The sublime connection between our parsha and its haftarah (Naso)
The haftara to Parshat Naso is lifted from Sefer Shoftim/Judges 13:2-25. Haftarot, as we all know, are excerpts from the Neviim (Prophets) that echo in some manner the week’s Torah reading.
Parhsat Naso, which contains the largest number of verses in the Torah (total: 176) alternates between the mostly excruciatingly boring and the wildly exotic and interesting.
At first reading one might think that the haftarah is meant to echo the yawn one gets from reading most of Parshat Naso. We are introduced to a very bland, undistinguished and childless couple. She has no name. His name is given as Manoah (which I believe is descriptive rather than being his actual name.) Manoah hails from the Tribe of Dan who was the son of one of Yaakov’s concubines, Rachel’s maidservant Bilha. Not a hint of yihus (pedigree) here.
For no apparent reason, God decides that it is this barren couple who will see the birth of an extraordinary son, Shimshon/Samson who will grow up to rescue the Israelite People from the Philistines. An annunciation to this effect is made to Mrs. Manoah by a man she encounters, although we are not told where.
This stranger instructs the future mother to raise her child as a Nazir, one who abstains from all wine and who lets his hair grow wild. It is, in effect, this finial to the haftarah which ostensibly links it to our Torah reading in which the laws of Nazir comprise one of the two breaks in the otherwise grand yawn that is Parshat Naso.
Surely the sages who chose the haftarah readings could have found a more scintillating Nazir-related excerpt for our Parsha. Perhaps even one that relates more to the adult Shimshon and his heroism. And yet they chose Shoftim 13:2-25.
Hence it behooves us to dig more deeply into these verses and find, perhaps, a deeper connection to Parshat Naso, one that would make Mr. and Mrs. Manoah far more compelling, and explain why they – of all people – were chosen to parent Shimshon HaGibor.
No doubt the two most interesting chapters in Parshat Naso are Bamidbar 5 and 6. Thee first deals with the topic of Sotah, a wife suspected of infidelity by a suspicious and jealous husband, and her subsequent trial by ordeal at the hands of a Kohen. The second deals with the topic of Nazir, when one voluntarily withdraws from society in order to achieve a greater degree of sanctity by abstaining from wine and by letting his or her hair grow wild.
The choice of Shoftim 13 as our haftarah is considered obvious at it informs us of the as yet unborn Shimshon being raised from birth as a Nazir. As well, Mrs. Manoah is told in Verse 7 to also become a Nazir.
We can stop right here — fully satisfied that the haftarah is linked to the Torah portion of Naso.
But we could well ask, why would the choice of haftarah be based on the topic of Nazir alone — which, with 21 verses — is certainly significant — while ignoring the topic of Sotah which — with 20 verses — is hardly any less significant and a far more likely scenario? After all, jealousy and suspicion are nearly universal impulses, whereas the desire to avoid wine and grow dreadlocks is not exactly commonplace.
But if we examine Shoftim 13:6-7 more carefully we realize that it is indeed all about Sotah, or rather the inverse of Sotah.
We are dealing here with a situation that is a classic setup for jealousy and suspicion. A long-barren wife wanders alone and comes home to tell her husband the wildest tale:
וַתָּבֹ֣א הָאִשָּׁ֗ה וַתֹּ֣אמֶר לְאִישָׁהּ֮ לֵאמֹר֒ אִ֤ישׁ הָֽאֱלֹהִים֙ בָּ֣א אֵלַ֔י וּמַרְאֵ֕הוּ כְּמַרְאֵ֛ה מַלְאַ֥ךְ הָאֱלֹהִ֖ים נוֹרָ֣א מְאֹ֑ד וְלֹ֤א שְׁאִלְתִּ֙יהוּ֙ אֵֽי־מִזֶּ֣ה ה֔וּא וְאֶת־שְׁמ֖וֹ לֹא־הִגִּ֥יד לִֽי׃
The woman went and told her husband, “An agent of God came to me; he looked like an angel of God, very frightening. I did not ask him where he was from, nor did he tell me his name.
וַיֹּ֣אמֶר לִ֔י הִנָּ֥ךְ הָרָ֖ה וְיֹלַ֣דְתְּ בֵּ֑ן וְעַתָּ֞ה אַל־תִּשְׁתִּ֣י ׀ יַ֣יִן וְשֵׁכָ֗ר וְאַל־תֹּֽאכְלִי֙ כּל־טֻמְאָ֔ה כִּֽי־נְזִ֤יר אֱלֹהִים֙ יִֽהְיֶ֣ה הַנַּ֔עַר מִן־הַבֶּ֖טֶן עַד־י֥וֹם מוֹתֽוֹ׃ {פ}
He said to me, ‘You are going to conceive and bear a son. Drink no wine or other intoxicant, and eat nothing impure, for the boy is to be a nazirite to God from the womb to the day of his death!’”
If ever there was a classic scenario that would unleash an avalanche of suspicion in a husband this is it. If ever there was a man who would be dragging his ‘Sotah’ off to the kohen, that man would be Manoah. This story is paradigmatic Sotah.
Except that it is not.
Not only does Manoah not accuse his wife of deception, he takes her at her word and partners with her in accepting the stranger’s annunication – a stranger whom, even after he meets him, he views only as a mortal.
Now let us note, parenthetically, that neither Manoah nor his nameless wife are in a state of panic over their childlessness. Unlike Sarah and Rachel and Hannah, we see no evidence of desperation, no arguing with God, no blaming of husbands, no camping out in sanctuaries, no wild promises if only God would answer Mrs. Manoah’s prayers.
This is our first hint that the future parents of Shimshon are in fact a highly unusual couple, one that is preternaturally calm and in a state of absolute harmony.
In fact the name Manoah hints at this as well. Manoah means “at rest”. Here is a man who cannot be brought to anger. This is one very relaxed and peaceful guy. Or as we say in modern parlance, he is “very chill.” And if he is calm, this is even truer for his wife. Mrs. Manoah, unlike every other barren biblical heroine, is devoid of hysteria and at peace with her lot. Indeed she is so self-effacing, so ethereal, that we do not even know her name — at least not from this story.
The state of trust and balance between this husband and wife is underscored by the fact in verse 11 that Manoah has no issue with following his spouse;
וַיָּ֛קם וַיֵּ֥לֶךְ מָנ֖וֹחַ אַחֲרֵ֣י אִשְׁתּ֑וֹ וַיָּבֹא֙ אֶל־הָאִ֔ישׁ וַיֹּ֣אמֶר ל֗וֹ הַאַתָּ֥ה הָאִ֛ישׁ אֲשֶׁר־דִּבַּ֥רְתָּ אֶל־הָאִשָּׁ֖ה וַיֹּ֥אמֶר אָֽנִי׃
Manoah promptly followed his wife. He came to that figure and asked him: “Are you the one who spoke to my wife?” “Yes,” he answered.
Once again, behavior atypical of most men whose egos might be bruised by not assuming the lead.
What we see here, therefore, is a reflection of the Sotah chapter but in its purest and most opposite form. We are witness to a relationship that is sublimely perfect and totally balanced, one in which suspicion and jealousy are inconceivable.
Manoah and his wife are introduced at the beginning of the chapter in verse 2, as very ordinary, anonymous people:
וַיְהִי֩ אִ֨ישׁ אֶחָ֧ד מִצּרְעָ֛ה מִמִּשְׁפַּ֥חַת הַדָּנִ֖י וּשְׁמ֣וֹ מָנ֑וֹחַ וְאִשְׁתּ֥וֹ עֲקָרָ֖ה וְלֹ֥א יָלָֽדָה׃
There was a certain man from Zorah, of the stock of Dan, whose name was Manoah. His wife was infertile and had borne no children.
What could possibly be less interesting than a childless couple from a tertiary tribe?
But what we are in fact witnessing here is a couple whose connubial harmony is a harbinger of what we can expect in the era of Redemption. Indeed the text does not refer to Manoah as the husband (בַּעְלִֽ / owner) but as her man (וַתֹּ֣אמֶר לְאִישָׁהּ֮) — which indicates a totally different kind of relationship, very much like the one between God and Israel ultimately predicted in the previous haftarah from Hosea chapter two. In Hosea, God tells His people whom He compares to a wanton wife who has betrayed her husband (the classic Sotah):
וְהָיָ֤ה בַיּוֹם־הַהוּא֙ נְאֻם־יְהֹוָ֔ה תִּקְרְאִ֖י אִישִׁ֑י וְלֹא־תִקְרְאִי־לִ֥י ע֖וֹד בַּעְלִֽי׃
And in that day —declares GOD— You will call [Me] Ishi (my man), And no more will you call Me Baali (My master/owner).
In their personal relationships, Manoah and his wife have achieved this ultimate state of grace, which is why (24).
וַתֵּ֤לֶד הָֽאִשָּׁה֙ בֵּ֔ן וַתִּקְרָ֥א אֶת־שְׁמ֖וֹ שִׁמְשׁ֑וֹן וַיִּגְדַּ֣ל הַנַּ֔עַר וַֽיְבָרְכֵ֖הוּ יְהֹוָֽה׃
The woman bore a son, and she named him Shimshon. The boy grew up, and GOD blessed him.