"It
came to pass on the eighth day that Moses called Aaron and his sons and the
elders of Israel " (Lev. 9:1). "Shmini," translated “eighth,” denotes a new beginning. The
previous Parasha ended with A'haron and his sons being charged to "not go
outside the door of the tabernacle of meeting for seven days, until the days of
your consecration are ended. For seven days he shall consecrate you" (8:33). And
again in 8:35: “Therefore you shall stay at the door of the tabernacle of
meeting day and night for seven days, and keep the charge of YHVH…" Thus, on the
eighth day A'haron was to "take… a calf as a sin offering and a ram as a burnt
offering, without blemish, and offer them before YHVH" (9:2). It is no mistake
or coincidence that on this eighth day, symbolic of departure from the 'former
things,' A'haron, who had played a major role in the golden calf episode, was to
offer, first and foremost, a calf. This offering is rendered a cut off mark, in
the course of which "all the congregation drew near and stood before YHVH" (9:5
emphasis added). In this way the atonement was fully made (see v. 7, and then
all the way to v. 22) and YHVH's relationship with Yisrael could be restored.
Following
this procedure, as specifically prescribed by YHVH, resulted in “… the glory
[kavod] of YHVH appear[ing] to all
the people" right after Moshe and A’haron blessed the people (v. 23). According
to Nechama Leibowitz, "The revelation of the Divine glory here denotes a reward
for their efforts in erecting a Sanctuary for the Shekina".[1]
“And fire came out from before YHVH and consumed the burnt offering and the fat
on the altar. And all the people saw it, and they shouted and fell on their
faces" (v.24). These sin offerings, therefore, became a demarcation point,
separating sinfulness and profanity from YHVH's Holiness and Glory. The motif of
the holy or clean versus the profane or the unclean is threaded throughout this
Parasha, as we shall continue to observe.
When
the above described scene reached its peak, with "fire [coming] out from before
YHVH… consuming the burnt offering…," as we just observed, we are suddenly
transferred without as much as a breather into the next one, with its parallel
yet contradicting elements. And so we read in 10:1 about A’haron’s sons, Nadav
and Avihu, taking censors and putting fire and incense on them, which YHVH had
"not commanded them." Theirs was a fire of their own
making ("zara" - foreign, strange, of a different kind), which they brought near before YHVH, and "so fire went
out from YHVH and devoured them" (v. 2). When the Children of Yisrael and their
leaders did as they were
commanded (ref, 9:10) and drew
near to YHVH, His
fire consumed the offering and He showed them His Glory. But when Nadav and Avihu brought near that which YHVH did not command, the consequence was that
a fire went out from Him, but
consumed them (ref. 10:1-2). The similar terms used
to describe both episodes make for a sinister symmetry, one that demonstrates
that often there may be but a fine line which separates the holy from the
profane, the desirable from the detestable. An example of contrasting terms, that serve to highlight
certain situations is seen in 9:24, where we read that the people "shouted" - (va)yaronou - joyfully. In contrast, after
Nadav and Avihu's sad annihilation, it says that A'haron was utterly silent, or even motionless - (va)yidom – root of d.o.m (ref. 10:3). In Psalm
94:17, the expression "dwelling
in silence" ("shachna
duma”), denotes death. Psalm
115:17 it is written: "The dead do not praise YHVH, nor any who go down into
silence" (duma, once
again).
"By those who come near Me I must be regarded as holy; And before all the people
I must be glorified" (10:3) is the explanation as to why Nadav and Avihu,
because of their lofty positions, had to be totally obedient to YHVH and could
not misrepresent him as they had done. In fact, they are called here by YHVH
"k'rova'i" - those who are close (or near) to Me - and as such, YHVH was to
“be rendered
holy" ("eka'desh") by,
or through them. In addition, their actions were supposed to glorify YHVH causing others to also do so,
with "eka'ved" being the term used, meaning
literally "heavy," and by implication "highly esteemed."
In
the second part of chapter 10, Moshe instructs A'haron and his two "remaining
sons" (v. 12) to not display any signs of mourning. On the other hand, the rest
of Yisrael was given permission to "bewail the burning which YHVH has kindled" (v. 6,
italics added). Interestingly, the “burning” here is not attached to the
particular individuals, neither to human beings in general or even to death. The
word used, which sounds so dreadfully detached, is "s'refa," meaning "burning” or “to burn." It appears that emphasis is put here
on the calamity inflicted by YHVH, with the priests being expected to identify
with His approach (hence His
strict orders to them not to display signs of mourning over the death of their
relatives), whereas the “whole house of Israel ” were allowed to “bewail the
burning”. In addition, the priests were to remain inside the tent (cf. 8:33,35,
mentioned above) as long as YHVH's anointing oil was on them, and were also
prohibited from drinking wine and intoxicating drink in the course of their
service in Ohel Mo'ed ("Tent of Meeting", 10:6-9). This latter requirement led
some commentators to surmise that YHVH's anger against Nadav and Avihu was
kindled because they may have been inebriated while ministering. The purpose for
these measures was, do “that you [i.e. the priests] may teach the children of
Israel all the statutes which YHVH
has spoken to them by the hand of Moses" (v. 11). But in order to be able to do
so they had, according to verse 10, to "…distinguish between holy and unholy,
and between unclean and clean." It is this verse which encapsulates or
summarizes the motif (as mentioned above) of the entire Parasha.
In
the following section (10:12-20), Moshe reproves A'haron and his remaining (“nota'rim”) sons, El'azar and Itamar, for
not having eaten the remaining
(“noteret”) offering, which was
rightfully theirs. Instead, they burned the goat for the sin offering ("soraf," v. 16 – identical word to the
“fire” mentioned in 10:6 above, which consumed Nadav and Avihu), making a fire
of their own and getting rid of that which they were supposed to consume. Here
we hear A'haron expressing himself for the first time after the loss of his two
sons, a loss he refers to tersely as, “such things [that] have befallen me" (v.
19), and wondering if the eating that was required “would have … been good - (ha)yitav - in the eyes of YHVH. And Moses
heard and it was good -
(va)yitav - in his eyes" (vs.
19-20). The echoing of A'haron's "good" in Moshe’s response seems to indicate
that harmony had been restored.
Our
Parasha clearly brings out the role of the priests in the Israelite society, and
their view
of their office. S.R. Hirsch elaborates on this issue: "The Hebrew priest is
part of the nation, and his position is not an isolated one before God, but one
that he occupies only within and through the nation….” Regarding the sacrifices
and their function relative to the Almighty and to the worshipper, he says: “The
closeness of and approach to God… may only be found through obedience to and
acceptance of God's will… The offering means to place the offerer at God's
service, i.e., he wants to fulfill God's wishes through his offering. All
offerings are therefore forms of Divine demands which the offerer, through his
offering, accepts as the guidelines for his future conduct."[2]
In line with the theme of
separating the clean from the unclean, the rest of the Parasha (chapter 11) is
devoted to the type of animal, fish and fowl permitted for consumption, as well
as to those that were forbidden. It is interesting that verses 4-7 constitute a
list of four animals, all of which have one of the two traits required, but are
devoid of the other. However, the first trait mentioned in all four cases
happens to be the one that fulfills the requirement, whereas the specification
of the missing one is second. The lesson to be learned here is simple: even
though things may seem 'right' or 'proper' at first sight, they should be
investigated further, lest deception sets in (e.g. notice the order of
adjectives in the title of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil). The above tragic scene, with Nadav
and Avihu, A’haron’s sons, who may have had ‘good’ intentions, illustrates this
point even more poignantly. YHVH’s holiness and His charge upon His people, to
be “set apart as He is,” cannot to be measured by human standards of ‘good’ and
‘evil,’ and requires unquestionable obedience.
"You
shall not make yourselves abominable with any creeping thing that creeps; nor
shall you make yourselves unclean with them, lest you be defiled by them, for I
am YHVH your Elohim. You shall therefore consecrate yourselves, and you shall be
holy, for I am holy. Neither shall you defile yourselves with any creeping thing
that creeps on the earth, for I am YHVH who brings you up out of the land of Egypt , to be your Elohim. You shall
therefore be holy, for I am holy" (11:43-45). The Israelites were separated for
YHVH’s sake by being brought out of Egypt , the land of bondage, where
they belonged to someone else (whose servants they were). Now, however, they
belonged to their Maker. They were, therefore, to reflect His nature of
holiness.
Aligning
themselves with their Elohim and His ways is what makes the Israelite Nation a
"holy nation." Partaking of that which is abominable in His sight, or even
coming into contact with it renders those who choose to do so just as abominable - "sheh’ketz." “You shall not make
yourselves (lit. “your soul”) abominable – teshak’tzu” - with any creeping thing
that creeps” (v. 43). The
"abomination (of desolation)" in Daniel 11:31 and 12:11 employs the same word,
with a certain modification (“shikutz”).
Our
Parasha, quite characteristically, ends with a clear reminder of its theme: “to
distinguish, [or separate], the unclean from the clean…" (v.
47).
Notes
1. New Studies in Vayikra Part 1, Nechama Leibowitz,
trans. Aryeh Newman. Eliner Library, Department for Torah Education and Culture
in the Diaspora. Hemed Books Inc., Brooklyn , N.Y.
2. Ibid
No comments:
Post a Comment