To Drink or Not to Drink – Parshat Naso 2024

In the early 20^th century, many sectors of American society supported a ban on the sale and consumption of alcohol. Among the diverse reasons to support this ban were a belief that it would benefit Black Americans in the job market and concerns about immoral behavior often associated with inebriation. Following the end of the First World War, Congress and 46 of 48 states overwhelmingly ratified the 18^th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

It is little known that Prohibition is connected to Jews and antisemitism. Many Jews who immigrated to the United States shortly before the Prohibition Era had expertise in producing alcohol, both because of the need for separate kosher wine production and because they had been legally or socially banned from other fields. As a result, Jewish engagement in the alcohol industry was a real phenomenon in the early 20^th century. The antisemitic conspiracy theory was that this was done not out of necessity but rather as an effort to corrode white Christian culture. As a result, among the most strident supporters of Prohibition were the members of the Ku Klux Klan, who saw the alcohol industry as connected with unwanted Jewish influence on white Protestants.

The Jewish community’s response to prohibition was divided between the Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform communities. Orthodox rabbis advocated for certain rabbinic organizations to be permitted under federal law to purchase limited quantities of alcohol and distribute it to their congregants, like the Catholic Church. The alcohol was paid for by donations from members.

There were numerous scandals in which rabbis abused their legal authority to purchase or produce alcohol as cover to create a black market for wine. This was obviously a major חילול ה׳ and fodder for Henry Ford in his antisemitic rants against Jews in the 1920s. The Conservative movement’s response to this was to tacitly accept the reality of prohibition. Rabbi Louis Ginsberg issued a halachic ruling permitting the use of grape juice instead of wine. The Reform movement, in contrast, went so far as to advocate that the religious exception within the 18^th Amendment be removed, at least for the Jewish community.

The split between the communities reflects their respective values. The Orthodox community was unwilling to accept restrictions on Jewish practice and insisted on maintaining the ability to use wine, even at the risk of moral hazard. The Reform movement, on the other hand, was willing to embrace the ethos of the time and make changes if it would better protect the Jewish community’s place in society.

By 1933, it became obvious that Prohibition not only failed but backfired by increasing the market for alcohol and expanding, rather than limiting, its social acceptance. The question is, which approach is correct? If we were living in the Prohibition Era, would we have embraced it fully or rejected it totally? Or is there another approach that could have been taken?

The תורה already prohibited כהנים from consuming alcohol while amid the Temple service back in פרשת שמיני. The simplest explanation for that prohibition is that a כהן needs to have the proper levelheadedness while performing the עבודה. In fact, רש״י there says that the prohibition against alcohol for the כהן is listed there in response to the sin of נדב and אביהו, who had recently died while offering an אש זרה in the משכן. According to רש״י, part of what contributed to the inappropriateness of their actions was their inebriation. However, this fact is not necessarily a comment on the consumption of alcohol, in general, outside the Temple framework.

Alcohol does come up in a few other contexts, though. After the Great Flood in פרשת נח, the תורה tells us that נח plants a vineyard, produces wine, and becomes drunk, leading to a very embarrassing situation. When he becomes sober again, he finds that his son and grandson had shamed him or taken advantage of him while he was unconscious. He curses them, in response. Similarly, לוט’s daughters use alcohol for incestuous purposes to become pregnant and repopulate the world. These stories, too, can be read in multiple ways and do not involve any specific laws about alcohol.

However, this morning we read about the concept of the נזיר. The תורה says that if someone decides to take a vow to be a נזיר, there are three prohibitions that they are required to observe. In addition to avoiding impurity from the dead and a ban against cutting their hair, a נזיר is also not allowed to consume any grape product, starting with alcoholic wine:

מִיַּיִן וְשֵׁכָר יַזִּיר חֹמֶץ יַיִן וְחֹמֶץ שֵׁכָר לֹא יִשְׁתֶּה וְכׇל־מִשְׁרַת עֲנָבִים לֹא יִשְׁתֶּה וַעֲנָבִים לַחִים וִיבֵשִׁים לֹא יֹאכֵל׃

they shall abstain from wine and any other intoxicant; they shall not drink vinegar of wine or of any other intoxicant, neither shall they drink anything in which grapes have been steeped, nor eat grapes fresh or dried.

The question is – why would wine, and all grape products, be the first, and seemingly primary, prohibition associated with a נזיר? The ספורנו explains that one might have thought that a נזיר is prohibited from any enjoyable food or drink. The תורה emphasizes wine and grapes to limit the extent of a נזיר’s restrictions on הנאה. This implies that נזירות is not necessarily a comment on wine or alcohol, per se, but rather a vow associated with asceticism. The תורה limits our ability to disconnect from the world entirely.

Some commentators note the similarities between the נזיר and כהן’s restrictions and surmise that the נזיר is attempting to elevate themselves to the level of priesthood. Both have rules related to their hair, to impurity, and to wine. But whereas a כהן’s prohibitions are permanent and related to the בית המקדש, the נזיר’s prohibitions are time-dependent and unconnected to the Temple specifically.

However, רש״י, again, sees alcohol as the motivation behind נזירות. He says that a נזיר is someone who watches, with horror, the punishment for a סוטה, for a woman who engaged in illicit sexual activity, whose interactions with her partner were likely made more possible with alcohol. Terrified of making similar mistakes, he takes a voluntary vow to be a נזיר, thus banning himself from consuming any wine.

The notion that נזירות is primarily motivated by a desire to ban oneself from consuming alcohol is supported by the fact that not only does the תורה state the ban on wine before the other two prohibitions of נזירות, but it repeats it in the next פסוק:

כֹּל יְמֵי נִזְרוֹ מִכֹּל אֲשֶׁר יֵעָשֶׂה מִגֶּפֶן הַיַּיִן מֵחַרְצַנִּים וְעַד־זָג לֹא יֹאכֵל׃

Throughout their term as nazirite, they may not eat anything that is obtained from the grapevine, even seeds or skin.

This idea of embracing Prohibition, albeit not on a constitutional or federal level, but rather on a personal level, has long been my personal inclination. When I was a senior in high school, one of my teachers hosted a פורים afternoon meal at his home. When I arrived, I saw that he, and another teacher of mine who was present, were completely drunk. Many of my classmates had snuck bottles of alcohol into the meal with them and quickly became drunk, as well. As I looked around the room, I realized that I might be the only person in the room sober enough to drive my teacher’s nine-month pregnant wife to the hospital if she went into labor. When I complained about this to a different teacher of mine after פורים, he said, “יהואש, maybe you need a drink!”

Following our graduation party, several of the same classmates got so drunk that they had to be admitted to the hospital and have their stomachs pumped. The next year on פורים, when I was in Israel, I saw teenagers become so smashed that they passed out on the floor, threw up, or made horrifying comments I knew they would never have said while sober. I saw the same thing happen to friends and classmates in college. פורים and שמחת תורה became my least favorite holiday because of the alcohol permeating the dancing and meals. As a result, I became the most anti-alcohol person I knew. I researched alcohol abuse in the United States and found that a significant percentage of deaths from car accidents, cases of domestic violence, sexual assault, and life-long addiction are related to alcohol.

At the same time, having strong views in this area has its drawbacks. My closest friends became sick of my extremism on this issue. Some girls even wouldn’t date me because of my views on alcohol. In some ways, this type of anti-alcoholic approach is reminiscent of being a נזיר, especially the social isolation. Dr. Erica Brown suggests that a נזיר’s long hair may have served as a reminder to everyone around them that they can’t participate in the party, that they can’t be offered alcohol. The question is, is this something worthy of praise or criticism?

The גמרא in תענית offers two perspectives on the נזיר that complicate this question. On one hand, among the sacrifices at the end of his נזירות-term, a נזיר brings a sin-offering, a קרבן חטאת The גמרא explains that voluntarily banning oneself from enjoyment of wine, or any permitted physical pleasure, is considered a sin. Elsewhere, the גמרא says that wine says אין שירה אלא ביין, that song must be accompanied by wine. דוד המלך says in תהילים that ויין ישמח לבב אנוש, that wine gladdens the heart of man, which is implicitly a positive. Wine is used in many ritual settings to enhance the experience of joy, from a ברית מילה to קידוש and הבדלה to a wedding and שבע ברכות. In fact, even the תורה itself says that after completing his term as נזיר, the former Nazirite should consume wine:

וְהֵנִיף אוֹתָם הַכֹּהֵן  תְּנוּפָה לִפְנֵי ה׳ קֹדֶשׁ הוּא לַכֹּהֵן עַל חֲזֵה הַתְּנוּפָה וְעַל שׁוֹק הַתְּרוּמָה וְאַחַר יִשְׁתֶּה הַנָּזִיר יָיִן׃

The priest shall elevate them as an elevation offering before Hashem; and this shall be a sacred donation for the priest, in addition to the breast of the elevation offering and the thigh of gift offering. After that the Nazirite may drink wine.

All of this implies that נזירות as a means of achieving a total prohibition against alcohol, especially wine, is problematic. On the other hand, many of the אחרונים discourage drinking more than a cup of wine on פורים, in part based on what they call an איסור, a prohibition, against becoming drunk. The גמרא in פסחים says that three things ensure that הקב״ה loves you:

מי שאינו כועס ומי שאינו משתכר, ומי שאינו מעמיד על מדותיו

One who doesn’t get angry, one who doesn’t get drunk, and one who doesn’t insist on always getting his way

The גמרא in תענית cites a view that says נזירות as a means of banning wine is a source of קדושה, as the נזיר’s hair is considered קדוש לה׳. Professor Nechama Leibowitz cites רב אנשלמה אשתרוק, the author of the מדרשי התורה in the 14^th century, as suggesting that a נזיר brings a חטאת, a sin offering, not because he denied himself wine at all, but because of the mistakes he made that made becoming a נזיר necessary, to atone for everything he did during his alcohol addiction. In other words, for an alcoholic, it is permitted, even a source of קדושה, of holiness, to ban oneself from drinking wine. But abusing alcohol to such an extent where that is necessary, where we have hit rock bottom, requires atonement, as well.

Rav Aharon Lichtenstein suggests that the תורה demands from us a balance, a strong sense of self-awareness and self-control. We all, and especially our children, need to be educated about how wine or other alcohol can both elevate special moments and be abused to the point of serious potential danger. If my teachers had been good role models, perhaps my friends would not have had their stomachs pumped and I would not have become such an extremist, either. May הקב״ה help us learn how to find this proper balance so we will no longer need to ban ourselves from wine and so we can all celebrate our holiest and most joyous moments properly in קדושה and שמחה.