Parashat Bechuchotai 5782, 2022:
 
I Will Walk Among You and Be Your G-d
 
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.
 
Our parasha is best known for the 31 pasukim that comprise the Tochacha (Admonition or Reproof, Sefer Vayikra 26:14-41, and 43-46). Although these frightening verses far overshadow the preceding Brachot section (26:3-13), to the extent that the blessings are nearly eclipsed, these very same brachot have been a powerful force in the creation of the Jewish faith structure. This idea is given poignant voice in the early midrashic work, Pesikta d’Rav Kahana (19):

In our time, the nations of the world ceaselessly deride the Jewish people and say to them: “For how long will you be murdered for your G-d, give up your very souls for Him and be killed for Him? How much misery He brings upon you, how mush embarrassment He brings upon you, how much anguish He brings upon you! Come and join us and we will make you commanders, town governors and treasurers!” (Midrash translations and brackets my own)
 
[And how do the Jewish people respond?] And the Jews enter their synagogues and houses of study and take a Sefer Torah and read therein [from the Brachot]: “I will walk among you and be your G-d,” (26:12) “and I will make you fruitful and increase you, and I will set up My covenant with you.” (26:9), and they are comforted. (All Tanach translations, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach) 
 
And when the time of ultimate redemption arrives, the Holy One blessed be He will say to the Jewish people, “I am amazed! How have you waited for Me for all these years?” And they will respond before the Holy One blessed be He: “Master of the Universe! Were it not for the Sefer Torah You have written for us, the nations of the world would already have destroyed our relationship with You! As the text writes: “This I reply to my heart; therefore, I have hope.” (Megillat Eichah 3:21) And so, too, did Dovid [HaMelech] declare: “Were not Your Torah my delight, then I would have perished in my affliction.” (Sefer Tehillim 119:92)
 
This midrash is comprised of three distinct sections: The mockery of the nations of the world regarding our relationship to the Almighty and their “offer” to abandon Him, our Torah-centric response to their abuse, and the dialogue that will b’zman karov (one day soon) take place between Hashem and our storied nation. I believe it is the middle portion that is of singular import and, in particular, the verse, “I will walk(v’hithalachti) among you and be your G-d, and you will be My people.”
 
In my view, one of the most cogent analyses of this verse is offered by the Sforno (Rabbi Ovadiah ben Ya’akov, c. 1475-c. 1550) in his examination of the term, mithalech, the nounal form of v’hithalachti:

The term, “mithalech,” connotes one who walks to multiple locations rather than to one place alone. Therefore, it as if [Hashem] said: “I will walk among you, and my divine illumination will not flow to one place alone as it did in the Mishkan and in the Beit HaMikdash.” As the text states: “And they shall make Me a sanctuary and I will dwell in their midst.” (Sefer Shemot 25:8)  That is, in this manner and in this place alone I will dwell among you… Instead, I will walk among you and you will see My glory in every place where there will be the righteous ones of the generation, for they are “the holy place of the dwellings of the Most High.” (Sefer Tehillim 46:5)  This is where His ultimate intention (kavanah) is realized…
 
The Sforno’s explanation of mithalech is reminiscent of a pasuk that appears in Parashat Bereishit: “And they [Adam and Chava] heard the voice of Hashem Elokim going— mithalech—in the garden toward the direction of the sun and the man and his wife hid from before Hashem Elokim in the midst of the trees of the garden.” (3:8)  The fact that Adam and Chava immediately recognized “the voice of Hashem” indicates that they were accustomed to hearing it prior to having eaten from the Pri Eitz HaDa’at (Tree of Knowledge). In other words, in their pre-sin state, when they had a perfect relationship with the Almighty, He was accessible to them 24/7. After their sin, however, this state of bliss would no longer be.
 
In my estimation, the Sforno is teaching us a very profound lesson, namely, in the time of the Mashiach, when our pasuk, “I will walk (v’hithalachti) among you and be your G-d, and you will be My people” is finally realized, we will return to the kind of relationship that obtained between Hashem and Adam and Chava: His divine presence will be palpable in “every place where there will be the righteous ones of the generation.” With the Almighty’s help and our fervent desire, may this time come 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 rdbe718@gmail.com to be added to my weekly email list.
 
*** My audio shiurim on the topics of Tefilah, 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 prohibition of charging a fellow indigent Jew interest on a loan is one of the many subjects addressed in our parasha:

If your brother becomes destitute and his hand falters beside you, you shall support him [whether] a convert or a resident, so that he can live with you (v’chai imach). You shall not take from him interest (neshech) or increase, and you shall fear your G-d, and let your brother live with you (v’chai achicha imach). You shall not give him your money with interest (neshech), nor shall you give your food with increase. (Sefer Vayikra 25:35-37, this and all Tanach translations, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach)
 
While the topic of neshech is analyzed and expanded upon throughout Rabbinic thought, on the peshat-level, our pasukim are quite clear: one may not charge interest on a loan to a fellow Jew in order for “your brother [to] live with you” without additional financial stress. An entirely different approach, however, to the words, “v’chai achicha imach,” are offered by Talmud Bavli, Baba Metzia 62a:

The Gemara asks: And Rabbi Yoḥanan, what does he do with this verse: “And your brother shall live with you”? The Gemara answers: He requires the verse for that which is taught in a baraita: If two people were walking on a desolate path and there was a jug [kiton] of water in the possession of one of them, and the situation was such that if both drink from the jug, both will die, as there is not enough water, but if only one of them drinks, he will reach a settled area, there is a dispute as to the halakha. Ben Petora taught: It is preferable that both of them drink and die and let neither one of them see the death of the other. This was the accepted opinion until Rabbi Akiva came and taught that the verse states: “And your brother shall live with you,” indicating that your life takes precedence over the life of the other. (The William Davidson Talmud, translation, Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz zatzal)
 
This baraita discusses a scenario wherein one of two individuals traveling together owns a very limited supply of water. Ben Petora opines that the water must be shared so that one of them does not witness the other’s death. As such, he interprets, “in order that your brother should live--v’chai achicha,” in a literal manner and maintains that the water should be shared at all costs. In stark contrast, Rabbi Akiba stresses the importance of the very end of our verse “with you--imach.” In his view, while you should do everything in your power to enable your fellow Jew to live, nonetheless, “chayecha kodmim l’chayeh chaveircha—your life takes precedence over your fellow Jew’s life” when you are the sole owner of the limited resource. It should be noted that the Rif (Rabbeinu Yitzhak Alfasi, 1013-1103), and the Rosh (Rabbi Asher ben Yechiel, 1250-1328), quote this baraita verbatim in their respective works, indicating that they concur with Rabbi Akiba’s opinion as a matter of actual halachic practice.
 
As we have seen, our baraita focuses upon a case of first party possession of a scarce resource. According to Rabbi Akiba, the owner is entitled to fully exercise his rights of possession and drink the water, even though this will result in the death of his companion. At first glance, this p’sak din seems to contradict another highly celebrated position of this mishnaic period sage: “Rabbi Akiva stated: ‘V’ahavta l’reicha kamocha, zeh klal gadol baTorah—And you should love your neighbor as you love yourself, this is the overarching principle of the Torah.’” (Talmud Yerushalmi, Nedarim 9:4)  The question is clear: How can Rabbi Akiva simultaneously maintain, “chayecha kodmim l’chayeh chaveircha,” and “v’ahavta l’reicha kamocha, zeh klal gadol baTorah?” That is, if you maintain the first position, the second seems impossible to fulfill.
 
We are fortunate that the universally recognized gadol of his generation, Rav Moshe Sofer zatzal (Chatam Sofer, 1762-1839) addresses this exact question:

If it is the case that “chayecha kodmim l’chayeh chaveircha,” how is it possible to fulfill “v’ahavta l’reicha kamocha?” [When Rabbi Akiva stated,] “chayecha kodmim l’chayeh chaveircha,” however, this was said regarding matters that pertain to this world (b’inyanei olam hazeh), but in regard to those things that refer to Eternal Life (b’chayeh hanitzchi’yi), that is Torah study, one is obligated to teach others—even if he will diminish his own Torah study—nonetheless, he is obligated to learn with others. Therefore, Rabbi Akiva said: “zeh klal gadol baTorah,” that is, regarding Torah study, it is the overarching principle to love your fellow Jew as you love yourself… (Torat Moshe, Parashat Kedoshim, s.v. v’ahavta l’reicha kamocha, translation, brackets and underlining my own)
 
In many ways, this analysis is an intellectual tour de force. The Chatam Sofer interprets the phrase, “zeh klal gadol baTorah,” in such a singular fashion that he was able to explain this ruling of Rabbi Akiva’s as referring specifically to Torah study, rather than as a universal Torah principle. In so doing, he deftly removes any seeming contradictions in Rabbi Akiva’s thought and reveals to us that “chayecha kodmim l’chayeh chaveircha” pertains to matters of this world, whereas “v’ahavta l’reicha kamocha zeh klal gadol baTorah” refers solely to teaching Torah to others.
 
It is crucial to note that the Chatam Sofer’s unique interpretation of Rabbi Akiva’s axiom does not refer to his view regarding the mitzvah of “v’ahavta l’reicha kamocha” per se. In this regard, I am convinced he embraced the famous words of the Rambam (Maimonides, 1135-1240):

It is a positive commandment of Rabbinic origin to visit the sick, comfort mourners, to prepare for a funeral, prepare a bride, accompany guests, attend to all the needs of a burial, carry a corpse on one's shoulders, walk before the bier, mourn, dig a grave, and bury the dead, and also to bring joy to a bride and groom and help them in all their needs. These are deeds of kindness that one carries out with his person that have no limit (gemilut chasadim sh’b’gufo sh’ain lahem shiur). Although all these mitzvot are of Rabbinic origin, they are included in the Scriptural commandment “v’ahavta l’reicha kamocha. That charge implies that whatever you would like other people to do for you, you should do for your comrade in the Torah and mitzvot. (Sefer Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Avel 14:1, translation, Rav Eliyahu Touger)
 
With Hashem’s help and our fervent desire, may we ever participate in acts of gemilut chasadim sh’b’gufo sh’ain lahem shiur, and may we thereby bring shalom to our world. V’chane yihi ratzon.
 
Shabbat Shalom
 
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org.
 
Please contact me at rdbe718@gmail.com to be added to my weekly email list.
 
*** My audio shiurim on the topics of Tefilah, 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.
 
Chapter 23 of our parasha is known as “parashat hamoadim,” since it contains the Torah-based chagim we encounter throughout the Jewish year. It begins with, “And Hashem spoke to Moshe, saying, ‘Speak to b’nai Yisrael and say to them: Hashem’s appointed [holy days] that you shall designate as holy occasions. These are My appointed [holy days].’” The chapter concludes with, “And Moshe told b’nai Yisrael [these laws] of Hashem’s appointed [holy days].” (Sefer Vayikra 23:44, this and all Tanach translations, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach)  At first glance, this final verse seems strangely out of place. After all, except for 23:3 (Shabbat), the Torah has presented 42 pasukim that are laser-focused on the moadim, if so, what, if anything, does it contribute to our understanding?
 
Rashi zatzal (1040-1105) was also challenged by this verse’s placement:

Why was it necessary to write here, “And Moshe told,” for is it not the case that Moshe proclaimed all the mitzvot to the Jewish people? As such, what is the purpose of “and Moshe told b’nai Yisrael [these laws] of Hashem’s appointed [holy days]?” This comes to teach us that Moshe explained to them the laws of each moad in its proper time to make known to them the laws of Elokim and His Torah. They subsequently accepted and upheld (kiblu v’kiymu) the reward of the mitzvot upon themselves, and their children, in this matter and in the future. (Commentary on Talmud Bavli, Megillah 32a, translation my own)
 
In some ways, Rashi’s comment was foreshadowed by Onkelos’ (first century) Aramaic translation/explanation of our pasuk: “U’malil Moshe yat s’dar mo’adayah d’Hashem v’alaphinun l’b’nai Yisrael—And Moshe stated the order of the Moadim of Hashem and explained them [that is, their details] to the Jewish people.” In sum, this verse is very significant, as it informs us that Moshe reviewed the calendrical order and meaning of the moadim, and taught the correct way to observe each one.
 
Closer to our own time, Rabbi Yeshayahu ben Avraham Ha-Levi Horowitz zatzal (the Shelah HaKadosh, c. 1555-1630) presented a cogent explanation of this verse that gives voice to the unique import of learning Torah on the Moadim:

It is necessary to learn Torah on yom tov…since yom tov is particularly chosen (mesugal) for this more so than any other day. As we learn in the baraita at the conclusion of tractate Megillah in Talmud Bavli (32a): “and Moshe told b’nai Yisrael [these laws] of Hashem’s appointed [holy days]. Moshe established the practice for the Jewish people to ask questions and analyze the various matters associated with each day [that is moad]—the laws of Pesach on Pesach and so forth…” and this is the din (law) on each of the moadot. (Shnei Luchot HaBrit, Commentary on Talmud Bavli, Succah, Perek Ner Mitzvah, 51, this and the following passage, translation brackets and underlining my own)
 
The Shelah HaKadosh emphasized that the moadim are mesugal for learning Torah, a notion that he derived from our verse and the baraita he cited. He provided powerful support for this interpretation based upon a drasha for the first day of Pesach from Rabbi Yehoshua ibn Shu’eib zatzal (1280-1340) that speaks of the outstanding nature of learning Torah on Shabbat and Yom Tov:

When they gather in the synagogues and houses of study to pray and hear words of Torah on the Shabbatot and Yamim Tovim, this is more accepted and desired by the Holy One blessed be He [than any other days], since they have left their physical desires [for sumptuous meals] behind] and have come [instead] to hear words of Torah…this love is more beautiful than all other varieties of love [the Jewish people show to Hashem]…
 
In his drasha, Rav Shu’eib points to a pasuk from Shir HaShirim that further illustrates the great significance of Torah study: “How fair and how pleasant you are, a love with delights;” (7:7) wherein “delights” are a metaphoric reference for the Torah. May we be zocheh (merit) to experience this intimate attachment to Hashem’s holy Torah, and may we ever find joy in its study on Shabbat and the Moadim. V’chane yihi ratzon
 
Shabbat Shalom
 
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org.
 
Please contact me at rdbe718@gmail.com to be added to my weekly email list.
 
*** My audio shiurim on the topics of Tefilah, 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.
 
Parashat Kedoshim includes many well-known mitzvot, such as reverence for parents (Sefer Vayikra 19:3), the prohibition of lashon hara (19:16), and the obligation to demonstrate love toward other people through acts of kindness (19:18). Like most of the commandments in our parasha, these mitzvot are under the rubric of mishpatim, a category of laws that are essential for the functioning of a proper Jewish society. The Rambam (Maimonides, 1135-1204) defines them in this manner: “The mishpatim are those commandments whose rationale is revealed and the value that obtains as a result of their performance is manifest in this world. For example: the prohibitions of stealing and murder, and the obligation to honor one’s father and mother.” (Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Meilah 8:8, translation my own).
 
In contrast, our parasha also includes a number of mitzvot that are included under the category of hukim, defined by the Rambam as “those commandments whose rationale are unknown.” Talmud Bavli, Yoma 67b further elaborates upon the fundamental difference that obtains between mishpatim and hukim in this celebrated passage:

Our Rabbis taught: “You should perform my mishpatim.” (Sefer Vayikra 18:4)  These are matters that if they were not actually written [by Hashem], it is logical that they would have been [written by the Jewish people]. They include: the prohibitions of idol worship, forbidden acts of intimacy, murder, stealing, and cursing Hashem. … Hukim, these are actions wherein the Satan [Rashi, the yetzer hara] attempts to disprove their validity and veracity, including: the prohibitions of eating pig flesh, wearing garments comprised of a mixture of linen and wool threads (shaatnez), the act of relieving a brother-in-law of his obligation to marry his widowed sister-in-law (chalitzah), the ritual purification of the individual afflicted with tzarat, and the scapegoat rite [of Yom Kippur]. [Since you cannot understand them] perhaps you will say that they are completely worthless and devoid of meaning! Therefore, the Torah states: “I am the L-rd your G-d.” (Sefer Vayikra 18:4)  I am He who has decreed them [that is, the hukim] and you do not have permission to question them. (Translation my own)
 
My rebbe and mentor, Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik zatzal (1903-1993), known as the “Rav” by his followers and disciples, formulates a basic question as to why our parasha combines both these classes of mitzvot, “The Torah expects us to lead a dignified and honorable life because it is a book of reasonable laws. So why does it mingle chok and mishpat?” (This and the following quotes, Darosh Darash Yosef: Discourses of Rav Yosef Dov Halevi Soloveitchik on the Weekly Parashah, Rabbi Avishai C. David, editor, page 146, underlining my own). His answer advances our understanding of the mitzvot in new and exciting ways:

This mingling carries with it an additional message. The hukim, which are seemingly unreasonable and presented in enigmatic language, also have a meaning we cannot grasp. We ultimately trust that hukim are as reasonable as the mishpatim. In fact, they may even be more reasonable. The highest of the mishpatim is to love your fellow human being as yourself. The Torah says, as it were: I have another group of mitzvot called hukim that are not as comprehensible, such as shaatnez. God says: Trust me in everything. If I can trust my neighbor, why should I not trust God and His Torah?... Since one might have been inclined to dismiss the hukim categorically, the verse ends with the phrase “I am the Lord your God.” In other words, God tells us: I am the God who gave you both hukim and mishpatim. Why would I give you laws that are unreasonable?... Our special relationship with God obligates us to go beyond our logic and trust God completely. Later, in retrospect, we may understand.
 
The element of trust (bitachon) in the commandments is one of the key elements that emerges from the Rav’s analysis of these categories of mitzvot. In essence, bitachon is the actualization of emunah (faith) in our daily lives, in that it takes emunah from the realm of the theoretical to that of practically actionable behaviors. In particular, the Rav is teaching us that our current inability to comprehend the hukim is not the deciding factor as to whether or not we should obey them. Instead, “our special relationship with God obligates us to go beyond our logic and trust God completely.”

The Rav’s presentation is highly reminiscent of a well-known passage in Sefer Tehillim: “Yisrael, trust in the L-rd; He is their help and their shield. Beit Aharon, trust in the L-rd; He is their help and their shield. Those who hold the L-rd in awe, trust in the L-rd; He is their help and their shield.” (115:9-11)  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 rdbe718@gmail.com to be added to my weekly email list.
 
*** My audio shiurim on the topics of Tefilah, 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.
 
This week’s parasha begins with the pasuk: “And Hashem spoke to Moshe after the death of Aaron’s two sons, when they drew near before Hashem, and they died.” (Sefer Vayikra 16:1, this and all Bible translations, The Judaic Press Complete Tanach)  This is a brief reference to one of the Torah’s most enigmatic pasukim: “And Aharon’s sons, Nadav and Avihu, each took his pan, put fire in them, and placed incense (ketoret) upon it, and they brought before the L-rd foreign fire (aish zarah), which He had not commanded them (asher lo tzivah otam).” (Sefer Vayikra, Parashat Shemini 10:1, this and all Bible translations, The Judaic Press Complete Tanach)

The behavior of Nadav and Avihu is very difficult to understand, since earlier in the Torah we find a passage that contains Hashem’s charge to offer ketoret each morning and afternoon, along with the explicit lo ta’aseh (prohibition) against offering ketoret when one has not been commanded to do so:

Aharon shall make incense of spices go up in smoke upon it; every morning when he sets the lamps in order, he shall make it go up in smoke. And when Aaron kindles the lights in the afternoon, he shall make it go up in smoke, continual incense before the L-rd for your generations. You shall offer up on it (lo ta’alu aluv) no foreign incense (ketoret zarah), burnt offering, or meal offering, and you shall pour no libation upon it. (Sefer Shemot 30:7-9)
 
For our purposes, ketoret zarah in this passage, and aish zarah in the Parashat Shemini citation, are functionally the same. In addition, the phrases, “lo ta’alu aluv,” herein, and “asher lo tzivah otam” in the Parashat Shemini pasuk, convey the same message: “It is forbidden to offer any incense upon the altar unless Hashem has commanded you to do so.” Surely, Nadav and Avihu, as students of both Moshe and Aharon, were privy to this information. As such, how and why did they so radically deviate from normative halachic practice?
 
In addressing this question, my rebbe and mentor, Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik zatzal (1903-1993), known as “the Rav” by his students and followers, begins by emphasizing the phrase, “asher lo tzivah otam:”

However, the Torah states, asher lo tzivah otam: On the day of their [Nadav and Avihu] installation, wearing their priestly vestments, they were overcome by ecstasy and by the need to express their emotions. The incense that they burned was identical to that which their father, Aharon, had offered. But there is one significant difference. Aharon was obeying God’s will, while Nadav and Avihu performed an action that God had not commanded. (This and the following Rav Soloveitchik quotes, Darosh Darash Yosef: Discourses of Rav Yosef Dov Halevi Soloveitchik on the Weekly Parashah, Rabbi Avishai C. David, editor, pages 223-226, brackets and underlining my own.)
 
This passage alerts us to the Rav’s insight that “they [Nadav and Avihu] were overcome by ecstasy and by the need to express their emotions.” He notes that the Jewish way to achieving this kind of ecstasy: “… requires us to fashion our lives according to God’s discipline, as illustrated by the word ve-tzivanu. The reason that we perform the mitzvah is our absolute surrender to God’s will. However, we must progress from that surrender to a profound spiritual experience that encompasses our entire being… In brief, the road consists of two steps: obedience to God’s command and discovering the spiritual treasures inherent in it.”
 
In contrast, the pagan orientation, “… the antithesis of the Torah approach, begins with excitement and culminates in sin and disillusionment. It very much parallels the approach of the modern world, where one uses drugs or alcohol in order to create an artificial feeling of euphoria...” Therefore, according to the Rav’s understanding, the ecstasy that is the driving force of these pagan acts is as false as the acts themselves. Tragically, while Nadav and Avihu embraced the correct form of a meaningful religious gesture, namely, the burning of ketoret upon the proper incense censers, it was nothing other than a humanly contrived act whose substance violated Hashem’s Torah. As such, the Rav concludes:

Therefore, the transgression of Nadav and Avihu, whom the Torah describes as sanctified [Sefer Vayikra 10:3], was that “they offered a strange fire concerning which they had not been commanded.” The divine command and our discipline in obeying that command are the only healthy routes to religious inspiration. Any deviation, especially by tzaddikim, is unacceptable and ultimately doomed to failure.
 
With Hashem’s help, and our fervent desire, may the path of authentic Torah observance enable us to draw near to Him and achieve the religious inspiration we desire. V’chane yihi ratzon.
 
Shabbat Shalom
 
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org.
 
Please contact me at rdbe718@gmail.com 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.
 
I have always found “metichilah ovdei avodah zarah hiyu avotainu, v’achshav karvanu HaMakom l’avodato (in the beginning, our ancestors were idol worshippers, and now, the Omnipresent One has brought us close to worship Him),” to be one of the many fascinating sentences in the Haggadah. It is based on the mishnaic statement: “One begins the telling of the Pesach story with that which is embarrassing (genut) and concludes with that which is praiseworthy (shevach),” (Pesachim 10:4) and is elaborated upon in Talmud Bavli, Pesachim 116a: “What is genut? Rav said: ‘in the beginning, our ancestors were idol worshippers,’ [and Shmuel] said: ‘We were slaves.’”
 
My rebbe and mentor, Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik zatzal (1903-1993), known as “the Rav” by his students and followers, suggests the following explanation of this machloket (dispute):

It appears that they [Rav and Shmuel] are disagreeing as to the essence of the nature of the Egyptian servitude. Rav maintains that the fundamental characteristic of this bondage was the subjugation of the soul (hashibude hanafshi), that is, the Egyptians enslaved the souls of the Jewish people until they were forced down to the level of the 49th gate of impurity... In contrast, Shmuel asserts that the fundamental quality of this slavery was the subjugation of the physical (hashibude hageshami), in that the Egyptians enslaved the Jewish people and forced them to perform back-breaking labor. (This, and the following citations, Haggadah shel Pesach: Siach HaGrid, Rabbi Yitzchak Abba Lichtenstein, editor, pages 45-46, translation and brackets my own)
 
In sum, Rabbi Soloveitchik asserts that Rav maintained spiritual subjugation (hashibude hanafshi) was the essence of our ancestors’ slavery experience in Egypt; whereas Shmuel held that it was fundamentally physical in nature (hashibude hageshami). These differing positions lead to contrasting opinions as to how to understand geulat mitzrayim (the Redemption from Egypt). For Rav, Rabbi Soloveitchik suggests:

… the essence of the geulah, wherein the Holy One blessed be He redeemed us, is also expressed through His drawing us near to Him to His service and giving us the Torah, for, in truth, this was the ultimate purpose of the Exodus… As such, Rav holds that when we tell the story of the Exodus from Egypt, we must begin with genut and speak of our spiritual enslavement and conclude with praise [to the Almighty] regarding the Redemption; namely, the Holy One blessed be He redeemed us, and brought us near to Him to His service.
 
According to the Rav, Shmuel, however, argued that the Redemption should be viewed as the miraculous act wherein:

… the Holy One blessed be He redeemed us from actual physical slavery (m’liyot avadim b’guf), and this is the case even though the purpose of yetziat mitzrayim was the receiving of the Torah. Nonetheless, the geulah from mitzrayim was [to cast off the shackles of slavery], m’hashibude hageshami. Therefore, when we tell the story of yetziat mitzrayim we begin with avadim hi’yinu.
 
The second half of the Haggadah’s statement, “v’achshav karvanu HaMakom l’avodato (and now, the Omnipresent One has brought us close to worship Him),” has received far less attention in the works of the standard Haggadah commentators than the first. This is striking, since the word, “v’achshav,” appears entirely out of place. As the Chasidic rebbe, Rav Avraham Dov Baer of Ovruch, Ukraine (d. 1840) notes:

One must be very exact and ask, what is the meaning of the expression “v’achshav,” when the Haggadah should have written, “v’achar kach karvanu (and afterwards He brought us),” since [everything that is mentioned in the subsequent proof text from Sefer Yehoshua] is prior to our forebears and their Departure from Egypt? (Sefer Bat Ayin, Sefer Vayikra, Drush l’Shabbat HaGadol, this and the following translation and brackets my own)
 
Rav Avraham Dov Baer’s response to his question is an interpretive tour de force:
The explanation of, “v’achshav,” is as follows: Since we now know [the true extent of] our [spiritual] defect, namely, that we were idol worshippers, and we are now exceedingly embarrassed because of the evil of our actions, we are [are now in the position] to beseech Hashem in great humility and embarrassment. As a result of our approaching Him in this manner, He will have mercy upon us, bring us near, and provide an opening for us to do teshuvah. [Moreover,] He will transform the letter “chet” [in the word chametz, chet-mem-tzaddi] into a “heh,” and thereby [metaphorically] change chametz [that represents the yetzer hara] into matzah [mem-tzaddi-heh] that signifies, [in this instance, that which is free of sin] …
 
May it be Hashem’s will and our fervent desire, that on this Pesach, we will be zocheh (merit) to transform all the chametz in our hearts and minds into matzah, so that we may serve Him in holiness and devotion. V’chane yihi ratzon.
 
Shabbat Shalom and Chag Sameach
 
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org.
 
Please contact me at rdbe718@gmail.com 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.
 
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 rdbe718@gmail.com 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 rdbe718@gmail.com 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 rdbe718@gmail.com 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 rdbe718@gmail.com 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