Parshas Vayikra 5779

Washing the Sacrifices?

The Torah writes (Leviticus 1:9):

Its entrails and legs shall be washed with water, and the priest shall turn the whole into smoke on the altar as a burnt offering, an offering by fire of pleasing odor to the LORD.

Bechor Shor (ibid) explains why:

Washing" for the innards is only written for the burnt offering. This is since the sin-offering and the guilt-offering are eaten by priests, and the wellbeing-offering is eaten by its owners -- if one wants to wash it they may! But this, the burnt-offering, comes to the table of the King, and one needs to prepare it in a respectful manner. But they are burnt outside.

Similarly in Daas Zekeinim (ibid):

seeing that these parts are going to be presented at the “King’s” Table, extreme care had to be taken that everything was meticulously clean and no trace of blood was visible. On the other hand, when writing of animals which were not served up on the “King’s” Table but were burned outside sacred grounds, the Torah lumps together “its insides and its excrement,” (Leviticus 4,11) as it does in Leviticus 1,16, and 27 where flesh, skin, and excrement are all being burned at the same time and place.

 Sifsei Chachamim (ibid) explains who does it:

This is done either by a kohen or by a Levite. Thus Scripture must specify that the kohen is the one who will kindle .

The Mitzva to Destroy Amalek

The Torah (Deuteronomy 25:17-19) writes:

Remember what Amalek did to you on your journey, after you left Egypt—how, undeterred by fear of God, he surprised you on the march, when you were famished and weary, and cut down all the stragglers in your rear. Therefore, when the LORD your God grants you safety from all your enemies around you, in the land that the LORD your God is giving you as a hereditary portion, you shall blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven. Do not forget!

Rashi (ibid) writes:

both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep (a quotation from I Samuel 15:3, stating how the Amalekites were to be destroyed), so that the name of Amalek should never again be mentioned even in connection with a beast, in that one could say: “This beast belonged to Amalek” (Pesikta Zutrata).

However, the Rambam (Hilchos Melachim 6:1-4) says that we ask for peace first:

War is not conducted against anyone in the world until they are first offered peace (and refuse it), whether this is a Discretionary War or a War of Mitzvoh, as it says, “when you come close to the city to fight with it, you shall call to it to make peace” (Deut. 20:10).

(see this article by R' Elchanan Samet that discusses the reasoning behind this)

The Value of PI

The Gra writes that it is possible to derive the value of PI from a ksav/kri in Melachim (Kings I 7:23):

Then he made the tank of cast metal, 10 cubits across from brim to brim, completely round; it was 5 cubits high, and it measured 30 cubits in circumference.

The Ksav/Kri is ״וקוה״/״וקו״ which is the gematria of 111 and 106. This results in:

(111/106) x 3 = 3.14150943

(see this article for additional details)

Misc:

•  R' Josh Yuter cites the Shadal who comments on why salt is needed; he also mentions why Ibn Caspi didn't write a commentary on the beginning of Vayikra
• Rav Kook on why the future sacrifices may be without animals
  

Parshas Vayikra 5778

The reason for Korbanos

The Torah writes (Leviticus 1:2):
Speak to the Israelite people, and say to them: When any of you presents an offering of cattle to the LORD, he shall choose his offering from the herd or from the flock.

The Rambam explains (Guide 3:32):

Many precepts in our Law are the result of a similar course adopted by the same Supreme Being. It is, namely, impossible to go suddenly from one extreme to the other: it is therefore according to the nature of man impossible for him suddenly to discontinue everything to which he has been accustomed ... But the custom which was in those days general among all men, and the general mode of worship in which the Israelites were brought up, consisted in sacrificing animals in those temples which contained certain images, to bow down to those images, and to burn incense before them; religious and ascetic persons were in those days the persons that were devoted to the service in the temples erected to the stars, as has been explained by us. It was in accordance with the wisdom and plan of God, as displayed in the whole Creation, that He did not command us to give up and to discontinue all these manners of service; for to obey such a commandment it would have been contrary to the nature of man, who generally cleaves to that to which he is used; it would in those days have made the same impression as a prophet would make at present if he called us to the service of God and told us in His name, that we should not pray to Him, not fast, not seek His help in time of trouble; that we should serve Him in thought, and not by any action. For this reason God allowed these kinds of service to continue; He transferred to His service that which had formerly served as a worship of created beings, and of things imaginary and unreal, and commanded us to serve Him in the same manner

The Ramban argues (Leviticus 1:9):

Since the deeds of people are determined by thought, speech and action, God, may He be blessed, commanded that when he sins, he brings a sacrifice and place his hands upon him corresponding to the deed, and confess with his mouth corresponding to the speech, and burn the innards and the kidneys, as they are the instruments of thought and desire. And the limbs [of the sacrifice] correspond to the hands and feet of a person that does all of his work. And he sprinkles the blood on the altar corresponding to the blood of his soul, so that a person think in doing all of this that he sinned to God with his body and his soul, and it is fit for him that his blood be spilled and his body burnt; were it not for the kindness of the Creator, who took an exchange and ransom from him [in] the sacrifice - that its blood be instead of his blood and its soul be instead of his soul. 

Sforno explains (ibid 1:2):

... G’d is not interested in the fools who offer sacrificial animals if they have not first humbled themselves...By means of this symbolic act, the humility with which the owner of the sin offering is to approach G’d prior to gaining a chance of acceptance and forgiveness, has been demonstrated.

Sefer HaIkarim (3:25) explains:

Or if we say that the purpose of the sacrifices is to bring together and unite the upper powers with the lower,

Shadal (ibid 1:2) explains that these were like food and gifts given to a king

Parshas Vayikra 5777

Four Things about Kehuna - Priesthood

1. The original plan was for the firstborn to serve as Priests and Levites, we see evidence of this for Priests in Exodus 24:5 (see Rashi regarding the sacrifices brought on Mt. Sinai by the firstborn) and for Levites (see Chizkuni on Exodus 8:12 regarding the waving of the Levites in exchange for the firstborn). It does require further study since the tribe of Levi was already set side as priests before the Exodus (see Rashi on Exodus 5:4).
2. In order to serve as priests, Aaron and his sons need to undergo a special inauguration ceremony during the establishment of the Tabernacle. However, that ceremony itself needed a priest and so G-d made Moses into a High Priest (see Zevachim 101b).
3. Once the priesthood was given, it was only given to people specifically enumerated by the verse, so Moses got it but not his sons, and Aaron and his sons, but possibly not his grandsons (see our earlier discussion about how that applied to Pinchas).
4. Priesthood was not meant to be shared with kingship and so we find that King Uzziah was punished with leprosy when he attempted to bring sacrifices as a priest (see Chronicles II 26:16). Similarly, the Hasmonean kings was also accused of the same problem of sharing priesthood and kingship, however, as I once heard from Rabbi Shmuel Irons, the position of the High Priest held the highest authority during the Era of the Second Temple and that was the way that the Hasmonean kings could rule. Their problem was that once things stabilized, they should have given up one of them.

Parshas Vayikra (5776)

Who is the Anointed Priest?

The Torah writes (Leviticus 4:3):

if the anointed priest shall sin so as to bring guilt on the people, then let him offer for his sin, which he hath sinned, a young bullock without blemish unto the LORD for a sin-offering.

Targum Onkelos (ibid) explains that this is the Kohen Gadol

Mishnah (Horyaot 3:4) explains further:

Who is the anointed? The one anointed with the oil of anointing, not the one with many clothes. There is no difference between the priest anointed with the oil of anointing and the one with many clothes except for the bull offered for [the violation of] any of the commandments.

(Barternura explains that after the flask of oil was hidden, Kohen Gadol was appointed by wearing his garments. Rambam explains that this was the case in the Second Temple.)

The Talmud (Horayos 12a) cites an opposing view:

We learned: [Kohen Gadol] who wears extra garments brings a bullock over sinning, these are the words of Rabbi Meir

The Talmud (ibid) also excludes another case:

If anointed, maybe this refers to the one anointed for war? No, for it says "and the priest that was anointed", referring one who has no other anointed one above him

Who is the Ruler?

The Torah writes (Leviticus 4:22):

When a ruler sinneth, and doeth through error any one of all the things which the LORD his God hath commanded not to be done, and is guilty

The Mishna (Horyaot 3:3) explains this is a king:

Who is the prince? This is the king, as it says (Leviticus 4:22): "And he did one of the commandments of Hashem his God," [this refers to] a prince, because there is no one above him besides Hashem his God.

The Talmud (Horayos 10a) excludes a ruler with leprosy:

Our Rabbis taught: When in ruler sinneth excludes a sick man. Should he, because he is, sick, be removed from his rank? — R. Abdimi b. Hama replied: The exclusion refers to a ruler who became leprous; as it is said, And the Lord smote the king, so that he was a leper unto the day of his death, and dwelt in the house of freedom,' and Jotham the king's son wins over the household.

The Tamud later on (ibid 11b) includes the kings of both Israel and Judah, and excludes the princes of tribes

(There is uncertainty regarding the Nasi at the time of the Mishnah and the exliarch in Babylon, whether they would have been included in this)


[Published at parshapeople.blogspot.com / Comments welcome to parsha-people@publishyoursefer.com]