Hello. Is it actually the case that R. Yohanan is suggesting that Shimshon the great tsaddik was involved in znus while in a Philistine jail as a blinded prisoner? It is not so clear that the idea of "everyone" bringing his wife meant that he actually did something, but that only the Philistines would be tempting him (as suggested by the statement of R. Papa). Indeed the Alshich offers a different understanding, that they came and had relations in front of Shimshon to have a child like him. I would be interested in your take on this. Thanks.
David Goldman, USA
The Rambam (Hilchos Isurei Bi'ah 13:12) makes it clear that Shimshon never married a non-Jewish woman - that his wife had been properly converted - which would suggest that our Gemara here needs to be interpreted along the lines of the Alshich ha'Kadosh. From the commentary of the Maharsha, however, it seems that the Gemara is to be taken at face value. He goes even further to say that whatever Shimshon was doing was done with Ratzon. This, of course, in no way contradicts the Rambam who is speaking about the prohibition of marriage, not the prohibition of Znus which is only forbidden Rabinically (unless it is done publically). Nonetheless, we are left with your dilemma: how could a Tzadik of the stature of Shimshon succumb to such behavior?
Let us start by noting that almost immediately following this statement of Rebbi Yochanan, the Gemara brings two more statements of Rebbi Yochanan describing the greatness of Shimshon: that he judged Klal Yisrael with a superhuman level of Mishpat Tzedek and that his name is one of Hash-m's names. Chazal seem to be driving home the point that Shimshon's actions cannot be understood on the level of a person who succumbs to his basest instincts.
Reb Tzadok ha'Kohen (Yisrael Kedoshim, p. 28) offers a thorough and deep analysis to this enigmatic Agadata, which I will not presume to summarise here. This much, though, could be said: what Shimshon did was an Aveirah l'Shema, that he did it in order to hasten his death which was necessary as an antonement for previous acts which he felt had caused a Chilul Hash-m, and that he derived absolutely no bodily pleasure from it. This last point is hinted at in the Gemara, on this same page, which says that Shimshon was lame in both legs. This, he says, means that Shimshon's Nefesh was disconnected from his physical body (the body is the vehicle of the Nefesh and when they are disconnected, the Nefesh is said to be lame) - i.e. that he did have any physical desires.
Kol Tuv,
Yonasan Sigler
1) Thanks very much for your reply, R. Yonasan. Since writing you someone directed me to the EYN YAAKOV on Sota 10, which brings the RIF and the IYUN YAAKOV. How would this affect the whole picture? And how do we reconcile it with the Alshich? In other words that he was oynes, that the Philistines forced him to do it in chains (see inside) (or they did acts in front of Shimshon, or both?). Although I don't understand how any person could be literally coerced to accomplish into such an act.
2) Don't one of the meforshim also say that the only relationship of geyrus was with the first wife, but Delilah was not with marriage? And if so, why?
3) Also, what is an aveyra lishma? I only came across that concept among the apologists of the Shatz, yimach shmo. So I assume he got this idea from something totally valid in kaballah and of course misused it.
1) The Rif and the Iyun Yaakov are both primarily interested in understanding the impetus of Chazal to interpret "Tochen" as Lashon Aveirah and not take it at face value. They both offer very interesting proofs.
Regarding a man being coerced to perform this act: the Gemara states explicitly (Yevamos 53a) Ein Ones l'Ervah she'Ein Kishuy Ela l'Da'as.
2) The Talmud Yerushalmi (Sotah 1:8) itself says that he only married (Nisu'in) his first wife from Timnasa but not the second woman (Delilah) from Azah. To understand this means understanding Shimshon's Avodah - what he was trying to accomplish. I refer you to Reb Tzadok's analysis mentioned in my first reply.
3) The Gemara (Nazir 23b) states: Gedolah Aveirah Lishmah k'Mitzvah shelo'Lishmah. Examples that the Gemara brings there include Tamar's involvement with Yehudah and Yael's efforts to kill Sisera. The Nefesh ha'Chayim (3:7), however, states unequivocally that we are no longer on the spiritual level of being able to commit an Aveirah Lishmah.
Kol Tuv,
Yonasan Sigler
Thank you very much. Now how do we reconcile the RIF and the Gemora with the brief peyrush on the posuk in the Alshich? That Alshich's description of toychen is unclear to me. It's only 2 or 3 lines, so maybe you could shed some light on it and in terms of reconciling what he says with what the Gemara says. Plus, if there is no oynes ledaas, then how can the RIF suggest that they wante d to "lehatish es koycho" even though he was a cripple in his legs and was chained up?
I wrote all I could on this subject.
Yonason Sigler