How was Shmuel permitted to kill Agag?

Question

How was Shmuel Hanavi, who was a nazir (Nazir 66a, Rambam Nezirus 3:16) allowed to kill Agag if in doing so he became tamei l'mais? I am looking for answers other than Shmuel using a wooden sword or him only terminally wounding (but not outright killing) Agag.

Answer 1

Rabbi Yechezkel ben Yehuda Landau (known as the Noda Beyehuda) in his work Doresh Letziyon, Derush 5 (new print p.46-47) poses this question. He takes the view that Shmuel Hanavi was allowed to kill Agag because of the principle of 'Aseh docheh lo saaseh'. The mitzva to kill Amalek (particularly, as he was the last living Amalekite at the time,) superseded the aveira of becoming tamei. This is quite a novel answer. The Noda Beyehuda understands from Shmuel's actions that this principle applies even when it would be possible to fulfill both mitzvos. Shmuel could have had someone else kill Agag who had no transgression to become tamei, or as he suggests, Shmuel could have killed Agag by shooting arrows at him. The fact that he personally killed him by cleaving him into four pieces, (ND"B citing Rashi) means that the mitzva overrode the issue of tuma.

Answer 2

Rabbi Reisman in one of his shiurim said that Shmuel could have worn gloves in order to prevent tumas mes. I found the reference when I sent the answer to MailJewish:

From: Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz <hsabbam@...>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 12:44:56 -0500
Subject: RE: Thank G-d for Tupperware

From: Andy Goldfinger <Andy.Goldfinger@...>
That is where Tupperware comes in. It is made of plastic, and to the best of my understanding, plastic is not mekabel tumah (capable of becoming impure). Tupperware, and other plastic implements and utensils will make our lives much easier.

Might Tupperware be a good stock to buy as investment?

Rabbi Reisman in on of his recent tapes brought up the fact that gloves will be needed. He pointed out that when Shmuel killed Agag, or when Pinchas killed Zimri and Kozbi, they could have required gloves so as not to become tamei. IIRC they would have needed two pairs of gloves so that the tum'ah does not cause the gloves (which are now tamei) to make the person tamei. I think that is because the level of tumah for a sword is higher than a regular object that touches a dead body.

The comment about plastic means that a person can wear plastic disposable gloves and not become tamei at all. Just pull out the gloves and put them on before touching anything tamei.

Sounds like a good investment.

Hillel (Sabba) Markowitz - <sabbahillel@...>

Answer 3

Whether Shmuel was a nazir is a matter of dispute on Nazir 66a. Rabbi Nehorai says he was while Rabbi Yossi says he was not.

The derivation of Shmuel's nezirut is from Shimshon. Thus:

שנא' (שמואל א א, יא) ומורה לא יעלה על ראשו נאמר בשמשון (שופטים יג, ה) ומורה ונאמר בשמואל ומורה מה מורה האמורה בשמשון נזיר אף מורה האמורה בשמואל נזיר

If so, perhaps the extent of Shmuel's nezirus was the same as that of Shimshon, which did not include ritual impurity. As the Rambam writes about Shimshon's status:

יג שִׁמְשׁוֹן לֹא הָיָה נָזִיר גָּמוּר--שֶׁהֲרֵי לֹא נָדַר בְּנָזִיר, אֵלָא הַמַּלְאָךְ הִפְרִישׁוֹ מִן הַטֻּמְאָה; וְכֵיצַד הָיָה דִּינוֹ--הָיָה אָסוּר בְּיַיִן וְאָסוּר בְּתַגְלָחַת, וּמֻתָּר הָיָה לְהִטַּמֵּא לַמֵּתִים. וְדָבָר זֶה, הֲלָכָה מִפִּי הַקַּבָּלָה.

יד לְפִיכָּךְ מִי שֶׁאָמַר הֲרֵינִי נָזִיר כְּשִׁמְשׁוֹן--הֲרֵי זֶה נָזִיר מִן הַיַּיִן וּמִן הַתַּגְלָחַת לְעוֹלָם, וְאֵינוּ מְגַלֵּחַ כָּל שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ כִּשְׁאָר נְזִירֵי עוֹלָם, וּמֻתָּר לְהִטַּמֵּא לַמֵּתִים. וְאִם אָמַר לֹא נִתְכַּוַּנְתִּי אֵלָא לְאִישׁ אַחֵר שֶׁשְּׁמוֹ שִׁמְשׁוֹן, אֵינוּ נָזִיר. וּמִי שֶׁנָּדַר נָזִיר כְּשִׁמְשׁוֹן--אֵינוּ יָכוֹל לְהִשָּׁאֵל עַל נִדְרוֹ, שֶׁנְּזִירוּת שִׁמְשׁוֹן לְעוֹלָם הָיְתָה.

Admittedly, the Rambam there explicitly distinguishes the nezirus of Shimshon from that of Shmuel, but perhaps one might argue.

Answer 4

There are 5 types of Nazirut Vows (Nedarim) the following 2

1. Nazir Shimoshon where the Angel Pali Stated that the unborn child should be a NAzir which will be a Forever term
2. Nazir LeOlam where a person gives a neder to be a Nazir LeOlam - Forever

there 2 types of Naziruts are not constraint by time.

the Nazir Shimshon if he becomes desecrated he does not bring a korban, since he does not lose his Status of Nazirut, shince he is not constarint by time

"ואם נטמאיג, אינו מביא קרבן טומאה"

משנה נזיר א ב

הריני נזיר מן החרצנים, ומן הזגים, ומן התגלחת, ומן הטומאה – הרי זה נזירח, וכל דקדוקי נזירות עליו. הריני כשמשוןט, כבן מנוח, כבעל דלילה, כמי שעקר דלתות עזה, כמי שניקרו פלשתים את עיניו – הרי זה נזיר שמשוןי. מה בין נזיר עולם לנזיר שמשון? נזיר עולם, הכביד שערו, מיקל בתער יא ומביא שלוש בהמותיב. ואם נטמא, מביא קרבן טומאה. נזיר שמשון, הכביד שערו, אינו מיקל. ואם נטמאיג, אינו מביא קרבן טומאה.

If one said: I am hereby a nazirite and therefore will refrain from grape seeds, or: I am hereby a nazirite and therefore will refrain from grape skins, or: From shaving, or: From impurity, he is a nazirite. And all details of naziriteship are incumbent upon him. Not only does the prohibition he mentioned take effect, he is bound by all of the strictures of naziriteship. If one said: I am hereby like Samson, like the son of Manoah, like the husband of Delilah, like the one who tore off the doors of Gaza, like the one whose eyes were gouged out by the Philistines, he is a nazirite like Samson, whose halakhot are explained in the next mishna (see Judges, chapters 13–16). What is the difference between a permanent nazirite and a nazirite like Samson, both of whom remain nazirites forever? In the case of a permanent nazirite, if his hair grows too heavy for him, he lightens it by cutting some hair with a razor, and he then brings three animals as a sin-offering, a burnt-offering, and a peace-offering, like one who completes his term of naziriteship. And if he becomes ritually impure, he brings the offering for impurity brought by a regular nazirite who became impure. By contrast, in the case of a nazirite like Samson, if his hair grows heavy he may not lighten it, since he is entirely prohibited from cutting his hair. And if he becomes impure, he does not bring an offering for impurity.

Since Shemuel was given to Nazirut by his mother Chana, she never intended for him to step down from his High Holiness of Nazirut. and thereofre Shemuel was a Nazir Leolam, where is not obligated to bring a korban upon contact with tumat met, as explained above