, an infinitive. This is a hint that the spelling out audibly of G’d’s Ineffable Name may be at the discretion of the priests when too many people in the audience are scoffers, non-believers, non-observant and the like. At such times and places it is better for the priests to “swallow” these words so that they are not heard by the audience evoking the reverse of the “peace” which is the purpose of the blessing. In fact we read in Kidushin 31 that as of the time when the פריצים, deniers of the faith, became numerous, the priests made it a practice to swallow the name of G’d inaudibly. The priests based themselves on the dual command here. On the one hand, the Torah writes כה תברכו, “(only) thus shall you bless,” and on the other hand, the Torah deliberately leaves aspects of the blessing indeterminate by adding the words אמור להם, “saying to them.” The meaning is that the people deserving of the blessing would find it effective, the others would not. Had the Torah written the word in an imperative such as תאמרו, the inescapable conclusion would have been that even non-deserving people would be bound to become beneficiaries of that blessing. [When Yitzchak took a great chance of mortally offending his father in order to prevent the indiscriminate power to bless or to curse to be given to Esau these were precisely the thoughts that motivated him. Ed.] I have already mentioned in my commentary on Exodus 17,12 that when the priest extends his ten fingers heavenward he signals to G’d that he desires to sanctify himself with all the sanctities embodied in the ten emanations, asking for the abundance of G’d’s goodness to be channeled toward his creatures on earth by means of the conduits G’d has available for that purpose, including all the disembodied spirits. The word את in the sequence כה תברכו את בני ישראל includes the angels in this directive. The words אמור להם is sort of a repetition to make certain all these disembodied angels both above and below certain layers of the heavens are included. Another lesson to be derived from the extra letter ו in the word אמור is that the chazzan is to call upon the priests to intone the blessing by pronouncing the word כהנים and to pronounce each word separately before the priests repeat it in chorus. The fact that the word אמור is singular followed by the plural להם suggests that a single individual is to call upon the priests (pl.) to proceed in such a fashion. This is also why when there is only one priest in the congregation the call כהנים is omitted and is not substituted for by the word כהן in the singular. The very fact that halachah deems it necessary to “brief” the priests word for word reflects that this is the practice in the celestial regions where the angels who act as priests in the celestial Sanctuary are following the same routine. This is the mystical dimension of Sotah 38 that כל כהן המברך מתברך, that every priest performing the commandments of blessing the people is himself the subject of a blessing. The Talmud means that the priest ministering on earth will in turn become the recipient of blessings from the source, the essence of Mercy in the heavenly regions; this is the meaning of what G’d promised Avraham in Genesis 12,3: “I will bless those who bless you.” In other words, the priests down here are patterning themselves after known role models in the celestial regions. Here on earth the sequence is as follows: The blessing is channeled to the congregation through the chazzan wearing a white talit through the priests pronouncing the blessing facing the congregation. Still another meaning embodied in the words אמור להם, is that the priests are to bless the people when the people tell them to, i.e. להם. This is why Onkelos translates the words as כד יימרון להון “when they say to them.” Once the priests have been asked by the congregation to intone the blessing and they fail to do so they violate a positive Biblical commandment (Sotah 38). As long as they have not been asked to intone the blessing they are not guilty of such a violation. Concerning this subject we find in the Jerusalem Talmud Berachot 8,5 that when Rabbi Shimon ben Pazzi felt weak he hid behind a pillar so that he would not be perceived as not complying with the congregation’s invitation to intone the blessing on the plaform. Rabbi Eleazar, on the other hand, preferred to leave the Synagogue altogether if he felt he could not perform the ceremony. Both Rabbis were too frail to raise their arms in the prescribed manner. [Apparently at that time individual invitations were issued to the priests to ready themselves to perform the blessing. Ed.] According to Rabbi Yitzchak the elder, a Tossaphist, any priest who is not married is not to ascend the platform and raise his hands in pronouncing this blessing. I believe there is a sound basis for his opinion. The reason is that man is not complete without a wife, he lives a joyless existence and the blessing to be effective must emanate from someone filled with joy. As an incomplete human being [by choice? Ed.] he is neither the recipient of blessings nor a suitable dispenser of such. This [voluntary state of being single, Ed.] was enough reason for the sons of Aaron Nadav and Avihu to be deserving of the penalty they incurred. By not marrying they caused thousands of girls to remain unmarried, each one hoping they would be chosen as a wife for them and meanwhile refusing other offers of marriage. By the time Nadav and Avihu died these girls were too old to attract suitors so that they remained spinsters for the remainder of their lives. I have already mentioned in my commentary on Leviticus 15,33 that this is one of the six opinions offered by the sages who elaborated on the nature of these two priests’s sins. This is also what lies behind the words of Psalms 78,63: “fire consumed their young men and their maidens remained unwed.” The reason that the young men were burned by fire was that on their account so many girls remained unwed. According to that particular view Nadav and Avihu were killed by heavenly fire as they were not worthy to pronounce the blessing over the Jewish people having themselves remained remiss in the performance of such a basic commandment. When a priest conveys the kind of blessings which include the principle of enjoying married life with a spouse, how could he be suitable to do this unless he himself had set a suitable example?

“Thus shall you bless the children of Israel.” He linked the blessings to the laws of the Nazirite because wine establishes a blessing for itself but not for others. On the contrary, it brought wailing and curse to the world according to the opinion that the Tree of Knowledge was a grapevine (Sanhedrin 70a), and it also caused a curse for Adam and Eve, for the descendants of Noah, and for Lot. The word thus [koh] refers to the preceding section, indicating that the priest who blesses should not be intoxicated with wine when standing to bless Israel, for he needs to pronounce the blessings as it is written say to them. One is considered drunk if he cannot speak before the king, therefore they need to be like Nazirites. With the word thus [koh], all blessings are sealed to be like the blessing of Abraham who was blessed with “koh” as it is said So [koh] shall your descendants be (Genesis 15:5). This is why Balaam wanted to nullify from Israel the blessing of “koh” as it is said Stand here [koh] by your burnt offering, while I meet [the Lord] there [koh] (Numbers 23:15). They said in the Midrash: “You with your offerings will nullify the blessing of So [koh] shall your descendants be, and I will nullify the blessing of Thus [koh] shall you bless, etc.” And with this I have seen to resolve, what is concluded in Rabbati (Balak 20:7) on the verse perhaps I will be able to strike them (Numbers 22:6) — just as one deducts a twenty-fourth part from a se’ah, so did he seek to deduct a twenty-fourth part from the 600,000 of Israel, which is 25,000. And one may ask: What advantage would he gain through all his effort by deducting 25,000 from 600,000? Furthermore, why did exactly 24,000 fall? Rather, it is certain that he only sought to nullify from Israel the blessing of “koh” (thus/so [shall you bless], the numerical equivalent of which is 25), and he thought that the falling of 25,000 would affect the blessing of “koh” and by nullifying this blessing, he would then have an opportunity to curse them. But it did not succeed for him, because he could only harm them up to the number 24 [thousand], approaching but not including the number 25, because the blessing of koh tevarchu [thus shall you bless] protected them, preventing the curse from taking effect any further. And this is a precious interpretation. And perhaps the number koh (25) is in merit of the 24 priestly gifts, and with the priestly blessing, there are 25 priestly gifts in whose merit the blessing falls upon Israel. And if you ask what benefit the priests receive from this blessing that it should be counted among all the priestly gifts, Scripture teaches us And I will bless those who bless you (Genesis 12:3). If so, through this blessing, they too will receive blessing. (See Chullin 49a: And I will bless them — it was taught that Rabbi Ishmael says, etc., the priests bless Israel, and the Holy One, blessed be He, blesses the priests). Furthermore, the formula of the blessings is May the Lord bless you, and our Sages taught (Bamidbar Rabbah 11:5) that this refers to material possessions, and this blessing returns also to the priests because when Israel has abundant possessions, their priestly gifts increase — the tithes and offerings — for if not, from where would they take them, from the threshing floor or from the wine press? “Say to them.” From here our Sages learned (Sifrei 6:143) that the prayer leader prompts the priests word by word with the format of the blessings. The reason for this is that the prayer leader is the intermediary who first draws down the flow from the source of blessings and pours them upon the heads of the priests. For he first says to the priest May the Lord bless you in order to make the priest first a vessel filled and full with God’s blessing, and afterward when the priest says to Israel May the Lord bless you, he is pouring from a full vessel into an empty vessel. But if the priest was not blessed first, he would be pouring from an empty vessel into an empty vessel. This explains what is written I will bless those who bless you, and those who curse you I will curse (Genesis 12:3). It should have said, “and I will curse those who curse you” in the same manner as it says I will bless those who bless you. Rather, the meaning is that I bless the priest who blesses Israel first, in order to make the priest a full and overflowing vessel, so he can pour God’s blessing from a full vessel onto Israel. But regarding curses, it is not appropriate to say this. Rather, after he curses them, I will curse him, and not before. Therefore it says, They shall place My name upon the children of Israel, and I will bless them first (see Chullin 49a), by means of the prayer leader first saying to the priest, May the Lord bless you.

כה תברכו, “Thus shall you bless, etc.” The fact that the Torah wrote the details of the priests’ blessing to the Jewish people immediately after the passage dealing with the Nazirite is to be understood as an oblique reminder that the priests are not to bless the people while they are intoxicated, i.e. after having drunk even a single glass of wine. The paragraph following this short passage deals with the erection of the Tabernacle, seeing that was the first occasion when the priests were commanded to publicly bless the people. They were commanded as of now to always perform this duty, and when the blessing was pronounced on the holy grounds of the Tabernacle/Temple they would invoke the Ineffable Holy Name of Hashem while doing so. When the priests bless the people outside the Temple they may not use that name. When performing the blessing in the Temple, they would recite it as a single blessing, i.e. as if it was all a single verse, whereas when doing so outside the Temple the blessing would be divided into three verses although the total number of words would be the same and identical. The blessing when pronounced inside the Sanctuary is directed exclusively at the Holy Name of Hashem. [there is no one around to answer “Amen” in the Sanctuary. Ed.] אמור להם, “saying to them.” The reason why the word אמור is uncharacteristically spelled with the letter ו is that the priests actually bestow six blessings in these verses, i.e. יברכך, ישמרך, יאר ה פניו, יחונך, ישא ה' פניו, ישם לך שלום.

כה תברכו את בני ישראל, you shall not bless them in the manner people bless one another, wishing that certain individuals will experience blessings of a certain kind. Instead, the priests are to make it plain that they pray to G’d to extend His blessings to the people whom the priests face at the time. Verse 24 makes clear that as a result of this prayer to G’d by the priests on behalf of those whom they wish to bless, G’d does in fact extend this blessing. Verse 27 also makes clear that what the priests are instrumental in doing is to bestow G’d’s name on them, not their own. G’d goes on record saying that He would accept the priests’ prayer.

May Hashem bless you and keep you.

יברכך [THE LORD] BLESS THEE — that thy property may increase (Sifrei Bamidbar 40). וישמרך AND MAY HE GUARD THEE — that no robbers come upon thee to take away thy property. For a human being who gives a present to his servant cannot guard him against everybody, and if a band of robbers attack him and take it away, what pleasure can he, then, derive from this present?! The Holy One, blessed be He, however, both gives and guards — against everybody (Midrash Tanchuma, Nasso 10). Many Midrashic interpretations are given of this verse in the Sifrei (Sifrei Bamidbar 40).

THE ETERNAL BLESS THEE, AND KEEP THEE. By way of the Truth, [the mystic teachings of the Cabala], the meaning thereof is because “the blessing” comes from on High [downward], and the meaning of shmirah [“keeping” — and He ‘keep’ thee] is that you should “keep” it, like Remember [the Sabbath-day], and ‘Shamor’ (Keep) the Sabbath-day. Furthermore, the Great Name will make His countenance that watches over you shine [upon you]. And so did the Rabbis say in the Sifre: “Rabbi Nathan says: [The Eternal make His countenance shine upon thee.] This is a reference to the light of the Divine Presence.” And He be gracious unto thee, that you may find favor in His sight, similar to that which the Rabbis have said [that when G-d completed the creation of the world He said]: “My world! My world! Would that you will find favor in My sight all the time [as at this moment]!” Furthermore, the Eternal lift up His countenance to the heavens above and give thee peace — all in your house. And so the Rabbis said in the Sifre: “[And He give thee peace.] Rabbi Nathan said: This is a reference to the peace of the kingdom of David.” So shall they put My Great Name upon the children of Israel, and I will bless them, for it is I that speaketh, behold, here I am, and peace.

"May He bless you" (יְבָרֶכְךָ) — with additional life and wealth. The meaning of "and may He guard you" — that He guard the addition [of blessing] so that another does not rob what He has added.

יברכך, with material wealth. The reason this is the first of the blessing is explained by our sages in Avot 3,17 אם אין קמח אין תורה, “if there is no flour, (no economic base) a Torah environment cannot flourish.” וישמרך, and protect you from those who steal material possessions.

יברכך וישמרך. "May the Lord bless you and preserve you." The order of 1) the blessing, 2) preserving the people who received the blessing, means that the degree of שמירה, protection, will be commensurate with the extent of the blessing previously received. Moreover, there is an implication here that the blessing will be so comprehensive that G'd has to make a special effort that all of it will be preserved. The wording יברכך may also imply that there should be no negative side effects to this blessing such as is referred to in Deuteronomy 8,12: "lest you eat, become sated etc…. and become haughty, forgetting the Lord your G'd."

יברכך ה' וישמרך, “may the Lord bless you and preserve you.” According to the plain meaning of the text the blessing, i.e. basically any blessing, is that the recipient enjoy the blessing he enjoys already and that these blessings be increased both qualitatively and quantitatively and that they be enduring. The ability to enjoy the continuity of such a blessing can be conferred only by G’d, not by an earthly ruler. The latter may dispense largess but cannot ensure that the recipient keeps getting the benefit. Our sages (Tanchuma Nasso 10) illustrated this point by means of a parable when they said: when a mortal king resident in Rome has a friend who resides in Syria, he inquired after the friend’s whereabouts, visited him and left a gift of 100 bars of gold. The friend loaded a couple of donkeys with the gold intending to move to Rome with his new-found wealth. On the way he was attacked and had everything he owned stolen from him. It was clearly beyond the king’s power to protect all his friends against robbers world-wide. A Midrashic approach: The word יברכך implies being blessed with material wealth; the word וישמרך implies that the recipient is preserved so that he can perform G’d’s commandments as a result of the material wealth G’d has blessed him with. The words יאר ה' פניו אליך , mean that G’d may grant you the kind of children who are full of Torah knowledge. The Midrash bases this insight on Proverbs 6,25 כי נר מצוה ותורה אור, “for like a single candle lighting a narrow area is the performance of a single commandment, whereas the performance of the Torah in all its aspects provides great light.” Furthermore, the same words include the blessing that “from you will stem priests who in turn will illuminate the Altar in the Temple,” as it is written in Maleachi 1,10 ולא תאירו מזבחי חנם, “you will not light up My Altar without recompense.” We have another verse supporting this point in Leviticus 6,5 where the Torah writes: “and the fire on the Altar will never be extinguished.” Concerning the precise meaning here of the word ויחונך, Rabbi Chiyah the great taught that it means that the Lord will make His camp near you (from the root חנה). Another approach holds that the word promises that G’d will make prophets descend from your loins; that school of thought bases itself on the verse in Zecharyah 12,10 ושפכתי על בית דוד ועל יושבי ירושלים רוח חן ותחנונים, “I will pour out over the house of David and over the people of Jerusalem a spirit of pity and compassion.” These are the ingredients which we think of when we think of prophets. Still another approach sees in the word ויחונך a reference to grace in the sense of being held in esteem, being appreciated. The word appears in that meaning in Esther 2,17 where we are told that all who saw Esther, including the king, immediately formed this positive opinion of her. On the final verse, ישא ה' פניו אליך וישם לך שלום, “may the Lord raise His countenance toward you and grant you peace,” we must compare the meaning of this expression to Deut. 10,17 אשר לא ישא פנים ולא יקח שוחד, “Who does not play favourites nor accept bribes.” How can we reconcile these two apparently contradictory concepts of asking the very same G’d whom we applaud for not playing favorites in Deut. 10,17 to play favourites with the entire Jewish people in the priestly blessing formulated by the same G’d? [The word ישא has to be translated then as “will forgive.” Ed.] If the victim of an unfavorable decree has repented before the decree has been sealed his repentance is effective. If not, such as in Deut. 17,10 it is not. A second approach to the first verse. The word יברכך implies being blessed with sons, the word וישמרך implies being blessed with daughters who require additional protection and safeguarding on the part of their parents. This is reflected in the promise in Psalms 121,5 ה' שומרך, ה' צלך על יד ימינך, ”the Lord is your guardian; the Lord is your protection, at your right hand.” The verse יאר ה' פניך אליך describes the element life which is associated with light, such as in באור פני מלך חיים, “in the light of the king’s face there is life” (Proverbs 16,15). The word appears in a similar connotation in Psalms 67,2 אל-הים יחננו ויברכנו יאר פניו אתנו סלה, ”May G’d be gracious to us and bless us; may He illuminate us with His face, Selah.” Concerning the last verse of the blessing(s)ישא ה' פניו אליך , this means that “in every direction you turn may G’d arrange for you to find peace and harmony and be protected from all unpleasant happenings.” This is a form of G’d’s personal benevolent supervision of our fates generally referred to as השגחה פרטית. We find the reverse of this threatened by G’d as part of threats of the prophet Isaiah when he quoted G’d as saying: “I am going to turn My watchful eye away from you (G’d refusing to hear our prayers)” (Isaiah 1,15). In Berachot 20, the sages derive from the wording ישא ה' פניו אליך that although when you look at this verse superficially you get the impression that it contradicts the verse where G’d says that He does not play favorites, using the word לא אשא פנים this way is misleading. All that is meant is that G’d will lift our countenances, i.e. respond to our first having raised our face to Him in prayer and supplication. This is not what is called “playing favorites,” i.e. using double standards. This idea is even reflected in the text of the Torah. We read in Deut. 8,10: “you will eat and be satisfied and you will bless the Lord your G’d.” Assume that father, mother, and children assemble around the family table to consume their daily meal and they find that there is not enough to sate even one of them, never mind all of them. They will turn their faces to G’d, and each one will hold back and help himself to a minimum making sure there will be enough to go around. When G’d observes such conduct, He will most certainly be affected by it and make sure that in the future this family will not be lacking for anything. This is also the deeper meaning behind the famous line in Song of Songs 3,7 that Solomon’s bed was watched over by 60 guards. Did then Solomon need these guards? Was he in danger of attacks by assassins, by terrorists? What is meant by these words is that the priestly blessing which comprises 60 letters was engraved on the edge of Solomon’s bed. Another explanation of this line in Song of Songs: the bed mentioned in Song of Songs is not that of King Solomon at all. It is the “bed” of He who owns peace, i.e. G’d. The “bed” is the Holy Temple; The reason the Temple is compared to a bed is that just as the function of the bed is for those on it to practice the commandment of increasing the human population of the world, so it was a propensity of all the furnishings in the Temple to increase and multiply. We have a glimmer of this in Kings I 8,8: “the staves (attached to the Holy Ark) were growing longer so that they would wind up being visible in the Sanctuary in front of the Shrine. A verse indicating something similar is found in Chronicles II 3,6 where Ezra describes the gold of the Temple as זהב פרוים, understood to mean “gold which had the capacity to multiply, which produced fruit.” A third scriptural verse which at least alludes to this phenomenon as far as the materials used for the Temple is concerned is found in Kings I 7,2 where the entire Temple is described as בית יער הלבנון, "The Lebanon Forest House,” suggesting that just as a forest and its trees keep growing, so the Temple would keep expanding. The next words in that verse in Song of Songs, i.e. כלם אחוזי חרב, “all of them trained in warfare, i.e. “swordsmen,” refer to names of the Lord. The words following i.e. איש חרבו על ירכו, “each one with his sword on his loins”, beg the question what the ירך, the seat of a man's semen has to do in this verse. The answer is that these words describe that even if Solomon (symbol of the Jewish people) had frightening dreams at night, dreams during which he (they) felt in immediate danger, thanks to the encouragement derived by the proximity of all these names of G’d the people would rouse themselves in the morning, go to the Synagogue, and shake off any fear experienced during the night in a nightmare. They would find the effects of the dream dissolve without any further ado. In order to provide the Jewish people in the desert with this remedy, G’d instructed Aaron and his sons to bless the people in the way the Torah specified. G’d said: “in the past when I needed to extend a blessing to My creatures I would bless Adam and Chavah, as we know from Genesis 1,28 ‘G’d blessed them saying be fruitful and multiply etc.’” G’d blessed Noach when the latter was in need of such as blessing as we know from Genesis 9,1: “G’d blessed Noach and his sons.” He blessed Avraham as we know from Genesis 25,1: “G’d had blessed Avraham with everything.” From Avraham’s time on, G’d changed His mode of administering blessings directly and assigned the task to Avraham saying to him: “become a source of blessing” (Genesis 12,2). Avraham responded by siring two sons, Ishmael and Yitzchak. Avraham failed to bless either of them. In order to understand Avraham’s failure to bless either one of his sons, let us illustrate this by means of a parable. A king who owned an orchard entrusted it to a profit-sharing farmer to look after it. The orchard in question contained within it right in the center two trees, one of which contained the elixir of life whereas the second one contained a poison which would kill. The farmer was in a quandary, saying to himself that if he watered both trees he would further the growth of the deadly tree. If, on the other hand, he did not water either tree he would cause the elixir of life to die out. He decided to serve out his contract and to leave the decision of what to do to the king, the owner, after he himself had bowed out of the picture. The “king” in the parable is G’d. The “orchard” is earth. The “farmer” is Avraham, and the two trees, the elixir of life and the poisonous one, are Yitzchak and Ishmael respectively. Avraham said to himself: “if I bless Yitzchak, Ishmael will demand to be blessed also. Seeing that he is wicked, I cannot do that. I prefer to pass and not exercise my discretion. After all, I am only flesh and blood, not all-knowing like the Lord.” What happened? After Avraham had died we find that the Torah records that G’d bestowed the blessing He had first given to Avraham on his son Yitzchak after his father had died (Genesis 25,11). Yitzchak in turn blessed Yaakov. Yaakov blessed all his twelve sons as we read in Genesis 49,28 “all these (aforementioned ones) are the twelve tribes of Israel and this is what he had said to them when he blessed them.” From that point on, G’d said to Moses: “the blessings are at your (Israel collectively) disposal. The priests shall be the ones to administer them (Based on Tanchuma Nasso 9).

May the Lord bless you and keep you. There are many opinions regarding the explanation of the text of these blessings, each person interpreting them according to their understanding. In the Yalkut (6:750), you will find many opinions which can be sought from their original sources, and there is no need to elaborate on mentioning them. However, I will state a general approach: Since all the blessings begin with the letter Yod (which is the Hebrew numeral 10), whose hidden numerical value equals 10, just like its revealed value (because the hidden part of Yod is Vav (6) and Dalet (4)), this teaches us that all blessings are doubled, with part of them directed to the body and part to the hidden soul, for both come in the number 10. As our Sages said (Niddah 31a): “There are three partners in the creation of a person: Their father provides the white substances from which come sinews, bones, brain in the head, fingernails, and the white of the eye — that’s five. Their mother provides the red substances from which come skin, flesh, blood, hair, and the black of the eye — that’s five. And the Holy One, blessed be He, places within them 10 spiritual elements: spirit, soul, facial features, eyesight, hearing, speech, walking ability, knowledge, understanding, and intellect.” All these 20 parts receive blessing through the priest raising his 10 fingers, so that from each finger a blessing flows to a physical revealed part and to a spiritual hidden part. The three Yods [in the three blessings] total 30, corresponding to the 60 letters in all the blessings, about which they expounded (Yalkut Shimoni, Song of Songs 3:986) on the verse Sixty mighty men surround it (Song of Songs 3:7). And the three Yods totaling 30 are connected to the standard period of Nazirite vows being 30 days, suggesting that through the merit of Nazirite abstinence, one will merit these blessings. And as a hint, these three blessings can be explained in the way that I explained above in Parashat Yitro (19:4) regarding the Midrash (Song of Songs Rabbah 3:21) which says that initially the Holy One, Blessed be He, called Israel “daughter,” and afterward “sister,” and afterward “mother.” For all this indicates authority, since initially He called her [Israel] “daughter” because presumably the father rules over the daughter, and he is above and the daughter is below. Therefore, it says, May the Lord bless you and guard you — that you will draw down an overflow of blessings from above, because He is your guardian, and every guardian is above the one being guarded, as it says When you lie down, it will guard over you (Proverbs 6:22). And there are many similar verses. Afterward, He called her “sister,” similar to Him. Regarding this level, it says, May the Lord make His face shine upon you — when you stand before Him face to face, like the way the moon receives its light from the sun when standing opposite it. And afterward, He called her “mother” who rules over the daughter. Just as the righteous person rules through fear of God, and just as the daughter’s eyes are raised toward the mother, so may the Lord lift up His face toward you, as it were. I will not elaborate further on these matters, but they are straightforward for those who find knowledge.

יברכך ה' וישמרך, “may the Lord bless you and keep you safe;” you should be blessed with material wealth, and be able to fulfill many of the commandments of the Torah. The word שמר is interpreted in the same way in Exodus 12,17, ושמרתם את המצות, “you are to observe the commandments.” (compare Mechilta there) An alternate interpretation: יברך, “may He bless you with sons;” וישמרך, “and may He bless you with daughters,” (who require much more protection.)

May Hashem cause His Shechinah to shine toward you and have mercy on you.

יאר ה' פניו אליך THE LORD MAKE HIS FACE SHINE UPON THEE — i.e. May He show thee a friendly (more lit., smiling) countenance — a beaming countenance. ויחנך means, May He grant thee good favour (חן) (Sifrei Bamidbar 41).

"May Hashem make His face shine upon you" — like the sense of "in the light of the king's face is life"; the meaning is: whatever you seek from Him, at the moment you seek it He will make His face shine — meaning He will receive you and be willing to fulfill your request at once. "And may He be gracious to you" — if you seek Him in a time of distress, He will be gracious to you. It is also possible that "and may He be gracious to you" means He will grant you your request, like the sense of "show me favor" (חָנּוּנִי), and "those whom God has graced" (אֲשֶׁר חַנַּן אֱלֹהִים) — both from the root חנן.

יאר, may He grant light to your eyes to see and appreciate all the wonderful things G’d has done and keeps on doing. You should become aware that all that you achieve is due to His blessing.

יאר ה׳ פניו, "May the Lord make His face shine upon you." This means that there should not be a "curtain" dividing between Israel and their Father in Heaven. ויחנך, "and be gracious unto you." Please refer to what I have explained on the meaning of the word חן in my commentary on Genesis 39,21, "G'd was with Joseph and he caused him to enjoy grace, etc."

יאר ה׳ פניו, “May the Lord make His face shine;” The meaning is that the priest expresses the wish that G-d will grant the listeners life, as per Proverbs 16,15: באור פני מלך חיים, “in the light of the King’s face there is life.”

May Hashem turn His face toward you and grant you peace.

ישא ה' פניו אליך THE LORD LIFT UP HIS COUNTENANCE UPON THEE — This expresses the idea: May He suppress His anger (Numbers Rabbah 11:7)).

"May Hashem lift His face toward you" — the opposite of "I will hide My eyes from you"; the meaning, as I have explained, is that wherever you turn, His face will be lifted toward you. "And may He grant you peace" — like the sense of: no evil shall touch you — neither a stone, nor a wild beast, nor an enemy.

ישא ה' פניו אליך, giving you a vista of the world to come which awaits you. The line is similar in essence to what David said in Psalms 36,10 כי עמך מקור חיים באורך נראה אור, “with You is the fountain of life; by Your light do we see light.” It also reflects the statement of our sages in B’rachot 17 that in the world of the future the righteous sit with their crowned heads and enjoy the radiations of G’d’s glory. וישם לך שלום, the serenity of peace which is equivalent to an infinite, unbroken and undisturbed existence, not tainted by punishment, something which is a feature of life in the world to come.

ישא ה׳ פניו אליך, "May the Lord lift up His countenance upon you, etc." This means that in the event the deeds (sins) of the Israelites have erected some kind of barrier between them and G'd that G'd should lift this barrier and remove it. וישם לך שלום, "and may He grant you peace." The meaning of the word "peace" or "harmony" is the reverse of every kind of separation and fragmentation. Anyone examining the word carefully realises that the concept it represents is the foundation our world is built upon, the force which ensures that the "higher" world and our "lower" world can co-exist successfully. This is the mystical dimension of the words: "and they shall put My name upon the children of Israel," and the concluding words "and I will bless them."

ישא ה׳ פניו אליך, “may the Lord lift up His countenance upon you!” In order to understand this properly it will help to look at Samuel II 2,22: ואיך אשא פני אל יואב אחיך “ how will I be able to look your brother Yoav in the face? [Avner had been trying to save Asa-el, his pursuer’s life, and Yoav’s brother by begging him to take advantage of the opportunity to escape from him. Ed.] The priests, in their blessing, ask G-d to welcome the members of the congregation with a welcoming and joyful heart.

“May the Lord lift His countenance to you.” In the tractate Rosh Hashanah (17b), they raised a contradiction: It is written (Deuteronomy 10:17), who does not show favoritism [literally: lift faces], yet it is written, May the Lord lift His countenance to you, etc. The Tosafot wrote that this is not a contradiction because here it speaks of God’s face, whereas there it speaks of the face of a person, meaning that God will not show favoritism to someone great. It seems that the questioner’s understanding is that any “lifting of faces” indicates faces that are worthy of falling or being downcast, and they are lifted as an act of lenience, as it is said (Genesis 4:7-8), Why has your face fallen? If you do well, there will be uplift [literally: lifting]. They will be lifted. And when it says later who does not show favoritism, it means that the face of the sinner, which deserves to fall like the face of Cain and his companions, God will not lift them up from their fall; rather, the one who is falling will fall, the one who deserves to fall will be pushed down and unable to rise (Psalms 36:13), for the Holy One, Blessed be He, does not forgo anything. But here it says, May the Lord lift His countenance to you. By saying lift, this implies that even in times of anger when Israel deserves to have faces hidden from them — and anyone who hides his face is as if they are pressed down below, so to speak — nevertheless, the Holy One, Blessed be He, says that as an act of lenience, “I will lift My face to you” so that they will be directed toward your face. For the term “lift” is only used for that which deserves to fall or deserves to be pressed down. This presents a contradiction between one instance of lenience and another. And in the Midrash (Numbers Rabbah 11:7), the Holy One, Blessed be He, said: “How can I not show favor to them? I said in the Torah (Deuteronomy 8:10), And you shall eat and be satisfied and bless, but they are stringent [to recite the blessing] even for [eating] an olive’s bulk or an egg’s bulk.” That is to say, “Behold, I have received a blessing from them, and a blessing I will not withhold. How can I not return blessing to them with generosity in exchange for the blessing that I take from them, also with generosity?” And what is written [elsewhere], who does not show favor (Deuteronomy 10:17) — that refers to all the nations who do nothing with generosity. But here it says, May the Lord lift up His countenance to you — specifically to you, because you act with generosity and are stringent with yourself. So I too will lift My countenance to you with generosity. And even this generosity is not in every matter, but is precisely measure for measure: just as you are stringent [to recite the blessing] for an olive’s bulk even without being satisfied, as if you were satisfied, so will I be generous to you that even if one eats a little, it will be blessed in his innards. And concerning this it says, and grant you peace. As it is written (Psalms 147:14), He who makes your borders peaceful, He will satisfy you with the fat of wheat. And similarly it says (Leviticus 26:5-6), You shall eat your bread to satiety, and you shall dwell securely in your land. And I will grant peace in the land. This explanation is correct and clear in understanding this Midrash.

ישא ה' פניו אליך, as G’d had promised in Leviticus 26,9 where He specifically phrased it thus, saying ופניתי אליכם “I will turn to you, etc.” As far as G’d having also said that He is by nature not showing favour, preference, to anyone, (Deuteronomy 10,18) this was in respect of forgiving one man’s sin while being unforgiving towards other sinners. In other words, those who have shown that they hate G’d by committing these sins will be treated in accordance with their deserts. But, those who have demonstrated their love for G’d by observing His commandments will certainly warrant that He in turns shows them His appreciation, i.e. He turns to them. In Leviticus there G’d adds that He will multiply the Jewish people, I.e. as a result of turning to them with His goodwill.

And they shall place the blessing of My name upon the children of Israel, and I will bless them.

ושמו את שמי AND THEY SHALL PUT MY NAME [UPON THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL] — i.e. they shall bless them by the Proper Name of God (i. e. when uttering the blessings they shall use the Tetragrammaton and no substitute for it) (Sifrei Bamidbar 43). ואני אברכם AND I WILL BLESS THEM — i.e. I will bless the Israelites: I will give My approval to the priests’ blessings (lit., I will agree with the priests). — Another explanation of “And I will bless them” is: “And I will bless the priests (Chullin 49a).

"And they shall place My name" — like the sense of "to place His name there," meaning they shall be sanctified through the Name. Or its meaning is: when they invoke My name upon them — for in each of the three verses [appears] the glorious and awesome Name. "And I will bless them" — it is possible that the mem of אֲבָרֲכֵם refers to the priests who are blessing, or it refers to Israel; the meaning being: if they [the priests] bless them, I will bless them — meaning I will fulfill their blessing. In my view, the mem of אֲבָרֲכֵם refers to all of them together, both priests and Israelites.

ושמו את שמי, “they (the priests during their blessing) are to place My name, etc.;” the fact that in each of the verses comprising the priests” blessings they pronounce the most holy name of the Lord, makes plain that they only act as conduits, and that the blessing stems directly from the Lord. The Torah, in order to underline this concept, adds: ואני אברכם, “and I will bless them.” G-d will bless the Israelites in response to the priests invoking this blessing. The priests are never to take credit for having blessed the people, as the blessing stems from the Lord whose messengers they are.[There are commentators who understand the above words to mean that if and when the priests bless the people as prescribed, G-d, in turn will bless them. (Rashi). Ed.]

ושמו את שמי על בני ישראל, “let them place My Name upon the Children of Israel.” G’d meant that as soon as the priests would mention G’d’s name as part of the blessing, He would bless them all, Priests, Levites, and Israelites, seeing that G’d’s name appeared in each of the three verses constituting the formula of the blessing. A Midrashic approach, elaborating on the procedure. The first verse contains three words; the second verse contains five words The third verse contains seven words. The symbolism alluded to is that the first verse represents the three patriarchs, i.e. G’d will remember their merits and the covenants made with them and bless their offspring; the second verse is an allusion to the five Books of the Torah; seeing that the Torah itself had been given to the people in recognition of the merits of the patriarchs. The seven words in the last verse are an allusion to the seven heavens, i.e. the priests ask the heavens to transmit these blessings. I have found in the Jerusalem Talmud Sanhedrin 1,2 that when the court meets to deliberate if to add an extra month to the current year, the deliberations commence with three judges, are expanded in the presence of five judges, and are concluded in the presence of seven judges. The reason given for this is the composition of the three verses of the priestly blessing and their increasing number of words per verse, i.e. 3-5-7. These numbers "3-5-7” are featured in the Book of Kings as respective people occupying positions of influence at the palace of Tzidkiyahu. The former are known as שומרי הסף, then there were חמשה מרואי פני המלך, “five officials who have access to the king on a regular basis.” Finally, there were the שבעה רואי פני המלך, a group of seven people who were free to see the king at any time. (Jeremiah 52,25). [These various people were taken hostage by the Babylonians as a symbol representing men of authority in the Jewish state.] Nevuchadnezzar executed them. It seems reasonable therefore that when deliberating on the authority to add a month to the calendar year these numbers should be symbolized in the successively larger number of judges required for these deliberations. Ed.] A kabbalistic approach: the order of these blessings, in ascending order, parallels the thoughts entertained by the priests during the offering of the communal sacrifices which also were marked by their ascending order. The priests commenced the blessings daily at the conclusion of the sacrificial service. This is the meaning of Leviticus 9,22: “he (Aaron) blessed them; then he descended from having performed the rites of the sin-offering, the burnt-offering, and the peace-offering. The proper way to understand the sequence of what the Torah writes here is: “he blessed them after he had descended (from the Altar);” at the time he had been offering the three types of inaugural sacrifices mentioned he had concentrated with his mind first on the last letter ה in the Ineffable Name. I have explained already at that point that the allusion to this is found in the ה appended to the word המזבח, the Torah writing instead המזבחה. (Leviticus, 1,9). From concentrating on that last letter ה in the tetragrammaton, Aaron had proceeded to concentrate on the letter ו in that name. From that level he concentrated in totally pure thought on the letter י in the Holy Name. The principal purpose of the Priest’s concentration while performing the part of the service allocated to him is to “draw” or attract G’d’s רצון, “goodwill,” from His Holy Attributes as expressed by His names from the celestial regions to the terrestrial regions. This is the mystical dimension of the three verses in the Torah here comprising the formula of the blessing. To summarize: the term שמור in the blessing refers to the deflection of negative influences from Israel; the term יאר ה' is already more positive, representing the קו האמצעי of the attributes pointing to פנים, symbolizing Mercy. Finally, the last blessing which begins with the word ישא, is a reference to the higher emanation בינה, and proceeds once more with פניו, this time referring to combating the fear of a confrontation with the attribute of Justice, culminating with the promise of שלום, the all-embracing harmony, based on pure חסד, undiluted loving kindness, resulting in a feeling of peace and harmony which knows no fear. In this way the three verses build on each other and each holds out greater promise of bliss than the one before it. According to the tradition I have the three blessings combine within them all ten emanations. However, according to Nachmanides these blessings proceed in the opposite direction, in a descending order... [I have decided to omit this as the interested reader can study this in Nachmanides’ commentary. Ed.] ... I have mentioned already in connection with my commentary on the wording אמור להם, that this wording gives the priests leeway to pronounce the tetragrammaton audibly when the setting is appropriate, or to “swallow” these words sotto voce when the priests do not consider the audience as one deserving to hear that name of Hashem. The combined three tetragrammatons mentioned in the three verses of this blessing are what is known as the שם המפורש של י'ב, "the spelled out name of 12 (3 times the four letters of the tetragrammaton).” In the Sefer Habahir (111) the author discusses the way the name is to be pronounced, slightly differently vocalised in each verse. [Seeing the commentators on the Sefer Habahir do not agree on the precise way this is to be done, and nowadays we do not have the option to pronounce the tetragrammaton in any form whatsoever, I do not find it useful to pursue this at this point Ed.] The author adds that he received another form of vocalization from German Kabbalists based on the verse in Joshua 2,15 ההרה הרודף ירדוף which parallels the vowel pattern to be used when the priests utter the tetragrammaton in each of these verses. [I believe that the reason the author finds the subject so fascinating is presumably that he was aware of a tradition that he who does indeed pronounce the שם המפורש של י"ב not only correctly but with totally pure thoughts, cannot have any of his prayers denied. Basically, what the author teaches us is that contrary to what we might have thought the forbidden pronunciation of the tetragrammaton does not only refer to a single vowel pattern but to several. This is a warning not to become guilty of experimenting with anything close to the forbidden vowel pattern. Ed.] Our author uses the vocalization of the letter י in the words before the tetragrammaton in each verse as clues to the appropriate pronunciation of the respective tetragrammaton. Thus, for instance, the vowel (semi-vowel) under the י in יברכך is different from the vowel kametz under the letter י in the word יאר before the second time the Torah writes the tetragrammaton. This is different again from the vowel chirik under the letter י in the word ישא before the final time the tetragram appears in the blessings. Here the author quotes at length from Sefer Habahir items 107-109 demonstrating how the 72-lettered name of Hashem is arrived at by means of what kinds of permutations. In the process he demonstrates that the attribute גבורה presides and its influence predominates over the צורות, “images” which Kabbalists perceive as surrounding the celestial throne from the left to the right; in other words commencing with the domain perceived as Gavriel’s to the domain perceived as Michael’s with the קו האמצעי in the middle, representing what we call אמת. The author also points out that the three verses contain respectively 15, 20, and 25 letters each and that the 60 letters arrived at in such an ascending number, each verse having five letters more than the preceding one alludes to G’d’s presence having extended over past, present, and future, but that His presence is also felt in an ever increasing measure starting with the past progressing into the future. Going back to the verse in Song of Songs 3,7 about the 60 armed guards surrounding Solomon’s bed, the author tries to explain why the author of that Book commenced with G’d in the present rather than in the past, progressing to the future via the present. He explains that Solomon wanted to make the point that none of G’d’s “years” belong exclusively to the past. One cannot speak of, nor must one think of G’d as “in the past,” something which has ceased to exist at least partially. Such thoughts are reflected in Psalms 102,28 ואתה הוא ושנותיך לא יתמו, “but You are forever the same, and Your years will never end.” This is why we include this concept in our daily prayers when we say ה' מלך, ה' מלך, ה' ימלוך לעולם ועד, “the Lord is king, the Lord was king, and the Lord will remain king forever more.” [Note that the author of the liturgical poem also begins with the present when referring to G’d, not with the past. Ed.] You are also perfectly familiar with the fact that this is not the only verse in Psalms in which this chronologically peculiar sequence is applied to G’d. There are numerous such verses. You may be tempted to retort that in Psalm 10,7 the psalmist refers to G’d as in the future asking G’d למה ה' תעמוד בחוץ, “why O Lord will You stand aloof, etc.,” whereas in verse 16 in that same psalm the author declares that ה' מלך that G’d is king, i.e. “He is never aloof.” Remember that you will not find that David had referred to the kingdom of heaven at all in the preceding nine Psalms. Whatever is said in this psalm then cannot be viewed as a reversal of a previous policy of the author. In fact, you will find something confirming what we said in psalm 20, which is the tenth after psalm 10 where G’d is first mentioned as king at all, that David appeals here for the first time to the Lord, the King, to grant victory, ה' הושיעה המלך יעננו ביום קראנו, “O Lord, grant victory! May the king answer us when we call.” The timing of this plea is significant as this “tenth” hymn is dedicated to the “tenth emanation" כתר, “crown,” the one symbolizing G’d as King. If we find on occasion that David relates to G’d’s kingship in the order “past-present-future,” he took his cue from Moses himself who made this sequence part of the song he composed after crossing the sea of reeds when he recorded ה' ימלוך לעולם ועד, “the Lord will rule forever more.” (Exodus 15,18).