Rabbi David Etengoff
 
Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon Hakohen, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, Chana bat Shmuel, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Shoshana Elka bat Avraham, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, Peretz ben Chaim, Chaya Sarah bat Reb Yechezkel Shraga, Shmuel Yosef ben Reuven, Shayndel bat Mordechai Yehudah, the Kedoshim of Har Nof, Pittsburgh, and Jersey City, and the refuah shlaimah of Mordechai HaLevi ben Miriam Tovah, and the health and safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world.
 
Parashat HaChodesh contains the celebrated verse, “Hashem spoke to Moshe and to Aharon in the land of Egypt, saying: ‘This month (hachodesh hazeh) shall be to you the head of the months; to you it shall be the first of the months of the year.’” (Sefer Shemot 12:1-2, this and all Tanach translations, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach, with my emendations and underlining) In his Commentary on the Torah, Rashi zatzal (1040-1105) suggests this peshat-level interpretation of hachodesh hazeh: “[Hashem] said this phrase to Moshe regarding Chodesh Nissan, [and stated:] ‘This will be to you the first in the order of counting the months; Iyar shall be called the second; and Sivan third.’” (Sefer Shemot 12:2, Rashi Leipzig Manuscript, translation and brackets my own) 
 
In his posthumous work of Torah analysis, Darash Moshe, Rav Moshe Feinstein zatzal (1895-1986) notes that Rashi underscores Nissan’s precedence of place as the first of the months of the year, and examines its significance:

The reason for this is simple: It is insufficient for us, the Jewish people, to believe that Hashem, may He be blessed, is the Creator of the Universe, for we have Shabbat that symbolizes this, and serves as a permanent covenant [between ourselves and the Almighty.] In addition, [and crucially so,] the Jewish people must believe that not only did He create [the Universe in the past], but rather, He is its Creator at this very moment, and its active Guide (manhig). And everything that occurs to a person, and to everything that lives, is from the Holy One blessed be He, just as we have seen regarding the Exodus from Egypt and the [10] Plagues, as we find stated explicitly in the Torah’s text. (Pages 44-45, translation and brackets my own)
 
For Rav Moshe, Nissan’s designation as the first of the months of the year is underscored by Rashi to emphasize that Hashem is the Manhig HaOlam (the Guide of the Universe), as we find in the Torah’s narratives of Yetziat Mitzrayim (the Exodus) and the Eser Makkot. This concept of Hashem’s ongoing hanhagat haolam (guidance of the Universe) is succinctly explained by the Rambam zatzal (Maimonides, 1135-1204) in a celebrated halacha in the Mishneh Torah:

This entity is the G-d of the world and the L-rd of the entire earth. He controls the sphere (v’Hu HaManhig hagalgal) with infinite and unbounded power. This power [continues] without interruption because the sphere is constantly revolving, and it is impossible for it to revolve without someone causing it to revolve. [That one is] He, blessed be He, who causes it to revolve without a hand or any [other] corporeal dimension. (Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah 1:5, translation, Rabbi Eliyahu Touger)
 
As Rav Moshe notes, the belief in Hashem’s direct management of the Universe constitutes the foundation of the crucial theological principle: “Everything that occurs to a person, and to everything that lives, is from the Holy One blessed be He.” This is reminiscent of the following beautiful interchange between Rabbi Avraham Yitzchak Kook zatzal (first Chief Ashkenazi Rabbi under the Palestine Mandate, 1865-1935) and Rabbi Aryeh Levin zatzal (the “Tzaddik of Yerushalayim,” 1885-1969) during their first meeting in Jaffa, as cited in Rav Levin’s memoirs:

After an early minhah he [Rav Kook] went out, as his hallowed custom was, to stroll a bit in the fields and gather his thoughts; and I went along. On the way I plucked some branch or flower. Our great master was taken aback; and then he told me gently, “Believe me: In all my days I have taken care never to pluck a blade of grass or a flower needlessly when it had the ability to grow or blossom. You know the teaching of the Sages that there is not a single blade of grass below, here on earth, which does not have a heavenly force (or angel) above telling it, Grow! Every sprout and leaf of grass says something, conveys some meaning. Every stone whispers some inner hidden message in the silence. Every creation utters its song (in praise of the Creator).” Those words, spoken from a pure and holy heart, engraved themselves deeply on my heart. From that time on I began to feel a strong sense of compassion for everything. (A Tzadik in Our Time, pages 108-109)
 
With Hashem’s help and our fervent desire, may we ever recognize Hashem’s guiding hand in our lives, and may this enhance our compassion for all His creations. V’chane yihi ratzon.
 
Shabbat Shalom
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org.
 
Please contact me at [email protected] to be added to my weekly email list.
 
*** My audio shiurim on the topics of Tefilah and Tanach may be found at: http://tinyurl.com/8hsdpyd
 
*** I have posted 164 of Rabbi Soloveitchik’s English language audio shiurim (MP3 format) spanning the years 1958-1984. Please click on the highlighted link: The Rav

 
Rabbi David Etengoff
 
Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon Hakohen, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, Chana bat Shmuel, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Shoshana Elka bat Avraham, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, Peretz ben Chaim, Chaya Sarah bat Reb Yechezkel Shraga, Shmuel Yosef ben Reuven, Shayndel bat Mordechai Yehudah, the Kedoshim of Har Nof, Pittsburgh, and Jersey City, and the refuah shlaimah of Mordechai HaLevi ben Miriam Tovah, Yocheved Dafneh bat Dinah Zehavah, and the health and safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world.
 
The Laws of Kashrut comprise the final portion of our parasha, and are classified as “chukim,” mitzvot whose rationale currently elude us. My rebbe and mentor, Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik zatzal (1903-1993), known as “the Rav” by his students and followers, suggests that chukim should be viewed in this manner:

The laws concerning chukim were classified as unintelligible, enigmatic, mysterious… However, even though it is forbidden to ask for motivation, for the motives or the reasoning pertaining to certain Divine categorical imperatives, we may yet inquire into the interpretation of the law. There is a difference between explanation and interpretation. (This and the following citation, Derashot HaRav: Selected Lectures of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik, summarized and annotated by Arnold Lustiger, pages 226-227, underlining my own)
 
In addition, the Rav maintains: “I believe that regarding chukim…we must not ask the question of ‘why,’ because ‘why’ is in general a foolish question to ask, even in regard to mitzvos which in our opinion are quite meaningful.” Instead, “…the question of ‘what’ can be asked. What is the meaning of this chok as far as I am concerned? What does the chok tell me? Not why did Hakadosh Baruch Hu ordain that law? [Instead,] what is the spiritual message that I can assimilate in my world view?”
 
The “what question” is the driving force behind the genre of halachic literature known as “ta’amei hamitzvot—the quest for interpreting the commandments.” Some of its notable exponents include the anonymous author of the Halachot Gedolot (Geonic period), Rabbi Eliezer of Metz (c. 1135-c.1165), the Rambam (Maimonides, 1135-1204), the unidentified author of the Sefer HaChinuch (13th century), and Rabbi Menachem Recanati (1250-1310). In addition, many well-known Rabbinic luminaries emphasized this topic in their Torah analyses.
 
In his Moreh HaNevuchim, the Rambam (Maimonides, 1135-1204) suggests that the Torah forbade all ma’achlot assurot (forbidden foods) because of their deleterious effect upon our physical wellbeing:

I say, then, that to eat of any of the various kinds of food that the Law has forbidden us is blameworthy. Among all those forbidden to us, only pork and fat may be imagined not to be harmful…With reference to the signs marking a permitted animal…know that their existence is not in itself a reason for animals being permitted nor their absence a reason for animals being prohibited; they are merely signs by means of which the praised [healthful] species may be discerned from the blamed [harmful] species. (III:48, translation, Dr. Shlomo Pines, page 599, brackets my own)
 
In general, the Sefer HaChinuch closely follows the Rambam’s approach in ta’amei hamitzvot as we find in his discussion of ma’achlot assurot:

In the same way, if there is any loss or damage in the body, of any kind, some function of the intelligence will be nullified, corresponding to that defect. For this reason, our complete and perfect Torah removed us far from anything that causes such defect. In this vein, according to the plain meaning we would say we were given a ban by the Torah against all forbidden foods. And if there are some among them whose harm is understood neither by us nor by the wise men of medicine, do not wonder about them: The faithful, trustworthy Physician [Hashem] who adjured us about them is wiser than both you and them. (Mitzvah 73, translation, Charles Wengrove, vol. I, page 285, brackets my own)
 
The hygiene-based interpretation of ma’achlot assurot was not limited to Sephardic Torah giants such as the Rambam and the author of the Sefer HaChinuch. It was championed in Ashkenaz, as well, by the Rashbam (Rabbeinu Shmuel ben Meir, c.1085-c.1158):

In accordance with the direct meaning of the text, and in response to the heretics, all large animals, wild animals, birds, fish, the various kinds of locusts, and those creatures that creep upon the ground, that the Holy One blessed be He forbade to the Jewish people are loathsome indeed, and destroy and heat up the body—they are, therefore, labelled tamei’im (impure). (Gloss on Sefer Vayikra 11:3, translation my own)
 
The world of Jewish thought is dynamic and diverse. Little wonder, then, that the hygiene-based model of interpretation of ma’achlot assurot is not universally accepted. One of its best-known critics is the celebrated Sephardic Torah commentator Rabbeinu Don Yitzchak Abarbanel (1437-1508):

The majority of Torah meforshim maintain (chashvu) that the prohibited foods which the Torah forbids is to ensure the maintenance of the body and its continued good health…G-d forbid that one should believe such an idea! If this was the case, then the Torah of HaElokim would be on the level of a relatively insignificant work among medical volumes that are overly terse in their words and reasoning; and this is neither the way of the Torah of HaElokim, nor representative of the profundity of its intentions…Rather, the G-dly Torah does not come to cure the bodies and to seek their continued health, instead, it seeks the ongoing health of the soul (briut hanefesh) and to cure its afflictions. (Commentary on the Torah, Sefer Vayikra 11, s.v. issur hama’achlim, translation and underlining my own)
 
The Seforno (Rabbi Ovadiah ben Ya’akov, c.1470-c.1550) joins the Abarbanel in rejecting the hygiene approach in his summary statement regarding the laws of ma’achlot assurot. Instead of focusing on briut hanefesh, however, he interprets these laws as an “on ramp” to kedushah (holiness):

“And you shall be holy, for I (Hashem) am holy.” In order that you will be holy and ever recognize your Creator, [and long to] walk in His path, for this is My desire, namely, that you will emulate Me. “For I am holy” And all of this you will apprehend when you sanctify yourselves and guard yourselves from forbidden foods. (Commentary on the Torah, Sefer Vayikra 11:43-44, translation my own)
 
In sum, while the Rambam, Sefer HaChinuch, and the Rashbam, among others, advocate a hygiene-based interpretation of the laws of ma’achlot assurot, this is soundly rejected by both the Abarbanel (briut hanefesh) and the Seforno (“on ramp” to kedushah).
 
Closer to our own time, the Rav analyzed some of the same pasukim as the Seforno regarding ma’achlot assurot and arrived at a strikingly similar conclusion: “What is forbidden here is overindulgence in satisfying human corporeal needs and drives; these mitzvot belong to the category of discipline of the body and its sanctification…The body must be sanctified and elevated…” (Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik, Festival of Freedom: Essays on Pesah and the Haggadah, Rabbis Joseph B. Wolowelsky and Reuven Ziegler, editors, page 137, underlining my own)
 
With Hashem’s help and our fervent desire, may we strive to live lives dedicated to the pursuit of kedushah in all that we do, and may we ever draw closer to Him. V’chane yihi ratzon.
 
Shabbat Shalom
 
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org.
 
Please contact me at [email protected] to be added to my weekly email list.
 
*** My audio shiurim on the topics of Tefilah and Tanach may be found at: http://tinyurl.com/8hsdpyd
 
*** I have posted 164 of Rabbi Soloveitchik’s English language audio shiurim (MP3 format) spanning the years 1958-1984. Please click on the highlighted link: The Rav

Rabbi David Etengoff
 
Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon Hakohen, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, Chana bat Shmuel, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Shoshana Elka bat Avraham, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, Peretz ben Chaim, Chaya Sarah bat Reb Yechezkel Shraga, Shmuel Yosef ben Reuven, Shayndel bat Mordechai Yehudah, the Kedoshim of Har Nof, Pittsburgh, and Jersey City, and the refuah shlaimah of Mordechai HaLevi ben Miriam Tovah, and the health and safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world.
 
The final section of our parasha is an expansive 36-verse passage that portrays the public investiture of Aharon and his sons into the kahuna. It concludes with the pasuk: “And Aharon and his sons did all the things that Hashem commanded through Moshe.” (Sefer Vayikra 8:36, this and all Tanach and Rashi translations, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach)  In his Commentary on the Torah, Rashi (1040-1105) suggests that the reason why the Torah states, “and Aharon and his sons did all the things,” is to “to tell their praise, namely, that they did not deviate to the right or to the left.” Yet, Rashi’s comment seems to be unnecessary. Aharon and his sons were some of the greatest spiritual leaders of their generation. Why, then,  would the Torah need “to tell their praise,” since they acted precisely as we would have expected?

In his supercommentary on Rashi’s perush entitled, Gur Aryeh, the Maharal of Prague (Rabbi Yehudah Loew ben Bezalel, 1525-1609) elucidates Rashi’s gloss in this manner:

[Rashi felt it necessary to provide this explanation] as the Temple service is of overarching import and replete with many stringencies that stem from the numerous laws that constitute the Korbanot Service. Therefore, the Torah teaches us that they neither deviated from, nor erred regarding any of them, “neither to the right or to the left,” since they acted with great intention and exactitude [in the fulfillment of their task]. (Translation and brackets my own)
 
In the Maharal’s view, Rashi presents a reformulation of the oft-repeated Talmudic dictum: “kohanim zarizim hame--kohanim act with alacrity and punctiliousness in mitzvot observance.” (Talmud Bavli, Shabbat 20a)  As such, the behavior of Aharon and his sons warrants recognition and praise at the inception of their avodah (service) in the Mishkan.
 
While Rashi’s focal point in our pasuk is the phrase, “and Aharon and his sons did all the things,” the Netziv (Rav Naftali Tzvi Yehudah Berlin, 1816-1893), in his HaEmek Davar, turns his attention to the end of our verse: “that Hashem commanded through Moshe--asher tzivah Hashem b’yad Moshe,” and to an explication of the term, “b’yad Moshe.” He notes that asher tzivah Hashem refers to “kabbalah be’al peh” (Oral Law). In order to analyze, “b’yad Moshe,” however, he cites Sefer Vayikra 10:11 and Talmud Bavli, Kritot 13b:

“And to instruct b’nai Yisrael regarding all the statutes which Hashem has spoken to them through Moshe (b’yad Moshe).”
 
“And to instruct,” this refers to issuing a halachic decision; “regarding all the statues,” this refers to halachic expositions of the Torah;” “which Hashem has spoken to them,” this refers to halachot l’Moshe mi’Sinai [a specific category of Oral Law]; “b’yad Moshe,” this is talmud [the analyses of Oral Law upon which halachic conclusions are based]. (Translation and brackets my own)
 
According to the Netziv, “talmud’ connotes “that which is created through exacting exploration of the Talmud, an ability that was given to Moshe.” Building on this definition, he suggests, “this is what the expression, ‘b’yad Moshe,’ means, namely, the [singular] ability the Holy One blessed be He bequeathed to Moshe to determine his own halachic positions.” At this juncture, he applies his definition of b’yad Moshe to our original pasuk and states:

And this is the case herein, that they [Aharon and his sons] not only did that which [Moshe] had received through kabbalah be’al peh, but, in addition, they did that which Moshe had determined to be the actual halachic practice in this instance [after his prodigious examination of this material]. (HaEmek Davar translations and brackets my own)
 
I believe the Netziv’s conceptualization of b’yad Moshe helps us understand the depth of Rashi’s earlier comment, “to tell their praise, namely, that they did not deviate to the right or to the left.” Aharon and his sons not only followed the words of the Torah that we have recorded in our parasha, and the Torah Sheb’al Peh that Moshe directly received from the Almighty, but, in addition, they did not diverge in any manner from the halachic guidelines they received from Moshe, himself. Surely this is praiseworthy and deserving of acknowledgement. As Malachi the prophet proclaimed so long ago: “Zichru torat Moshe avdi—Keep in remembrance the teaching of Moshe, My servant.” (Sefer Malachi 3:22)  With Hashem’s help and our fervent desire, may this be so. V’chane yihi ratzon.
 
Shabbat Shalom
 
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org.
 
Please contact me at [email protected] to be added to my weekly email list.
 
*** My audio shiurim on the topics of Tefilah and Tanach may be found at: http://tinyurl.com/8hsdpyd
 
*** I have posted 164 of Rabbi Soloveitchik’s English language audio shiurim (MP3 format) spanning the years 1958-1984. Please click on the highlighted link: The Rav

 
Rabbi David Etengoff
 
Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon Hakohen, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, Chana bat Shmuel, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Shoshana Elka bat Avraham, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, Peretz ben Chaim, Chaya Sarah bat Reb Yechezkel Shraga, Shmuel Yosef ben Reuven, Shayndel bat Mordechai Yehudah, the Kedoshim of Har Nof, Pittsburgh, and Jersey City, and the refuah shlaimah of Mordechai HaLevi ben Miriam Tovah, Yocheved Dafneh bat Dinah Zehavah, and the health and safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world.
 
Many Torah-observant Jews are deeply conflicted regarding the reinstitution of korbanot. Although they viewt the binding character of these mitzvot with the same respect they have for other commandments, their alienation from this form of service to Hashem engenders a disconnect between what He has commanded and their personal beliefs. In my estimation, this is based on a fundamental lack of understanding of the inherent meaning and purpose of the korbanot. As such, we are fortunate that in his Commentary on the Torah on Sefer Vayikra 1:2, Rabbi Shimshon Raphael Hirsch zatzal (1808-1888) offers a trenchant analysis of this subject that is as relevant today as it was in the late 19th century.
 
Rav Hirsch begins his discussion of the word “korban” by suggesting, “We have no word that really represents the idea which lies in the expression korban.” He notes that defining korban as “sacrifice” fails to convey its true meaning. In addition, since it “…implies the idea of giving something up that is of value to oneself for the benefit of another, or of having to do without something of value…” it is actually diametrically opposed to the essence of a korban. Even the term, “offering,” fails to communicate what the Torah means by korban:

In addition, the underlying idea of “offering” makes it by no means an adequate expression for korban. The idea of an offering presupposes a wish, a desire, a requirement for what is brought, on the part of the one to whom it is brought, which is satisfied by the ‘offering’. One cannot get away from the idea of gift, a present. But the idea of a korban is far away from all this.
 
If a korban is neither a sacrifice nor an offering, how is it to be defined? Rav Hirsch suggests the following:

It is never used for a present or gift, it is used exclusively with reference to man’s relation to G-d and can only be understood from the meaning which lies in the root krv. Krv means to approach, to come near, and so to get into close relationship with someone. This at once most positively gives the idea of the object and purpose of hakravah (drawing close) as the attainment of a higher sphere of life.
 
This concept of korban as the vehicle whereby one obtains “the attainment of a higher sphere of life” is the essence of Rav Hirsch’s explication of our term. Approaching Hashem in a true I-Thou relationship through a korban, therefore, “…rejects the idea of a sacrifice, of giving something up, of losing something, as well as being a requirement of the One to Whom one gets near…” Instead, the makrivim (the ones who bring the korban) have an overwhelming desire to draw near to their Creator and, therefore, desire something representative of themselves to “come into a closer relationship to G-d…” From this perspective, the korbanot emerge as a symbolic fulfillment of the well-known second verse of the Shema: “And you shall love the L-rd, your G-d, with all your heart and with all your soul, and with all your means.” As such, the purpose of a korban is to enable “kirvat Elokim, nearness to Hashem,” that will lead to “the attainment of a higher sphere of life.”
 
This idea is given powerful voice by Dovid HaMelech when he declares, “kirvat Elokim li tov” (“Closeness to G-d is what is truly good for me,” Sefer Tehillim 73:28). With Hashem’s help and our fervent desire, may we be zocheh (merit) to draw ever nearer to Him, and may we encounter His Divine Presence in the third Beit HaMikdash soon, and in our days. V’chane yihi ratzon.
 
Shabbat Shalom
 
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org.
 
Please contact me at [email protected] to be added to my weekly email list.
 
*** My audio shiurim on the topics of Tefilah and Tanach may be found at: http://tinyurl.com/8hsdpyd
 
*** I have posted 164 of Rabbi Soloveitchik’s English language audio shiurim (MP3 format) spanning the years 1958-1984. Please click on the highlighted link: The Rav