5. The meaiiinff of this interesting ordinance has been largely discussed by Philo Judicus, Maimonides, Abar- banel, and other Jewish writers. The following theo- ries have been maintained by them and by modern writers :
(1.) Some consider it as a symbolical expression of the divine nature^ working in man, and deny that it in- volved anything of a strictly ascetic character. Sev- eral of the Jewish writers have taken this view more or less completely. Abarbanel imagined that the hair represents the intellectual power, the power belong- ing to the head, which the wise man was not to suffer to be diminished or to be interfered with by drinking wine or bj' any other indulgence; and that the Nazarite was not to approach tlie dead because he was appointed to bear witness to the eternity of the divine nature. Of modern critics, Biihr appears to have most completely trodden in the same track. AVhile he denies that the life of the Nazarite was, in the proper sense, ascetic, he contends that his abstinence from wine, and his not being allowed to approach the dead, figured the separation from other men which characterizes the consecrated servant of the Lord ; and that his long hair signified his holiness. The hair, according to his theorj', as being the bloom of manhood, is the symbol of growth in the vegetable as well as the animal kingdom, and therefore of the operation of the divine power.
(2.) Others sec in Nazaritism the principle of stoicism, and imagine that it was intended to cultivate and bear witness to the sovereignt}' of the will over the lower tendencies of human natiue. The philosophical Jewish
the vow of the Nazarite as an act of self-sacrifice ; but he looks on the preservation of the hair as signifying that the Nazarite is so set apart for God that no change or diminution should be made in any part of his person, and as serving to himself and the world for a visible token of his peculiar consecration to Jehovah.
(4.) In all such dis(iuisitions there is a basis of truth, combined with an element of error derived from the speculations of the age or of the individual. From a review of all the particulars of this institute, it is to be inferred that it was a typical representation of a holy life, forming, in the case of individuals, prominent ex- amples of that fidelity to covenant engagements, for the interests of righteousness, which shoidd have been found in the whole community of Israel. It exhibits to the view a practical symbol t)f that separation from sin which is coincident with dedication to God. It is a part of that system of teaching by figures which was adapted to a comparatively unsophisticated age. It was not in itself a principle or law for the regulation of conduct, as stoicism or asceticism, but a divinely ap- pointed emblem of a duly regulated life. The sym- bolical character of the naziratc is manifest from its constitution. It was not incumbent upon any individ- ual or order of men, and therefore possessed no inherent moral obligation. In its ordinary form it lasted only thirty, or, at most, one hundred days. It prohibited not merely intoxicating drink, but every product of the vine, whereas for purely moral purposes the Scripture simply enjoins temperance in all tilings. It imposed two other restrictions which are not in themselves mor- al, but only typical or ceremonial, namely, leaving the hair unpolled, and taking no part in the last offices that involved contact with the dead.
A symbol thus regulated by a divine ordinance must have had a profound significance. Accordingly it sets forth, in a striking and ix'autiful manner, the leading features of a life devoted to (Jod. It originates in a solemn resolve of the free-will, and is in this respect an
doctors, for the most part, seem to have preferred this j interesting emblem of a godly life, which is the spon-
view. Thus Bechai speaks of the Nazarite as a con- queror who subdued his temptations, and who wore his long hair as a crown, "(puKl ipse rex sit cupiditatibus imperans pra;ter morom reliquorum hominum, qui cu- piditatum sunt servi." He supposed that the hair was worn rough, as a protest against foppery. But others, still taking it as a regal emblem, have imagined that it was kept elaborately dressed, and fancy that they see a proof of the existence of the custom in the seven locks of Samson (Judg. xvi, 13-19).
(3.) Many regard it wholly in the light of a sacrifice of the person to God. Philo has taken this view of the subject. In his work, On Anilnals Jit for Sacrifce, he gives an account of the Nazaritish vow, and calls it i) tiix'i i^yuXri. According to him the Nazarite did not sacrifice merely his possessions, but his person, and the act of sacrifice was to be performed in the completcst manner. The outward observances enjoined upon him were to be the genuine expressions of his spiritual de- votion. To represent spotless pm-ity within, he was to shun defilement from the deail, at the expense even of the obligation of the closest family ties. As no spirit- ual state or act can be signified by any single symbol, he was to identify himself with each one of the three victims which he had to offer as often as he broke his vow by acciilental pollution, or when the period of his A'ow came to an end. He was to realize in himself the ideas of the whole ijurnt-offcring, the sin-offering, and the peace-offering. That no mistake might be made in regard to the three sacrifices being shadows of one