Leviticus · Chapter 9

And it came to pass on the eighth day that Moses called to Aaron and to his sons and to the elders of Israel.

ויהי ביום השמיני AND IT CAME TO PASS ON THE EIGHTH DAY of the installation of the priests into their sacred office (cf. Sifra); this was the New Moon of Nisan on which the Tabernacle was finally erected (cf. Rashi on Exodus 40:29) and it (that day) received ten crowns (it was distinguished in ten different ways) which are enumerated in Seder Olam 7 (Sifra, Shemini, Mechilta d'Miluim 2 1; Shabbat 87b). ולזקני ישראל AND TO THE ELDERS OF ISRAEL, to inform them that it was by the express command of God that Aaron was entering the Sanctuary and ministering in the high-priesthood, so that they might not say: “He is entering on his own authority, unbidden.”

"And it came to pass on the eighth day." It appeared to us that the eighth day was the eighth of Nisan, since the Tabernacle was erected on the first of the month — but the transmitters said it was the New Moon of Nisan, and that during the seven days of the investiture Moses would erect the Tabernacle each day and then dismantle it, in order to train [the priests] in its service and to teach [them]. "Moses called to Aaron and to his sons" — and they went out from the entrance of the Tent of Meeting, or the congregation entered into the courtyard.

ויהי ביום השמיני, it was on the eighth day; We need to analyse why the Torah had to introduce this chapter with the word ויהי. We are told in Megillah 10 that Rabbi Levi claimed there was an ancient tradition that every time the word ויהי appears it has a connotation of something painful having occurred. This view was challenged by the questioner pointing to the word ויהי in our portion which introduces the joyous event of Aaron performing the rites in the Tabernacle; furthermore, we have a Baraitha according to which this day was as joyous an occasion as the day on which G'd created Heaven and Earth, a day which is also introduced in the Torah by the words ויהי ערב ויהי בקר, "it was evening it was morning, etc." The Talmud answers that the saddening event in our portion was the death of Nadav and Avihu. The questioner in the Talmud continues, wanting to know why the word ויהי is used in Kings I 6,1 when the building of Solomon's Temple is reported. He also points to Genesis 29,10 where Jacob's encounter with his bride-to-be Rachel is introduced by the word ויהי. The questioner mentions a further occurrence of that word every time G'd completed part of the creation of the universe and the Torah describes the completion of that portion with the words ויהי ערב ויהי בקר. What were the negative elements on those occasions which prompted the Bible to draw our attention to them by means of the word ויהי? Rav Ashi answers that the word ויהי by itself may have either positive or negative connotations. When the word ויהי is followed by the word בימי, "during the lifetime of, etc." it invariably has a negative connotation. The Talmud added that there are five occasions when the expression ויהי בימי occurs in the Bible. Thus far the discussion in Megillah 10. Why did the questioner address his question to what is written in our verse, when the real question is what is written in Genesis over and over again, i.e. ויהי ערב ויהי בקר, which enabled the query about our verse not having a negative connotation? I must assume that the questioner obviously had all these verses in mind when he challenged Rabbi Levi's tradition. The only reason he introduced our verse was to make his question even more powerful by suggesting there are many such verses which clearly point to a joyous event. Alternatively, the questioner wanted to draw the opposite conclusion of the one Rabbi Levi reported as originating with the men of the great assembly. He wanted to argue that the word ויהי always introduces something joyous. He reasoned that just as the Tanna had compared our verse to the verse in Genesis in which the expression occurs for the first time and which certainly spoke about a positive event, so every time that expression occurs it denotes something positive, a joyous occasion. Using the verse ויהי ערב ויהי בקר in Genesis makes it much harder to refute the questioner's argument seeing no specific event is mentioned in that verse the nature of which could be disputed. R...

ויהי ביום השמיני קרא משה לאהרן ולבניו, “It came to pass on the eighth day that Moses called upon Aaron and his sons;” he intended to consecrate them as priests; ולזקני ישראל, “and the elders of Israel;” so that they could stand and watch them present their sacrificial offerings.” (B’chor shor)

חכמות בנתה ביתה חצבה עמודיה שבעה. טבחה טבחה מסכה יינה אף ערכה שלחנה. שלחה נערותיה תקרא, על גפי מרמי קרת., “Wisdom has built her house, when she has hewn seven pillars. She has slaughtered the meat, mixed her wine; she has also set her table. She has sent out her maids, she cries out from the highest places in the town.” (Proverbs 9,1-3). In these verses Solomon draws a comparison between our faith and that of the idolaters. He compares our faith to a wise woman, whereas he compares the idolaters to a foolish woman (verse 4 and onward). The words חכמות בנתה ביתה, are a reference to the wisdom contained in the Torah. The reason that the word appears in the plural is to remind us that all manner of wisdom extant are contained in the Torah. This is why he describes the house built by such a woman (faith) as based on seven different pillars. The number seven is a simile for "many pillars.” Any structure built on numerous pillars, foundations, is bound to endure. The number “seven” is not to be considered as literally seven, just as in Proverbs 24,16 the word “seven” in the line: “for the righteous will rise even if he falls seven times,” is not to be taken literally. The wise woman endeavours to prepare the food herself, mix the wine herself, and set the table herself instead of relying on others to do all this for her. This is implied in the words אף ערכה, i.e. she also does this herself. The wise woman, i.e. the Torah, also calls out to the women of her age, the foolish ones, trying to convince them that our faith is the only one which has substance. [This is the meaning of “she sends out her maids” Ed.] The paragraph is a parable describing the perfection of Torah in all its aspects, the Torah of which it is written לא תחסר כל בו, “it does not lack anything at all” (Deut. 8,9). Torah is a guide for the individual leading him to His Creator. Anyone who immerses himself in Torah thoroughly will find answers to all its detractors, i.e. to people who believe in the Trinity (the Catholics) or those who believe in other power-sharing by G’d and other deities. When he has studied Torah thoroughly he will feel that the table is set for him and all the food and drink has been served ready to eat. Torah can fill the needs of the mind of the foolish just as food and drink can serve the needs of our stomachs. This is what David had in mind when he wrote in Psalms 19,8 “The teaching of the Lord is perfect, renewing life; the decrees of the Lord are enduring, making the simple wise.” Solomon warns all people to preoccupy themselves with Torah and to abandon their previous foolish pursuits. This is the meaning of Proverbs 9,4: ”Who is a fool let him enter here; to the person who is devoid of sense she says.” What does Torah (the wise woman) have to say to such people devoid of sense? “Come and eat my bread, drink the wine which I have mixed, Forsake foolishness and live!, Walk in the way of understanding.” As a result (verse 11) “your days will be multiplied; you will experience added years of life.” Solomon compares the belief in idolatry to a foolish woman who offers the kind of advice which makes the multitude stumble and fall; she strengthens those who indulge in a sinful life style; she praises the foolish practices perpetrated by the sinners, the wicked deeds performed by them. This is the meaning of Proverbs 9,13-14: “a foolish woman makes a lot of noise, she is full of foolishness, knows nothing. For she sits at the entrance of her house or on a chair in the highest place in town.” The meaning of this verse is that the woman described here is the reverse of the one described in verses 3-4 of the same chapter. The meaning of the verse is that the woman mentioned made herself the foremost, the highest in rank. Normally, the highest ranking position is accorded to wisdom; in this instance the woman occupying pride of place is a foolish woman. The truly foremost woman, the one mentioned in verses 3-4 built her house with wisdom, while preparing everything in her household she kept silent. The foolish woman, who is unable to do what the wise woman has done, substitutes for her failure with noise. This is the meaning of the words: “she does not know anything.” To the degree that the woman in verses 3-4 is accomplished with all degrees of perfections, the one mentioned in verses 13-14 is without any of these accomplishments. All she knows how to do is “sit in the entrance of her house.” This expression is a simile for the way such a woman, i.e. philosophy, is unproductive and a waste of time. The “woman” sitting perennially at the entrance to her house indicates by her conduct that there is nothing worthwhile inside her house. The idolaters are in a similar position. Although totally devoid of accomplishments they can point to, they are unwilling to enter the shadow of G’d’s House, or the protection of his wings, preferring to remain on the “outside.” Rabbi Joshua ben Chananyah answered the Roman Emperor in a similar vein when he said to him that whereas he and his colleagues were at liberty to worship any philosophy they desired, they would forever remain outside the fold, (Judaism) even if they wanted to. Our verse points out the audacity of idolaters who, though not able to boast of any true accomplishments, boast of the efficacy of their faith, extolling their evil deeds. This is what Solomon meant here with the words על כסא מרומי קרת, as opposed to על גפי מרומי קרת in verse 3. The difference is that the maids of the wise woman call to people warning them not to enter the house of the foolish woman, the foolish woman by way of contrast praises “the sweetness of stolen waters, and the tastiness of bread eaten in secret” (verse 17 there). This is an example of how the foolish woman (philosophy) entices her followers to become enmeshed in further sin. The former woman gives advice which results in added years of life, whereas the foolish woman’s advice hastens the onset of decay and death. (compare verse 18 at the end of that chapter). A Midrashic approach to the verses in question: The words “she built her house with multiple wisdom” refer to the Torah which was the blueprint with which all the various worlds were built. The words חצבה עמודיה שבעה, mean that the world is hewn out of seven heavens, רקיעים. If man accumulates merits by busying himself with Torah he will inherit seven different “earths.” If not, he will be expelled from seven earths, i.e. worlds. The expression שבעה ארצות, “seven earths,” refers to our terrestrial world which consists of seven regions each with a different climate. Promising us “seven earths” is equivalent to promising us that we will inherit this earth, whereas the people ignoring Torah are told that they will lose their life in the hereafter, the region of seven heavens. This Midrash (Midrash Mishley chapter 9) interpreted the word שבעה, “seven,” which Solomon mentioned in verse one literally. The reason is that the number seven has equal significance in the celestial regions and the terrestrial regions. There are many commandments in the Torah where the number “seven” plays a significant role. The Sabbath is the seventh day; the Jubilee year is the conclusion of seven cycles of seven years, שמטה. Both the festival of Passover and Tabernacles consist of seven days. The components of the four species of plants used on the festival of Sukkot total seven, (1 lulav, 1 etrog, 2 willow-branches, and 3 branches of the myrtle). We observe a period of seven days of mourning for close relatives who have died; we observe seven days of celebration when a couple get married. The common denominator of all these commandments or practices involving the number seven is that they somehow symbolise the seven days in which G’d created and completed the universe. Even a Gentile prophet such as Bileam built seven altars for G’d before embarking on his nefarious scheme of cursing the Jewish people (which was thwarted by G’d). He told G’d specifically that he had erected seven altars (Numbers 23,4). It is not surprising therefore that there were seven days of inauguration for the Tabernacle. G’d Himself referred to them as such (Leviticus 8,33). The spiritual origin of these rites involving the number seven is one and the same. If Aaron did not get consecrated on the seventh day itself but only on the morrow, the eighth day, this was because of the special nature of performing service in the Sanctuary of the Lord. Seeing G’d is essentially “One,” this is symbolized by the fact that Aaron did not commence his duties until the “first” day after the seven days of his consecration, i.e. the day of the “One.” ויהי ביום השמיני קרא משה לאהרן ולבניו ולזקני ישראל , “It was on the eighth day; Moses called upon Aaron, his sons, and the elders of Israel.” The reason that the office of the High Priest began functioning on the eighth day was due to yet another cause in addition to what we have mentioned. We observe that in connection with the Tabernacle and the Temple the number eight plays a very significant role. The High Priest wore eight garments. The number of fragrances consisting of anointing oil, and incense was eight. The anointing oil contained four such fragrances, i.e. מר, קנמון, קנה, קדה, (Exodus 30,23-24) whereas there were four additional fragrances which made up the incense. They were נטף, שחלת, חלבנה, לבונה (30,34). The number of staves used to carry the furnishings of the Tabernacle also amounted to eight; 2 each for the Holy Ark, 2 for the golden Altar, 2 for the table, and two for transporting the copper Altar. Animals which were basically fit as sacrifices on the Altar had to be at least eight days old (Leviticus 22,27). The musical instruments used when the Levites sang the daily hymn during the service numbered eight as we know from Psalms 4,1 and others. In this instance the eighth day was the first day of Nissan, a day when the Tabernacle was not only erected but remained standing. The day was distinguished with “ten crowns” in the language of our sages (Rashi). In other words, it was distinguished, honored in ten different ways. 1) It was the beginning of the second year since the Exodus. 2) It was the first day on which Aaron functioned as High Priest. 3) It was the first day on which sacrifices were offered in the Tabernacle. 4) It was the first time the people of Israel received the priestly blessings. 5) It was the first day on which heavenly fire descended onto the copper altar. 6) It was the first time the male goat of the New Moon offering was ever offered. 7) It was the first time that animals which had been slaughtered without previously having been designated as a sacrifice were no longer permitted to be eaten. 8) It was the first day when the Shechinah took up residence on earth. 9) It was the first of the twelve days on which the princes offered their respective offerings. Nachshon ben Aminadav, prince of the tribe of Yehudah, was the first to offer same. 10) It was the first day on which people who had contracted certain types of ritual impurity had to leave the camp, i.e. a testimony to the sanctity of the encampment of the whole people. We find a similar description in Torat Kohanim describing the day as “taking” ten crowns, i.e. it was first in order of the creation. [There are two views as to whether the world was created (completed) on the first of Tishrey or the first of Nissan; this is the latter view. Ed.]. It was the first day of the offerings by the princes; the first day when the institution of the Priesthood began to function; the first day that service on the Altar in the Tabernacle was performed; the first day on which heavenly fire descended; the first day when sacrificial meat could be eaten; [incompatible with the view that Yitro arrived before then. Ed.] the first of the first of the months. It was the first day on which the Shechinah rested over the Jewish people on a permanent basis. It was the first day on which the Israelites received the priestly blessings. A Midrashic approach to the words: “it was on the eighth day” (based on Tanchuma Shemini 2) David says in Psalms 75,5: אמרתי להוללים אל תהולו, “I said to the frivolous men: ‘do not be frivolous!’” Instead of reading אל תהולו, read אל תחולו, “do not break out in dance.” The reason is that true joy does not linger with man in this world but only in the world to come. Many people who rejoice and are happy today may find that on the morrow they have no such cause for happiness and exuberance. This is why Solomon, [using the same expression as David, מהולל, Ed.] said: (Kohelet 2,2) לשחוק אמרתי מהולל, “of revelry I said: ‘it is mad!’” If you require proof of the truth of both statements take a look at what happened at the creation. When G’d completed His handiwork at the end of 6 days and He reviewed it (Genesis 1,31) He was very pleased as we know from Psalms 104,31: “may the glory of the Lord endure forever, may the Lord rejoice in His works!” In the verse from Genesis we are told that “G’d looked at His entire handiwork and behold, it was very good!” Only a few chapters later (Genesis 6,6) the Torah reports וינחם ה' כי עשה את האדם בארץ ויתעצב אל לבו, “Hashem had to comfort Himself that He had made man on earth, and it caused Him sadness in His heart.” Keeping this verse in mind, Assaph said in Psalms 75,5 not to indulge in frivolous merriment. If even G’d’s joy did not endure, how much less is the chance that man’s joy on earth will endure! Avraham progressed in his life and became exceedingly great and wealthy killing the most powerful kings on earth in the process. In his old age G’d gave him a son from Sarah. His joy was unbounded. A few years later G’d commanded him to take his son and to offer him up as a sacrifice. Even after having mastered that trial and being commended by G’d (Genesis 22,16-17), he went back from Moriah and had to bury his beloved wife Sarah. His joy had been short-lived. He even had trouble being given a suitable plot where to bury Sarah. In the end, he was literally fleeced, having to pay an astronomical sum of 400 shekel for a hole in the ground. Yitzchak who enjoyed phenomenal success in Gerar, seeing his investment returned one hundred-fold, (Genesis 26,12) faced expulsion shortly thereafter as the Philistines became jealous of his wealth. His joy had been very short-lived. After Avimelech realized that he had wronged him and apologized and made a treaty with him (Genesis 26,28) and he surely thought that “he had it made,” we read that his eyesight failed him and that he almost made a fatal error bestowing the blessing on a son whom he had considered worthy but who in the event had been unworthy all along. His joy had proven to be short-lived. If a Yitzchak who had been a living example of what it means to be a “total-offering, i.e. burnt-offering,” was not allowed permanent joy on earth, i.e. the fruits of his total dedication to G’d’s command, how much less may we ordinary mortals expect joy on earth to be enduring. Yaakov experienced great joy when he had the dream with the ladder, seeing angels ascending and descending, a promise from G’d that He would be with him, etc. (Genesis 28, 12-13). Not long afterwards he experienced a whole string of misfortunes, beginning with being tricked out of his chosen wife Rachel, the rape of Dinah, and concluding with the disappearance of Joseph. If Yaakov the righteous, of whom G’d had said that He would boast of such a man (Isaiah 49,3), could not hold on to his joy in this life, what can we lesser individuals expect in the way of enduring joy on earth? Joshua experienced great joy in his time, he settled the Jewish people on their land, killed 31 Kings, was promised by G’d that no one would rise against him successfully, and enjoyed unchallenged authority by his people (compare Joshua 1,18) but died without leaving behind any children. Surely, this must have dimmed his joy on earth. If this was his lot, how much less joy can the righteous in our time expect to enjoy while on earth! The High Priest Eli who did have sons had to experience the loss of the Holy Ark, the curse on his children who had disgraced him. When he died at a ripe old age the immediate cause of his death was the news that both his sons had been killed in battle (compare Samuel I 1,9; 1,10). If this happened to a righteous person such as the High Priest Eli, what sort of joy can there be in store in this world for the wicked? Consider the fact that on this day, Elisheva, daughter of Aminadav experienced greater joy than any man or woman before her. She saw her husband begin his career as High Priest; Her brother-in-law, Moses, became king of Israel. Two of her sons became deputy High Priests. Her brother Nachshon became the first of the princes to be honoured with bringing the sacrifices by laymen. Even she did not long remain in such a blissful state of joy seeing that two of her sons, Nadav and Avihu, died on the very same day at the hands of G’d. Considering all these examples we need not be surprised at Solomon’s warning not to be frivolous, not to dance with joy, as such joy is apt to be all too brief. קרא משה לאהרן ולבניו, “Moses called out to Aaron and his sons.” Our sages (Tanchuma Shemini 3) comment that the word קרא ל.. means that Moses called upon Aaron to wear the mantle of the position of High Priest. When told that he was to be the High Priest, Aaron said to his brother: “seeing you have worked tirelessly to make the Tabernacle a reality, it does not seem fair that I should be the High Priest.” Moses answered him that although Aaron had been appointed to this position by G’d, He, Moses, was as happy for him as if he himself had been appointed to that position. He added that just as Aaron had rejoiced at the time when Moses was appointed the leader of the people, although he was the older of the two, now it was his turn to rejoice in Aaron’s promotion. The occasion when Aaron had rejoiced at Moses’ appointment is recorded in Exodus 4,14 where G’d told Moses that his brother Aaron would rejoice in his appointment. One of the reasons Moses had not wanted to accept the position was that he was afraid that Aaron who had been the people’s spokesman up until then would be offended. This is what Moses had meant when he said to G’d: “appoint (send) the one whom You are in the habit of sending on such missions” (Exodus 4,13). Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai said that the heart which had been able to sincerely rejoice at the promotion of his younger brother was the most suitable one to wear the urim vetumim, as is written “he shall carry the judgment of the Children of Israel on his heart” (Exodus 25,30). This is why during the seven days that Moses performed the sprinkling of the blood on the Altar, offering incense, etc., G’d said to him: “Moses in case you think that you are going to be the High Priest, call in Aaron and appoint him to the position.” Why did Moses also have to call in the elders of the people? G’d told him to appoint Aaron in their presence in order that later on no one could claim that Aaron had appointed himself to this position.

And it was on the eighth day. This is the eighth day of the inauguration. It appears from this that this day is also included among the inauguration days that preceded it, but this is not [correct], for the verse says For seven days shall your hands be filled (Leviticus 8:33). And although this day was an inauguration for the dedication of the altar, nevertheless, what does the initiation of Aaron and his sons have to do with the dedication of the altar?Perhaps it is that since on this very day the Lord appeared to them, and not on the preceding days, therefore it needed to give a reason what made this day special among days — because this day was the eighth, and this is what gave it extra holiness. For every number seven is mundane and the number eight is sacred, according to the opinion of the Midrash (Yalkut Shimoni, Exodus 241:15) which says that all of Moses’s praise was with [the word] az [when/then], and from when I came to speak in Your name, then Moses sang, etc., because az [numerically equals eight, as alef = one, zayin = seven] refers to the One riding over the seven, meaning to establish the Holy One, blessed be He, over all seven planets and over all creations that were formed in the seven days of creation. Therefore, the Lord appeared to them specifically on this day because it was the eighth, as this number is uniquely associated with Him, blessed be He. And this is the reason for a sacrifice not being acceptable except from the eighth day and onward, and this is the reason why circumcision on the eighth day overrides the Sabbath on the seventh, because the spiritual overrides the physical. And the reason why this eighth day took ten crowns, is a hint to what our Sages said (Arakhin 13b) that the harp of the Messianic era will have eight strings, and that of the World to Come will have ten strings. This is because in the Messianic era the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see together (Isaiah 40:5) that the Lord is One, riding upon the seven planets that govern this world. But in the World to Come, when people will be completely stripped of materiality, their comprehension will increase as they recognize His blessed sovereignty over all the higher separated beings, which are included in the number nine, in the secret of the Ark was nine [cubits] and the cover was a handbreadth [referring to the dimensions of the Ark of the Covenant]. And then the eighth will rise to the number ten. Therefore, the hint comes on this eighth day that took ten crowns, to say that it contains an element of the World to Come, for there they will see the glory of the Lord eye to eye, and similarly on this day it is said for today the Lord will appear to You. And to the elders of Israel. We do not find that he spoke anything to the elders, and if as the commentators say that he spoke to Aaron in front of the elders of Israel so that they would not say that Aaron entered into the service on his own initiative, it was already stated in Parshat Tzav (8:3), And gather all the congregation, etc., and there he was inducted into the service in front of the entire congregation, so why was this necessary here a second time? It seems to me that it is because it is stated (Leviticus 4:13–15), And if the entire congregation of Israel shall err… and the elders of the congregation shall lay their hands on the head of the bull. Similarly, regarding these communal offerings that came for atonement for and they slaughtered a goat (Genesis 37:31) and for the sin of the Golden Calf, presumably they followed all the instructions detailed in Parshat Vayikra regarding the communal sin-offering, therefore he called for the elders. And although it is not mentioned here that they laid their hands [on the offerings], nevertheless they presumably performed the laying of hands. And although every communal sin-offering is a bull, this case is different because they sinned with a goat and a calf, therefore God wanted them to bring a goat and a calf.

ויהי ביום השמיני ...ויאמר אל אהרן וגו', “It was on the eighth day…he said to Aaron, etc.” Up until now the Torah did not spell out which of the sacrifices mentioned had been commanded to Moses in which order, and the Torah contented itself with writing: זה הדבר אשר צוה ה' תעשו, “this is the matter which the Lord has commanded you are to do,” and the sacrifices mentioned here in our portion had not been recorded as being specifically commanded to Moses to command to Aaron and the Children of Israel respectively. Now- as opposed to the seven days previously when Moses had been offering the מילואים inaugural sacrifices,- Aaron and his sons, and subsequently he and his sons on behalf of the people at large, will perform these procedures. The sacrifices mentioned here served as consecration sacrifices for the people. The מנחה gift offering that Aaron was to bring with the sin offering and the burnt offering was the חביטים offering he was required to offer every single day of the year. The Midrash suggests that the calf that Aaron was instructed to offer here served as a sin offering for his share in the sin of the golden calf. Nachmanides writes that Aaron’s sacrifice here was no different in nature from his personal sin offering on the Day of Atonement, and the sin offering on behalf of the people also corresponded to the sin offering he brought on behalf of the people on the Day of Atonement, when he offered a he-goat as their sin offering. It would appear therefore that seeing that the reason for Aaron’s sin-offering corresponded to his sin offering on the Day of Atonement, he burned it, just as he burned the one on the Day of Atonement. This was so, in spite of the fact, that this sin offering was offered on the large altar in the courtyard of the Tabernacle, and part of such sin-offerings are usually consumed by the male priests within the holy precincts. (Zevachim, chapter 5) Though we do not hear that Moses had instructed him to burn this sin offering, it is possible that he had received such instructions and the Torah did not bother to inform us of this. There was no need for the Torah to mention the directive, as clearly, Aaron would not proceed on his own initiative to offer an offering he had not been told to offer. There is a further statement in the Midrash to the effect that the שור, bull, was intended as atonement for the Israelites’ share in the sin of the golden calf, and that the reason that here a male goat was added was to atone for the brothers having dipped Joseph’s coloured tunic in the blood of a male goat at the time, a sin which had not yet been atoned for. [According to an ancient version of the Tanchuma, this was to reassure the Israelites that the sin of the golden calf had been forgiven. Ed.]

ויהי ביום השמיני; the eighth day after the commencement of the consecration of the priests, the eighth day after the Tabernacle had been erected and Aaron and his sons had been consecrated to commence performing the service therein.

ויהי ביום השמיני קרא משה לאהרן ובניו, “it was on the eighth day when Moses called Aaron and his sons, etc.”; we find the expression קרא being used for inviting someone to eat in order to satiate himself, as in Ezekiel 36,29: וקראתי אל הדגן והרביתי אותו, “I will summon (call) the grain and make it abundant;” we find the same expression used in connection with famine, as in Kings II 8,1: כי קרא ה' לרעב, “for the Lord has decreed a seven year famine on the land.” We find that expression when someone is chosen for greatness, as when G–d chose Moses and Aaron for such positions, G–d having told Moses to call his brother Aaron in Exodus 4,14 and his telling him that he rejoices over his appointment. We now find it here where Moses is called upon to make the appointment of Aaron and his sons as priests public knowledge. We also find this expression being used when the elders were being appointed to their respective positions, in order that this would become public knowledge.

And he said to Aaron: Take for yourself a calf, the young of an ox, for a sin-offering, and a ram for a burnt-offering, unblemished, and bring them near before Hashem.

קח לך עגל TAKE THEE A CALF — This animal was selected as a sin offering to announce to him that the Holy One, blessed be He, granted him atonement by means of this calf for the incident of the golden calf which he had made (Midrash Tanchuma, Shmini 4)

AND HE [Moses] SAID TO AARON: TAKE THEE A BULL-CALF FOR A SIN-OFFERING. Moses, our teacher, had been commanded about these offerings, as he said at the end [of the section], This is the thing which the Eternal commanded that ye should do, although this [command for these specific offerings] is not expressly mentioned. Similarly, And Moses said: This is the thing which the Eternal hath commanded: Let an omerful of it be kept throughout your generations, [where the verse indicates that Moses received a Divine command although it is not specifically mentioned]. Also, I am the G-d of Beth-el, when Jacob related [to his wives all that G-d’s angel had told him in the dream], even though it is not mentioned in Scripture that he was so told. I have already shown to you many such examples in the sections on the commandments regarding the Passover.

"A calf, a son of the herd." During the seven days of the investiture there was a bull for a sin-offering and also a ram for a burnt-offering; but [the text] does not specify here with the calf of the herd whether it is a year-old animal. My view is that a bull [פר] is like a calf [עגל] without mention of its year. "Unblemished" — [this applies] to the calf and to the ram. And the bull of the investiture was for the sin-offering of the altar, whereas this calf was to atone for Aaron. I have already explained this word [תמים, "unblemished"].

קח לך עגל, "take for yourself a bull-calf, etc." Yuma 4 questions the need for the words "for yourself," seeing that the Torah goes on to say that the he-goat in verse 3 was for the people; obviously then the bull-calf was for Aaron personally. The Talmud answers that the words קח לך meant that Aaron was to pay for that bull-calf out of his personal funds. Perhaps we may add that the word לך was intended as a sign for all times that Aaron had not made the golden calf with sinful intent nor had he been involved in its worship. This is why a bull-calf could serve as atonement for Aaron. The same could not be said of the people at large seeing their involvement in the sin of the golden calf had been במזיד, i.e. they had been aware of what they had been doing. Not only could a bull-calf not serve as atonement for their sin, on the contrary, it would remind G'd of their sin and be an accuser. You will find in Vayikra Rabbah 21,10 that the reason G'd did not want Aaron to enter the Holy of Holies on the Day of Atonement dressed in his golden garments was because he had been the one who made the golden calf and we have a principle of אין קטיגור נעשה סניגר, "something which served once as an accuser cannot reverse its role and serve as advocate for the defence." This was a consideration which did not apply to the Israelites who had sinned knowingly in the way they related to the golden calf so that a bull-calf could not serve as a sin-offering for them. In this connection we must explain why G'd commanded Aaron to take a bull-calf as a sin-offering altogther. Is not a sin-offering intended as atonement and there is therefore no more powerful advocate for the defence than such an offering? Apparently G'd judged matters very fairly. On the one hand, Aaron's involvement in the construction of the golden calf was peripheral; he had neither made its shape, nor believed in it when it emerged from the crucible, and, as he explained to Moses: "the calf emerged by itself" (Exodus 32,24), i.e. as a result of an action by the sorcerers Yeynuss and Yombrus amongst the mixed multitude as reported by Tanchuma 19 on Parshat Ki Tissa. It follows therefore that there were steps in the procedure which resulted in the golden calf materialising which Aaron did take knowingly. He told the people to bring the gold; he accepted it from them; he etched the gold with an etching tool. All of these details he performed in full awareness of what he was doing. Even though the reason he did these things was fear of the Israelites killing him just as they had killed his nephew Chur, and even though all he did was stall for time until Moses would return, he did something improper. This is why G'd told him to bring a sin-offering to atone for a sin which he had been instrumental in making possible. Concerning the gold which was the crucial element in that sin, G'd told Aaron not to appear before Him in the Holy of Holies dressed in gold seeing the accuser could not become an advocate...

קח לך עגל, “take for yourself a calf;” it was customary for the priest to take a bull as a sin offering as is written in Leviticus 4,3: ,'אם הכהן המשיח יחטא וגו, “if the High Priest will sin, etc.; in other words, the calf will atone for the sin of the golden calf. [According to Sifra we must understand that verse as referring specifically to this High Priest. Ed.]

ויאמר אל אהרן: קח לך עגל בן בקר לחטאת, “He said to Aaron: “take yourself a young bull for a sin-offering, etc.” This was intended to atone for the affair of the golden calf, of which the Torah had written that Aaron had made it (Exodus 32,35). A Midrashic approach to these words (Tanchuma Shemini 4): “the reason Moses diod not simply say: “take a bull,” but “take yourself a calf, etc,.” is to remind him that whereas on account of the golden calf he had almost lost his claim to the position of the High Priesthood, he now would re-establish his claim to it by offering a calf as sin-offering.

Take for yourself a calf of the cattle for a sin offering. Some question why Aaron’s calf is brought as a sin offering while Israel’s calf is brought as a burnt offering. They explained that in the sin of the Golden Calf, Aaron did not sin in thought, as he certainly did not intend it for idolatry at all. His main sin was in the deed — that he actually made the calf, as it is written: And the Lord smote the people because they made the calf which Aaron made (Exodus 32:35). Why does it add which Aaron made? It comes to teach that Aaron sinned only in making the calf, but not in thought. Therefore his offering was a calf for a sin offering, which atones for sins of action. But Israel, who sinned also in thought, as they certainly intended it for idolatry, therefore their offering was a calf for a burnt offering, which comes to atone for sins of thought. What is difficult with this explanation is that Israel also sinned in deed, as they bowed down to it and sacrificed to it, so why didn’t they bring a calf as a sin offering for atonement? It seems to me that for the sin of sacrificing, they brought the goat for atonement, because it is said: And they shall no more sacrifice their sacrifices to demons (Leviticus 17:7). Where do we find that Israel sacrificed to goat-demons, that Scripture says no more? Rather, it certainly refers to what was said about the calf: and they sacrificed to it, because this sacrifice was certainly to goat-demons, to demons [that are] no-gods, as that entire incident was the work of Satan, and goat-demons dance there (Isaiah 13:21). Therefore it says, Take a young goat for a sin offering. But Aaron, who did not sacrifice to it at all, brought a calf as a sin offering to atone for making the calf. Regarding what is written in Aaron’s sacrifice “and bring it before God,” and in the people’s sacrifice it says “to slaughter before God.” Some say this is because slaughtering is permitted to be performed by non-priests, but not the offering [on the altar]. But it seems to me that it is because the sacrifices of God are meant to lead to a broken spirit, and Israel sinned with the spirit of impure thoughts. Therefore, it says about them to slaughter before God, meaning that after the slaughtering they will be before God. But Aaron, who did not sin in thought, therefore immediately after taking the calf for a sin offering, it says and bring it before God, because immediately and at once he became close to God after the act of taking [the sacrifice].

קח לך עגל, “take a calf for yourself, etc.” the Torah here tells Aaron to take a calf instead of a bullock (fully matured animal) as seeing that the status of the priesthood had been had been undermined by the golden calf in which he had been involved, it required a calf to restore its status to its former eminence.

And to the children of Israel you shall speak, saying: Take a he-goat, the young of the goats, for a sin-offering, and a calf and a lamb, year-old, unblemished, for a burnt-offering.

And unto the children of Israel thou shalt speak. This means that Aaron is to speak to them thus, as it was His wish that Aaron should be the one who commands in the name of G-d, and that he should be the one who would bring the offerings, in order to elevate him in the eyes of the people. The correct interpretation is that the expression and unto the children of Israel thou shalt speak, means you [Aaron] and the elders mentioned [in Verse 1], since it was for that purpose that he called them, so that they should speak to the children of Israel, as in the verse, And Moses called for all the elders of Israel, and said unto them: Draw out [and take you lambs]. Or it may be that [Moses] said to each of the elders, and unto the children of Israel thou shalt speak [the singular word thou thus referring to each one of the elders]. Accordingly, the meaning of the section is as follows: and he [Moses] said to Aaron: Take thee etc., and to [each of] the elders he said, and unto the children of Israel thou shalt speak. For one who speaks to many people usually addresses his command to each person individually, something like that which it is said, And I commanded you at that time, saying etc.: Ye shall pass over armed before your brethren. There are many such cases in the Book of Deuteronomy [where Moses speaks to the whole congregation, when his message is actually addressed to each person individually].Now Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra wrote that the verse, And Moses said: This is the thing which the Eternal commanded that ye should do, means that “Moses had already told them, this is the thing.” If so, it is possible that the meaning of the verses be as follows: Moses called Aaron and his sons and the elders of Israel, and Moses said: This thing which the Eternal has commanded me ye should do, that the Glory of the Eternal may appear unto you; and he said unto Aaron: Take thee a bull-calf etc.; and unto the children of Israel thou shalt speak, saying: Take ye a he-goat for a sin-offering etc. Thus [Moses] spoke briefly at first [as in Verse 6] and then explained himself at the end [in Verses 2-4].But this is not correct. Rather, after Moses had mentioned to them the offerings [which they were required to bring on that day], and they brought that which Moses commanded, he said to them again, This is the thing which the Eternal commanded that ye should do, meaning that they should bring the offerings in the order that he would command them, and afterwards the Glory of the Eternal would appear to them. Now since he had said, for today the Eternal appeareth unto you, he went back and said that He would appear to them through His Glory. Now these offerings [which were brought on the eighth day after the completion of the seven-day consecration of the priests], were not mentioned in the section of And this is the thing that thou shalt do unto them to hallow them, to minister unto Me, for there He only gave the command about the consecration, and their days of con...

"A he-goat for a sin-offering" — on behalf of the congregation; and a calf that lacks a complete year; and likewise a lamb for a burnt-offering.

תדבר לאמור, "you shall speak saying;" We need to explore the reason why Moses commanded Aaron to speak in this instance instead of instructing the Israelites himself as was his custom. Perhaps it was because at the time of the golden calf it had been Aaron who invited the people to bring him their gold, Moses now wanted to give him an opportunity to speak to the people and tell them to bring a male goat to be the sin-offering as atonement. This would be in line with the principle הפה שאסר הוא הפה שהתיר, "that the mouth which uttered the prohibition must be the mouth which utters the permission." We have repeatedly quoted our sages as saying that the sin which causes someone's reputation to become sullied can best be repaired when the method of rehabilitation is as closely linked to the circumstances of the sin it rehabilitates as is possible. This is why G'd ordered Aaron to inform the people of this procedure. The words תדבר לאמור mean that inasmuch as on the previous occasion Aaron had uttered words which resulted in the people becoming unrestrained, demeaning themselves, he was now to utter words which would eventually elevate the people and result in atonement for that sin. Furthermore, seeing that Moses had observed how Aaron had been elevated by G'd to such a high position, Moses told him to communicate soothing messages to the Jewish people. The word לאמור implies a message couched in a very friendly manner. Aaron told the people that G'd would appear to them (verse 4) to indicate that the whole procedure he was instructing them about was for their good, not for his own. This recalls what we wrote in the name of Torat Kohanim at the beginning of פרשת ויקרא, that the fact G'd did not communicate with Moses in the Tabernacle for 38 years was on account of the sin of the spies; when G'd is reported as communicating with Moses out of the Tabernacle this was a compliment to Israel.

קחו שעיר עזים, “take a he-goat as a sin offering to atone for your sins, etc;” they had to pray for atonement for what their forefathers had done to Joseph, when they had sent his tunic soaked in the blood they had taken from the heg-oat they slaughtered for that purpose. (Genesis 37, 31-32) (Sifra) An alternate explanation: They needed to offer a sin offering for idolatry they had been guilty by burning he goats for idols. (in Egypt) (Tanchuma, section 4 on this portion) We find that also on other occasions such animals were burned in idolatrous rites outside the camp. (Torat Kohanim, chovah chapter 6,5.) This is why this he-goat was burned outside the camp, as we are told in verse 11.

קחו שעיר עזים לחטאת ועגל וכבש בני שנה תמימה לעולה, “take a he-goat for a sin-offering and a calf as well as an unblemished sheep in its first year for a burnt-offering.” In Sifra Shemini 3 the question is posed why the Israelites had to offer more sacrifices than Aaron, i.e. both a he-goat, a calf and a sheep. The answer given is that the Israelites had sinned with a he-goat when they had drenched Joseph’s coat in its blood at the time; now they had been guilty of committing a sin using a calf. It was appropriate therefore that they receive expiation for both of these sins. Each of these two sin-offerings was to atone for the sin committed with its counterpart. I believe that the fact that the calf offered by the people was a burnt-offering whereas Aaron’s calf was a sin-offering was to demonstrate that although Aaron had committed the sin of the golden calf with his hands, his heart had not had any part in the sin at all. This is why the calf could be his sin-offering. [I believe the author tries to explain why the principle of אין קטגור נעשה סנגור, “that the prosecutor cannot change his garments and suddenly appear in the guise of the counsel for defense,” has not been violated here, as the sin-offering was of a technical nature only. Ed.] Furthermore, the author believes that the very words: “which Aaron had made,” referring to the golden calf Aaron had made, are superfluous, and are to be read as limiting Aaron’s guilt, i.e. though he had “made” it, he had had no emotional or intellectual part in that whole episode. The Torah had described how Aaron had made the calf in Exodus 32,4, so there was certainly no need to tell us in 32,35 that he had made it. Aaron had to bring the calf as a sin-offering precisely because the sin-offering atones for a deed not for a thought. The Israelites, on the other hand, whose sin had consisted of their sinful thoughts connected to the golden calf had to offer it as a burnt-offering, to atone for their thoughts. [The Israelites who had sinned in deed on that occasion had long since been executed or died at the hand of G’d. Ed.] Those who had been guilty of auxiliary deeds required the sin-offering to atone for that part of their sin.

And to the children of Israel you shall speak, saying. The reason Moses commanded Aaron to speak to Israel and did not command them himself was because Moses wanted to show all of Israel that Aaron was innocent of the sin of the Golden Calf. Otherwise, how could he command them take for yourselves a calf for atonement? They would say to him, “Take the beam from your own eye, etc.” Alternatively, the explanation follows the principle “Adorn yourself first, etc.” (Bava Batra 60b). Therefore, first take for yourself a young calf to adorn yourself first, and afterward, and to the children of Israel you shall speak, saying that they should also adorn themselves, and then they too can adorn others. This is the meaning of the phrase saying [le’emor]. Take a young male goat for a sin offering. To atone for their sacrificing to goat-demons, therefore it says to sacrifice before the Lord and not to the goat-demons, as they did in the sacrifice to the calf, as mentioned. In Torat Kohanim (Leviticus 9:3), they expounded: Why did Israel bring more than Aaron? Rather, Moses said to them, “You have sins in your hands from the beginning and you have sins in your hands from the end. In the beginning, as it says (Genesis 37:31), And they slaughtered a young goat, and at the end, as it says (Exodus 32:8), They made for themselves a molten calf. Let a goat come and atone for the deed of the goat, and let a calf come and atone for the deed of the calf. But Aaron had no part except in the sin of the calf.”There is a need to analyze why Aaron was excluded from the deed of the young goat. Wasn’t Levi also involved in that deed? And just the opposite, he had a greater part in that deed than his brothers, as Rashi explains on the verse Simeon and Levi are brothers (Genesis 49:5). Furthermore, why did it use the language of “beginning” and “end”? It should have said, “You have two sins in your hands.” Why did he attribute the sin to earlier and later times? Also, what is the connection between the atonement for the young goat and the atonement for the sin of the calf?Additionally, the verse And the entire congregation drew near and stood before the Lord needs explanation, because it is not specified where they drew near to. And what is meant by This is the thing that the Lord has commanded you to do? What more should they do beyond what they have already done? And the closest explanation to me to resolve these questions: The author of this midrash believes that one thing depends on the other, that the incident of they slaughtered a goat was also the cause of the Golden Calf incident. This is because it is known that the trait of jealousy that existed among Joseph’s brothers caused them to commit the act of slaughtering a goat, and from then on, the trait of jealousy became deeply rooted within them for generations, as it is written: For the jealousy of Your house has consumed me (Psalms 69:10). This refers to the jealousy of the house of Israel that is found among Israel throughout all generations, more than among any other nations, to the extent that this calf emerged because many in the camp were jealous of Moses, like Korah and his assembly. Similarly, at that time, many jealous people attacked him, and this is the nature of jealousy — to fabricate false accusations against him, saying, As for this Moses, the man, we do not know what has become of him, in order to cast off his authority and appoint over themselves this calf, this despised idol held in contempt. For jealousy, which causes division of hearts, is what led them to separate from one another, as they nullified the commandment of love your neighbor as yourself. And this is the prior sin that also causes the later one, that eventually they turned their backs on God as well and nullified the commandment of love the Lord your God. For this reason, our Sages said (Bereishit Rabbah 38:6) that as long as there is peace among Israel, even if they worship idols, leave them be, as it is said: Ephraim is joined to idols; let him alone (Hosea 4:17). But their heart is divided; now they shall be found guilty. You will find a beautiful and well-ordered explanation of this matter in my work Ollelot Ephraim, Part 1, Essay 23, and from there you can understand why the author of this midrash connected these two types of sins, the earlier and the later one, because one leads to the other. Similarly, we find (First Kings 12:28) that Jeroboam made the calves out of his jealousy for Solomon’s kingdom. With this suggestion, it is resolved why Aaron did not need to have a part in the atonement for the previous sin, and they slaughtered a goat, which refers to the division of hearts that existed among the forefathers, because Aaron had already rectified this by embracing the attribute of peace, as to obey is better than sacrifice. Similarly, Israel saw fit to correct both sins on this day, which is why it says, And all the congregation drew near, etc. For when all the congregation saw that they needed atonement for and they slaughtered a goat which caused jealousy and division of hearts, and for the later sin, the making of the Golden Calf, through which they distanced themselves from God and turned their backs, not their faces, to Him — they saw fit to rectify all this through actual deeds, not just through sacrifices, so they would not be like one who immerses in a ritual bath while holding an impure object. This is why it says, And they took all that Moses commanded, meaning the sacrifices, and all the congregation drew near — they drew close to one another in a closeness of hearts, and they established and accepted upon themselves to be in brotherhood and friendship to correct the earlier sin of the goat, which came from division of hearts. Afterward, they also corrected the later sin, and they stood before the Lord, for they turned their faces, not their backs, to the Blessed God. And when Moses saw the fitness of their hearts toward each other, and that they were at peace with God, it was very right in his eyes, for it is better than bringing a sacrifice, as it is said Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice (1 Samuel 15:22). Regarding this, Moses said, This is the thing which the Lord commanded you to do — for did the Lord command anything about matters of burnt offerings and sacrifices rather than to obey the voice of the Lord? For with “this thing,” he minimized the act of sacrifices, saying, “do like this for generations, and who will grant that your hearts be like this always,” for in its merit, the glory of the Lord will appear to you. Just as you turn your faces toward the Divine Presence, so will the Lord make His face shine upon you, in the manner that one comes to be seen, so one comes to see.

ואל בני ישראל תדבר לאמר, “and to the Children of Israel say as follows:” Moses told Aaron to speak to the Israelites directly and command them in the name of the Lord. This was meant to enhance Aaron’s status among the people seeing that it was he who performed all these rites on behalf of the people. If not for this reason it would have been appropriate for Moses to also include the elders in his address to Aaron, seeing that the elders had been mentioned in verse one as having been called to Moses’ presence also. But Moses was anxious for the people to be addressed by Aaron separately, independently of the elders. When the people had been instructed that each Israelite householder was to secure a lamb for the Passover, (Exodus 12,21) Moses had allowed all the elders to convey that directive. [The latter paragraph is phrased in a manner that could suggest that it is a retreat from the author’s first interpretation. Ed.]

קחו שעיר עזים לחטאת....ועגל, “you (plural) are to take a he-goat as sin offering plus a calf, etc;” this was to let them know that the sin of the golden calf had been atoned for, otherwise they would not have been commanded to use a calf as an offering.

And a bull and a ram for sacred peace-offerings, to slaughter before Hashem, and a meal-offering mixed with oil — for today the Glory of Hashem is to be revealed to you.

כי היום ה' נראה אליכם FOR TODAY THE LORD WILL APPEAR UNTO YOU to make His Shechinah rest upon your handiwork; on this account these sacrifices come (are to be brought) as an obligation for this day (cf. Sifra, Shemini, Mechilta d'Miluim 2 4).

"And an ox and a ram" — [these are] adults. "And a meal-offering" — it is fine flour, for each and every [animal].

כי היום ה' נראה אליכם, it had already become manifest as an appreciation of their handiwork when we read that the Presence (glory) of the Lord filled the Tabernacle (Exodus 40,34). It is therefore no more than appropriate that you express your appreciation of this by this sacrifice.

ומנחה בלולה בשמן, “and a gift with oil mixed in;” the same applied to frankincense, as we had already learned in Parshat Vayikra, chapter 2, a standard procedure with all such gift offerings. We have also learned this in the Talmud tractate Menachot folio 59. All of these gift offerings consisted of unleavened dough, including this one. כי היום ה׳ נראה אליכם, “for today the Lord will appear to you.” This is why it is appropriate to appear before him with a variety of offerings, including samples of all the categories of offerings. (B’chor shor).

ושור ואיל לשלמים, “and an ox and a ram as peace-offering.” Our sages in Torat Kohanim Sifra Shemini 4 comment on this: “why did the Israelites have to bring two animals, i.e. a calf as well as a fully grown bull?” The answer is that the Torah had described what came out of the crucible into which Aaron threw the gold both as “calf” and as “bull,” on separate occasions. In Exodus 32,8 it was described as a calf, whereas in Psalms 106,20 it was described as a bull when David said: “they exchanged their glory for the image of a bull that feeds on grass.” It was appropriate then that the bull would atone for a deed that was as animal-like as that of a bull, whereas the calf was to expiate for a deed comparable to that of a calf. The proof that G’d was willing to relate to the people again with His goodwill is found in the words לזבוח לפני ה' “to slaughter in the presence of the Lord,” meaning that the (symbol of) sin the people were afraid of had already been slaughtered in the presence of the Lord. We would have expected the Torah to write that these animals be slaughtered as “peace-offerings,” rather than as “in the presence of the Lord.” Moreover, atonement is accomplished through the sprinkling of blood not through slaughtering, a merely preparatory act. According to Torat Kohanim then these words indicated that the very act of slaughtering these animals already resulted in atonement for the people on that occasion. כי היום ה' נראה אליכם, “for this day the Lord has appeared to you.” Actually Moses should have said “nireh” with the vowel segol under the letter aleph instead of the vowel kametz that we find here. [Seeing that the word refers to Hashem, who is certainly masculine]. The variation in the regular use of the vowel may be an allusion to the feminine attribute of Justice which would also manifest itself on that day killing Nadav and Avihu. We find something parallel to this in Psalms 130,3 אם עונות תשמר י-ה אדוני, מי יעמוד?, “if You G’d were to keep account of sins, O G’d, who will survive?” The name used for G’d is the attribute of Justice. In our chapter we encounter a verse (23) describing the manifestation of G’d which is described as כבוד ה', an attribute below that of the tetragram without moderating adjective.

כי היום ה' נראה, and the fire will emerge from heaven to consume the sacrifices on the altar.

And they took what Moses had commanded before the Tent of Meeting, and the entire congregation drew near and stood before Hashem.

ויקתו את אשר צוה משה, They took what Moses had commanded, etc. When the Torah writes "which Moses had commanded," the Torah means what Moses had commanded to Aaron, i.e. that Aaron took the animals Moses had commanded him to take and sacrifice on behalf of the people. Had the Torah only written that the people took the animals Aaron had commanded them to take, I would not have known of Aaron's involvement, i.e. that Aaron carried out Moses' instructions. Furthermore, perhaps the Torah wrote "which Moses commanded" as a contrast to the usual "as G'd had commanded," that Moses' command sufficed for the people to carry out these orders although they had not been assured that the command which they were bidden to carry out had emanated from G'd.

And Aharon and his sons, and all the sons of Israel, hastened and took what Mosheh commanded, and presented them in front of the tabernacle of ordinance; and the whole congregation drew near, and lifted up their heart fully before the Lord.

And Moses said: This is the word that Hashem has commanded you to do, and the Glory of Hashem will be revealed to you.

The meaning of "And Moses said" — [understand it] as I have shown you [regarding the verse] "and I asked her" (Gen. 24:47), and I have explained its sense there: Moses had already told them this thing to do — that they should bring a he-goat, a calf, a lamb, an ox, and a ram — and then the glory of Hashem would appear to them. The meaning refers to the fire that would go forth.

זה הדבר אשר צוה ה' חעשו, to place the weight of your body with your hands on the sin offering as well as on the burnt offering intended on behalf of the congregation. 'וירא אליכם כבוד ה, in addition to the manifestation of G’d’s presence already experienced by the Presence of G’d filling the Tabernacle. (compare verse 23)

זה הדבר אשר צוה ה׳ תעשו, "This is the thing G'd commanded you should do." What precisely does the Torah refer to by the word הדבר? Rashi explains that the reference is to Aaron's offering. [our editions of Rashi on the Torah do not have a commentary by Rashi on this verse. Ed.] This is not the plain meaning of the verse seeing that it addresses the Israelites, i.e. תעשו, (pl) and not Aaron. Perhaps Rashi referred to words in the previous verse: ויקרבו כל העדה ויעמדו לפני השם, that "the whole congregation drew near and stood in the presence of G'd." The Torah was careful there to write in the "presence of G'd," instead of "in front of the Tent of Meeting." The words were altogether superfluous seeing the Torah mentions that all this occured in front of the Tent of Meeting. We may therefore assume that in verse 5 the Torah describes the spiritual preparations made by the people to appear in the presence of the Lord. They achieved a spiritual niveau which made them fit to be in the presence of G'd. When Moses observed this, he added of his own accord in verse 6: "this is the thing which G'd commanded you should do;" Moses told the people that they should always remain on such a spiritual plane that they would be fit to be in G'd's presence. David spoke about this in Psalms 16,8: שויתי ה׳ לנגדי תמיד, "I am ever mindful of the Lord's presence." When doing this he could be assured of what is written in the second half of that verse: כי מימיני בל־אמוט, "so that He (i.e. Torah) is at my right hand and I (David) will never be shaken." The reward for such a spiritual preparation is "the glory of the Lord may appear to you." Another general meaning of the term לפני השם is that there should not be a curtain or barrier between Israel and G'd; Isaiah perceives of the sins of the Jewish people as constituting such a barrier (compare Isaiah 59,2). Accordingly, our verse reports that the Israelites were at peace with their G'd at that time enabling them to appear in the presence of the Lord. After I had written this I found a comment in Bamidbar Rabbah 12,8 on this verse which goes as follows: "What is the meaning of זה הדבר? It refers to circumcision. The same expression occurs in Joshua 5,4 when it describes the fact that Joshua circumcised all the Jewish males who had been born in the desert immediately after the people crossed the river Jordan." Thus far the Midrash. Actually, what do the two events have in common? After all Moses did not circumcise anyone on the day Aaron assumed the office of High Priest! I believe we must distinguish between circumcising the foreskin of the body and removing the "foreskin" of the heart, the קליפה, the peel, which makes us unreceptive to G'd's commands. Moses commanded the people to rid themselves of that foreskin in order to qualify for being in the presence of the Lord. If they were to do this the glory of G'd would appear to them. I have seen yet another Midrash quoted in Torat Kohanim on our verse which goes as follo...

זה הדבר, “this is the thing;” the sacrifices of which we spoke.

And Moses said to Aaron: Draw near to the altar and perform your sin-offering and your burnt-offering, and make atonement for yourself and for the people; then perform the offering of the people and make atonement for them, as Hashem has commanded.

קרב אל המזבח [AND MOSES SAID TO AARON] GO TO THE ALTAR, for Aaron was diffident and feared to go there. Moses therefore said to him “Wherefore art thou diffident? For this purpose hast thou been selected!” (cf. Sifra, Shemini, Mechilta d'Miluim 2 8). את חטאתך THY SIN OFFERING — the young calf (v. 2). ואת עלתך AND THY BURNT OFFERING — the ram (v. 2). קרבן העם THE OFFERING OF THE PEOPLE — the kid of the goats and the calf and the lamb (v. 3). Wherever the term עגל, “calf” is mentioned without further definition it denotes one in its first year, and it is from this passage that you may derive this rule (cf. Sifra on 4:2; Rosh Hashanah 10a).

DRAW NEAR UNTO THE ALTAR. 8. AND AARON DREW NEAR UNTO THE ALTAR AND SLEW THE CALF. It seems to me in accordance with the plain meaning of Scripture that Moses said to Aaron: “Draw near to the north side of the altar and offer there the sin-offering and the burnt-offering, for they are to be slaughtered on the north side of the altar.” Moses, however, said it briefly since Aaron already knew [that these offerings were to be slaughtered on the north side of the altar].Our Rabbis in the Torath Kohanim were, however, prompted by [the use of] these expressions to draw a parable [and to say]: “To what can this be compared? To a human king who married a woman, who in her shyness [did not dare to enter] before him. Her sister then approached her, saying, ‘My sister, why did you enter this matter? Was it not in order that you serve the king? Embolden yourself and go in to serve the king!’ Similarly did Moses say to Aaron: ‘My brother! Why were you chosen to be the High Priest? Was it not so that you minister before G-d? Embolden yourself and come and do your priestly activities.’ Some Rabbis say that Aaron saw the [horned] altar in the form of the bull [which — as stated in Psalms 106: 20 — Israel had worshipped], and he was frightened by it. Then Moses came near and said to him, ‘My brother, Aaron, do not be afraid of that which you fear. Embolden yourself and come near it.’ This is why he said, draw near unto the altar, and [Aaron] drew near unto the altar — with zeal.” The reason for this [apparition which Aaron saw in the altar] was that since Aaron was the holy one of the Eternal, having no sin on his soul except for the incident of the golden calf, therefore that sin was firmly fixed in his mind, something like that which is said, and my sin is ever before me. It thus appeared to him as if the form of the calf was there [in the altar] preventing his [attaining] atonement [through the offerings he was to bring]. That is why Moses said to him, “Embolden yourself so that you should not be of such humble spirit,” for G-d has already accepted his works. Other scholars explain that it was Satan who showed him this apparition, just as they have said there in the Torath Kohanim: “My brother Aaron, although G-d has agreed to grant atonement for your sin, you must nonetheless close the mouth of Satan [through your offerings], lest he accuse you when you enter the Sanctuary etc.” And the expression, and make atonement for thyself, and for the people means as follows: “draw near unto the altar to bring all the offerings, and offer first thy sin-offering, and thy burnt-offering, and make atonement for thyself first with thy offerings, and for the people afterwards, through bringing their offering and atoning for them by means thereof.” Thus Moses taught Aaron that the guiltless should come and effect atonement for those who are guilty.

"And make atonement for yourself and for the people" — for this is a commandment: that you shall atone for yourself and for the entire congregation. With the sin-offering bull you shall atone for yourself, and afterward you shall perform the people's offering and atone for them — for a person cannot atone for another until he himself is pure from all sin.

וכפר בעדך ובעד העם. "and make atonement for yourself and for the people." We learn from this that Aaron's own atonement effected the atonement of the people. This is because Aaron's sin was brought about through the Israelites. Had they not demanded from Aaron that he make a deity for them, none of all this would have happened. As long as Aaron had not obtained atonement for his part in that sin, both the sinner and the one who had been the prime cause of that sin still remained guilty. As soon as Aaron obtained atonement, so did the people. We derive all this from the linkage of the two atonements in this verse i.e. "on your behalf and on behalf of the people."

קרב אל המזבח, “come close to the altar;” seeing that during all of the seven days of the consecration Moses was performing all the duties in the Tabernacle and around it, he had to tell Aaron on the eighth day that the time had come for him to take over. וכפר בעדך, “and (commence) by obtaining atonement for yourself,” and subsequently,“for the people,” so that someone free from guilt performs these rites. After all, both Aaron as well as the people had born a share of the guilt associated with the sin of the golden calf.

קרב אל המזבח, “approach the Altar!” According to the plain meaning of the text these words mean that Aaron is to approach the northern side of the Altar, the area where the slaughtering of the animals took place. According to a view in the Midrash Sifra Shemini Miluim 8, the Altar appeared to Aaron as looking similar to the shape of a bull and he was afraid of approaching it. Moses approached him saying to him that he should not be afraid but should approach it without worry. This is why we find these instructions here which we do not find anywhere else. According to Nachmanides we must not misunderstand this Midrash as meaning that Aaron saw (a non-existent) figure of a bull on the Altar. The Midrash means that the only sin which Aaron had been guilty of was the making of the golden calf (bull). This is why the sin was constantly in his thoughts. It was just like when David said in Psalms 51,5 concerning his own sin: “my sin is constantly present in my mind.” Aaron looked at the Altar as if it were the personification of his sin, reminding him of it even more visibly. He was afraid that such thoughts would interfere with his ability to offer sacrifices from here on in. This is why Moses had to put his mind at rest telling him that he did not have anything to worry about as his part in that sin had already been forgiven. וכפר בעדך ובעד העם, ועשה את קרבנך ואת קרבן העם, “and make atonement for yourself and for the people, and prepare your offering and that on behalf of the people.” The sequence of the words may mean that Aaron was first to initiate atonement for his own sin before bringing about atonement for the people, or it might mean that the words “and for the people,” are a reference to his immediate family, i.e. the members of the house of Levi. In that event the words קרבן העם, “the offering for the people,” would refer to the people at large.

And atone for yourself and for the people. Aaron’s atonement is doubled: firstly for what he himself sinned, and secondly for causing the people to sin as well, as it is written, For you have brought a great sin upon them (Exodus 32:21). But regarding the atonement of the people, it only says and atone for them, because they depend on him, and he does not depend on them. Furthermore, Aaron’s atonement is essentially the atonement of the people, because when the leaders of Israel are properly corrected, then all the people are properly corrected, and their corruption is the guilt of the people, as it is written, If the anointed priest sins, resulting in guilt for the people (Leviticus 4:3). For an unintentional error in teaching leads to intentional sin, and when he sins, even unintentionally, then his unintentional error becomes the cause for the guilt of the people who may sin intentionally. Therefore, his atonement is the atonement of all the people. Another explanation of “and for the people.” It refers to the people’s sacrifice, and the reason it is mentioned here alongside his [Aaron’s] atonement is to tell you that Aaron’s atonement depends on the atonement of the people. If the people are atoned for, then you too have atonement. However, if the people are not atoned for, then you too have no atonement or remedy. Because anyone who causes the public to sin — the sin of the public depends on him, and he is not given the opportunity to repent, so that the teacher should not be in the Garden of Eden while his student is in Gehenna. Therefore, he has no atonement except on this condition: that he also atones for the people whom he caused to sin. And some say that Aaron did not need atonement, except for the sin of action and not for the sin of thought, as explained above in the verse Take for yourself a calf. The people also needed atonement for the sin of action, therefore it is said regarding Aaron’s atonement: And make atonement for yourself and for the people, to tell you that the people also need your atonement for the sin of action. But regarding the atonement of the people, who brought a calf as a burnt offering to atone also for the sin of thought, it is said and make atonement for them alone, because Aaron did not need atonement for thoughts, as he did not sin in thought at all, but only in action, and without doubt he did not intend it as [worship of] a deity.

קרב אל המזבח, “approach the altar;” why did Moses have to command Aaron to do this? Satan at the time had appeared to Aaron in the guise of a calf, and he had become afraid that he no longer was qualified to serve as priest, or certainly as High Priest. Moses reassured him that he had nothing to fear. וכפר בעדך ובעד העם, “and make atonement for yourself as well as for the people.” This verse requires further study, as this offering was only on behalf of Aaron, not the people. We read further on in verse 15 and 16 of this chapter about the offering presented on behalf of the people. Seeing that this was so, why did the Torah in our verse include “the people?” We may answer that the Torah mentioned this in order to explain why Aaron first had to offer his personal sin offering, before being able to act as the agent of the people. As long as he had not obtained atonement for his part in the golden calf, he could not function as the people’s agent in this respect.

And Aaron drew near to the altar and slaughtered the calf of the sin-offering that was his own.

"Which was his" — it was from his own [property]. And so too [is the case with] the bull of Yom Kippur.

ויקרב אהרון אל המזבח, Aaron approached the altar, etc. This verse alludes to a conversation in the celestial spheres which is reported in the Jerusalem Talmud Makkot 2,6: "They enquired from 'prophecy': what shall be the punishment of a person who has sinned? Answer: והנפש החוטאת היא תמות. 'The person (soul) who sins, she (the soul) will die (Ezekiel 18,4)'. When they asked 'mercy' the same question the answer given by 'mercy' was: 'he shall bring a sacrifice.'" The major factor determining the value of the animal sacrifice is the thoughts it evokes in the person offering it. If that person will realise that everything which is being done to the sacrificial animal is something that should really be done to him, the offering may effect atonement for its owner. When the Torah writes that Aaron approached the altar this is another way of saying that he readied himself to place his own soul on the altar as a guilt-offering. He was aware that when he performed the act of slaughtering the animal instead, this was an act of mercy by G'd who spared his life and allowed him to present the animal's life as a substitute for his own. In order to understand the system of crime and punishment and the apparent ease with which atonement can be obtained by the offering of an animal, we must consider various statements by our sages. Tanchuma Shoftim posits that G'd has sworn to hold the universe and the creatures therein responsible for their deeds. If anyone were to declare that G'd is a וותרון, an indulgent and lenient G'd, he will experience that his bowels יוותרו, will become loose. (Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 5,1). If, as the prophet said in Ezekiel 18,4, the sinner ought to die for his sin, how is it that he only has to offer a sacrifice in order to escape death? I believe we can find a reason for this which is acceptable even in legal terms. At the time a person commits a sin he does not do so as a human being in full command of his faculties. Rather, he has temporarily taken leave of his senses or he would never have committed the sin in the first place. Compare Sotah 3. We are told there that prior to committing a sin man's mind is afflicted by some mental disturbance. Had the person committing the sin not descended to a spiritual level such as that of a beast he would not have committed the sin. On the day such a person becomes a penitent, his רוח, spiritual level, has reasserted itself and he again assumes the spiritual level of a human being. Would it be fair to kill such a human being because of what he did while he was on the spiritual level of a beast? When such a person has to offer a beast in expiation of his sin he will realise the anguish the beast suffers when it has to die and he will appreciate that he himself had been in a situation similar to that of the beast which now has to die. Man's sensitivity to the animal's anguish then is what really saves him from the fate of the animal. This is what the Psalmist has in mind when he speaks of "m...

ויקרב אהרן אל המזבח וישחט, “Aaron approached the altar and slaughtered;” Nachmanides writes that in his personal view, the plain meaning of the words קרב אל המזבח is that Aaron is to approach the north side of the altar where he is to perform the procedures involving the sin offering and the burnt offering, seeing these two types of offerings need to be slaughtered on the north side of the altar. (Zevachim chapter 5) The catching of the blood of these offerings must also be carried out on the north side of the altar in the appropriate vessels. Moses recorded this in abbreviated form as Aaron was already familiar with the procedure. According to a Midrash, seeing that Aaron was a קדוש ה', someone sanctified by Hashem, his life having been stained only by one marginal sin, his involvement in the sin of the golden calf, this sin was something which preyed on his mind constantly, similar to David’s remark וחטאתי נגדי תמיד, “and I am constantly conscious of my sin against You.“ (Psalms 51, 5) He felt that the image of the golden calf constantly intruded upon his imagination and interfered with the proper concentration required when presenting sacrifices on behalf of others. This is why Moses tried to restore his mental equilibrium by telling him not to be depressed, that G’d had already forgiven his involvement in that sin. Some commentators think that it had been Satan that had shown Aaron these images of the golden calf, and that Moses told Aaron that in spite of he fact that as far as G’d was concerned, his sin had been forgiven, he also had to do something to shut up Satan so that the latter would not be able to upset him at the crucial time when he would perform sacrificial duties. This is the approach taken to our verse by Torat Kohanim.

And the sons of Aaron brought the blood to him, and he dipped his finger in the blood and placed it on the horns of the altar, and the blood he poured out at the base of the altar.

"And the blood" — the remainder he poured out.

ואת הדם יצק אל יסוד המזבח, “and he poured the blood upon the foundation of the Altar.” He did this in order to achieve atonement for man whose existence is dependent on blood. This is the meaning of Leviticus 17,14: “for the life-force of all flesh resides within its blood.” It is also written (Leviticus 17,11) “for he atones for the blood which resides in the נפש, ‘life-force.’” This then was the reason that the High Priest was burning up the following three items, “the fat parts, the kidneys, and the tissue attached to the liver.” All of these parts of man had to partake in order for the sin to be carried out (golden calf) and they were instrumental in turning the people away from the path of goodness to the path of evil. This is the deeper meaning of “and the fat-parts, the kidneys and the tissue adjoining the liver of the animal which was the sin-offering he made go up in smoke on the Altar” (verse 10). The part called חלב is the fat which causes man to become gross, arrogant; it is responsible for man’s inherent pride and arrogance. Moses alluded to this when he said (Deuteronomy 32,15) “Yeshurun grew fat and kicked, you became fat and gross and coarse;” we also have a verse in Job 15,27 depicting something similar: ”his face is covered with fat and his loins with blubber.” [The speaker refers to a king rebelling against the Lord. Ed.] The kidneys are the source of what is called עצה, “counsel,” in the language of our sages (Berachot 61); they base this on Psalms 26,2 “ונסני צרופה כליותי ולבי, “and try me, test my heart and kidneys (mind).” Another verse (Psalms 16,7) carries a similar message, i.e. אף לילות יסרוני כליותי, “my kidneys (conscience) admonish me at night.” The reason the tissue adjoining the liver had to be burned up is that desire, carnal and other kinds of greed which permeate man, have their origin in that region of the body. It is also the region which is the (physical) cause of anger and rage. All the negative virtues in man are connected to the liver. All of these parts the Priest burned up in the northern part of the Altar as the north is the region from where all evil originates, (compare Jeremiah 1,14). In other words, evil is consigned back to where it originated (symbolically speaking). All these procedures have one purpose, to achieve atonement for man’s sins which originate in the fatness of his heart and the planning of his ego which originates in the liver.

And the fat, and the kidneys, and the lobe from the liver of the sin-offering he caused to go up in smoke on the altar, as Hashem had commanded Moses.

"And the fat that covers" — namely that which is upon the entrails and upon the kidneys.

And the flesh and the hide he burned in fire outside the camp.

'ואת הבשר ואת העור וגו AND THE FLESH AND THE HIDE [HE BURNT .. OUTSIDE THE CAMP] — We do not find that any “external” sin-offering (one the blood of which was sprinkled on the outer altar) was burnt except this and that of the installation ceremony — and all these, only at the express command of God (cf. Rashi on Exodus 29:14).

ואת הבשר ואת העור, “and both the meat and the skin, etc;” Rashi explains here that there is no other occasion when the blood of the sin offering is burnt outside the Tabernacle, except in this instance and on the preceding seven days. (when Moses officiated.) If you were to question that we find that the blood of the second bull offered by the Levites in Numbers 8,8-15 was also offered before the Levites entered the Tabernacle, and that in the Book of Ezra chapter 8,35, we encounter something similar, a) these were consecration offerings prior to the second Temple beginning to function, and b) Ezekiel had already predicted in Ezekiel 45,18-20, that in the new Temple the ritual involving all these sin offerings would take place outside the doorposts of Temple itself. What Rashi meant when he commented on our verse refers to every place when the consecration rites of the Tabernacle in the desert had been discussed, as well as when the consecration rites in the days of Ezra were discussed and when the prophet prophesied about the consecration rites of the third Temple, hopefully in our own days. The answer given to the question raised above in the first chapter of the Talmud, tractate Horiyot, is that what was done in the days of Ezra was an emergency measure, one from which no conclusions may be drawn for normal times. שרף באש, “he burned in fire;” the reason for this has already been explained in both Exodus 29,14, and in the last Parshah.

And he slaughtered the burnt-offering, and the sons of Aaron presented the blood to him, and he dashed it upon the altar all around.

וימציאו — This signifies handing over and presenting.

"And they presented [וימציאו]" — from the root מצא, meaning that they found [what was needed] at the moment of need.

וימציאו, they used this opportunity to become trained in the priestly functions by assisting in their father’s personal sacrifice.

And the burnt-offering they presented to him piece by piece, and the head, and he caused it all to go up in smoke on the altar.

ויקטר על המזבח, he placed them on the altar; when the heavenly fire descended they would be consumed.

And he washed the entrails and the legs and caused them to go up in smoke on the burnt-offering upon the altar.

על העולה — with the Olah offering

And he brought near the offering of the people, and took the he-goat of the sin-offering that was for the people and slaughtered it, and performed atonement with its blood as with the first.

ויחטאהו means: he treated it according to the regulation regarding the חטאת, “sin-offering”. כראשון AS THE FIRST — as his own calf (as is described in v. 8).

"And he brought near the people's offering" — upon the altar. "And he performed the sin-offering as the first" — that is, the calf of the sin-offering. And the meaning of "and he performed the sin-offering" is: he made atonement with it as a sin-offering.

כראשון, which had been burned although it had been a sin offering whose blood was destined for the altar in the courtyard.

ויקרב את קרבן העם. He presented the people's offering. This refers to the presentation of the "lights" [a term denoting enlightenment in kabbalistic jargon. Ed.] which were planted in the Israelites from the source of the original "light" which had been diffused due to Adam's sin and which had prevented man from achieving the close relationship with G'd he should have maintained. The change which took place in man's soul dictated that he keep a certain distance from G'd as ever since the sin G'd and man are perceived of as two different species, [a halachic term used when two categories of food, a forbidden one and a permissible one become mixed and the question arises if one of them loses its former identity. Ed.] The Torah tells us here that by means of the service performed by Aaron two species which had previously been incompatible had again become compatible. The words "he brought close the offering of the people" mean that he re-united what had become estranged. Actually, by rights, this verse should have been written at the end of the whole procedure in verse 23. Why did the Torah write this verse prior to describing the details of the procedure? The Torah wanted to teach us the lesson that it is not the actual procedure which is crucial in achieving the objective of the sacrifice. It is the intent with which such a procedure is initiated which determines if the execution of the ritual will achieve its objective. We have a mystical element in this verse also. I have mentioned on a previous occasion that the burnt-offering, עולה, represents the concept of כנסת ישראל, [a concept known in kabbalistic language as the שכינה תחתונה, the lower manifestation of the שכינה in the emanation מלכות. Ed.] the ideological concept of the people of Israel. If the Israelites fail to behave as they should they "lower" the concept of כנסת ישראל. On the other hand, if they draw near to G'd as expressed in the words ויקרב את העולה, they will experience one spiritual ascent after another. Not only will they not be tainted by sins but they will be able to face the most rigorous standards of justice. This is what is implied in the words ויעשיה כמשפט.

And he brought near the burnt-offering and performed it according to the proper manner.

ויעשה כמשפט AND HE DID IT ACCORDING TO THE MANNER that is set forth in the section ויקרא (ch. 1) in respect to the burnt offering brought as a free-will gift (Beitzah 20a).

כמשפט, that Aaron’s sons did the sprinkling of the blood, arranged the pieces of flesh and burned them.

And they brought the burnt offering, and he performed it after the rite of the burnt offering which he had offered for himself.

And he brought near the meal-offering and filled his hand from it and caused it to go up in smoke on the altar, in addition to the morning burnt-offering.

וימלא כפו AND HE FILLED HIS HAND [THEREWITH] — this is what is elsewhere termed קמיצה (i. e. this is elsewhere expressed by the phrase … וקמץ מלא קמצו “he shall take a fistful”) (Sifra, Shemini, Mechilta d'Miluim 2 10; cf. Menachot 9b). מלבד עלת הבקר BESIDE THE BURNT OFFERING OF THE MORNING — all these rites he carried out after the continual burnt offering.

BESIDES THE BURNT-OFFERING OF THE MORNING. Scripture had to mention this here, in order to teach us that the burnt-offering of the people [which was a special offering for that day] did not exempt [them from bringing] the Daily burnt-offering, nor did it precede it [as nothing may ever be offered before the Daily burnt-offering of the morning]. But Scripture did not have to mention this about the seven days of consecration [namely that the offerings of those days were to be offered besides the burnt-offering of the morning], because those were offerings of individuals [i.e., Aaron and his sons] to consecrate them as priests, and it is self-understood that such offerings did not exempt [them from bringing] the Daily burnt-offering, nor did they precede it. In the Torath Kohanim the Rabbis have taught: “And the meal-offering was presented; and he filled his hand therefrom and burnt it on the altar, besides the burnt-offering of the morning. What does this come to teach us? Shall we say it teaches us that if he could not obtain the meal-offering [which was offered with every burnt-offering] that he should nevertheless bring the animal [as a burnt-offering]? [That could not be the case], for it has already been stated, And the burnt-offering was presented, and he offered it according to the ordinances. If so, why does it say, and he burnt it [i.e., the meal-offering] upon the altar, besides the burnt-offering of the morning? It is to teach us that there were two meal-offerings there, one for the [Daily] burnt-offering and one [brought] by itself” [for the burnt-offering of the people, which was a special offering of that eighth day].The meaning of this text [of the Torath Kohanim] is as follows: Had Scripture stated, “And the burnt-offering was presented, and he offered it according to the ordinance, besides the burnt-offering of the morning,” the sense thereof would have been to teach that the Daily burnt-offering precedes [the other offerings], as He says in the section of the Additional Offerings, it shall be offered beside the continual burnt-offering, and the drink-offering thereof; beside the continual burnt-offering. But since He mentioned the meal-offering — stating, And the meal-offering was presented; and he filled his hand therefrom, and burnt it on the altar, besides the burnt-offering of the morning — it appears that [the phrase, besides the burnt-offering of the morning] is said with reference to the meal-offering. Therefore the Rabbis commented that if it comes to say that he offered this meal-offering alone, but did not offer the drink-offering of the Daily burnt-offering nor that of the people’s burnt-offering [of the eighth day], because he only found [ingredients] for this freewill meal-offering — [that could not be the case]. For [in the preceding verse] it has already been stated, And the burnt-offering was presented, and he offered it according to the ordinance, which means that it was offered according to its ordinance, with...

מלבד עולת הבקר, apart from the gift offering which accompanied the morning burnt offering.

מלבד עולת הבקר, “in addition to the burnt offering in the morning.” This teaches that on this occasion two gift offerings were presented, one which was part of the daily burnt offering in the mornings, the other on its own. (Compare verse 4 in our chapter, and chapter 28 in the Book of Numbers).)

ויקרב את המנחה, “he presented the minchah offering.” Although in the directives, he had first been told about offering a bull and a ram, followed by the gift offering mixed with oil, he offered the gift offering first, because Moses had told them all the meat offerings in one directive followed by the instruction about the gift offering. Aaron actually offered the gift offering in the proper order simultaneously with the meat offering. מלבד עולת הבוקר, “in addition to the daily burnt offering which was presented each morning.” Nachmanides writes that the Torah had to record this additional detail (about the daily burnt offering in the morning) in order to teach us that an offering brought on behalf of the whole people, such as here- cannot replace the daily mandatory communal offering known as tamid. (Called here עולת הבוקר). Not only this, but the daily tamid is offered before any other offering, communal or private. Actually, if not for teaching us this aspect of the daily communal tamid, there was no need to make special mention of this during the days of the inaugural offerings, seeing those were not communal offerings but private offerings, which had been designed to serve as the introduction of the priests to their position as the people’s intermediary between themselves and G’d. Therefore, there had not been the slightest reason to assume that their offerings could replace the daily tamid. This may be the reason why in the Torat Kohanim the reference is understood as pertaining only to the libation offering, מנחת נסכים, which accompanied the daily tamid, and which was considered a private offering, the wording here teaches that both these libation offerings were presented.

ויקרב את המנחה, “he then brought forward the meal offering;” after that he slaughtered the ox and the ram as peace offerings. This sequence also deserves further study as the order is unusual. We would have expected the meal offering to be the least in that sequence. (Compare verse 4)

And he slaughtered the bull and the ram, the sacred peace-offerings that were for the people; and the sons of Aaron presented the blood to him, and he dashed it upon the altar all around.

וימציאו, they also trained in performing the rites of the peace offerings offered on behalf of the congregation.

And the fat portions from the bull and from the ram — the fat tail, and what covers the entrails, and the kidneys, and the lobe of the liver —

והמכסה AND THAT WHICH COVERETH — This is elsewhere (e.g., Leviticus 3:3) termed “the fat which covereth the inward parts”.

V’HAMECHASEH’ (AND THAT WHICH COVERETH THE INWARDS). “That is, the fat which covers the inwards.” Thus the language of Rashi. But it does not appear to me to be correct, for why should He mention [only] this particular fat and not the other fats [which were burnt on the altar]? Rather, the word hamechaseh in my opinion is a term for all the fats, since all fats which are burnt on the altar are “covering” [fats]. One is the fat which covereth the inwards, and the second is all the fat that is upon the inwards, and that too “covers” [the inwards]; the fat which is upon the kidneys covers them, as does also the fat which is upon the loins. This is similar to that which the Rabbis have said: “Fat which the meat covers is permissible to be eaten, for the Merciful One said, the fat which is upon the loins [is called ‘fat’], and not that which is within the loins.” This verse is thus a continuation of the above: and Aaron’s sons delivered unto him the blood of the ox and the ram mentioned [in the first part of that verse], and the fat of the ox, but of the ram they presented to him the fat tail and “the fat” [as the word mechaseh indicates], and of the two [the ox and the ram, they presented to him] the kidneys, and the lobe of the liver. Scripture states, And they put the fat upon the breasts, for they placed the fat tail, the kidneys, and the lobe of the liver at the bottom, and the [other] fats on the top of them, and everything upon the breasts. Thus the fats alone were visible above, this being the respectful way to burn them [on the altar].

והמכסה, “and the covering fats;” Rashi claims that this abbreviated reference refers to the fat membranes covering various innards.” Nachmanides queries this interpretation, asking why this fat part should be singled out for special mention? He therefore explains that the word המכסה sums up all the fat parts which cover the innards, be it kidneys, parts of the liver, etc, Any fat part offered on the altar and burned up there is included in the term המכסה. Whereas a distinction is made between חלב על and חלב המכסה, when it comes to its function on the altar, there is no such distinction. Basically, our verse refers to what has been written before beginning with the words וימציאו in the middle of verse 18. From the word ומן האיל (המציאו) in verse 19 what is written belongs to what follows in the text. In other words, the parts mentioned after ומן האיל were all burned up on the altar.

they placed the fat portions upon the breast-pieces, and he caused the fat portions to go up in smoke on the altar.

וישימו את החלבים על החזות AND THEY PUT THE FAT UPON THE BREAST — After the waving the priest who waved them gave them to another priest to burn them; consequently what was previously above was now beneath (cf. Rashi on Leviticus 7:30; Menachot 62a).

AND HE BURNT THE FAT UPON THE ALTAR — together with the others mentioned [namely, the fat tail, and that which covereth the inwards, and the lobe of the liver, and the breasts]. But because the burning of the fats is greater, He mentions [only] them. Similarly, it consumed upon the altar the burnt-offering and the fats.

"And they placed the fats" — together with the kidneys and the lobe of the liver, as I have shown you.

וישימו את החלבים על החזות, “they positioned the fat parts on top of the breasts;” The fat tail, the kidneys and the attachment to the liver would be placed below; above that would be placed the various parts of fatty substance; both of these would be placed above the breasts of the animals From the outside only the fatty membranes would be visible; this was out of consideration for the “dignity” of the remnants of the animals.

And the breast-pieces and the right thigh Aaron raised as a wave-offering before Hashem, as Moses had commanded.

"And the breast" — the breast of the ox and also the breast of the ram. "And the right thigh" — from this one and from that one. And [the word] שוק, thigh, is adjacent to the side or flank.

And Aaron raised his hands over the people and blessed them, and descended from performing the sin-offering and the burnt-offering and the sacred peace-offerings.

ויברכם AND HE BLESSED THEM with the priestly benediction (Numbers 6:24—26): “May the Lord bless thee … May the Lord cause his face to shine … May the Lord lift up …” (cf. Sifra, Shemini, Mechilta d'Miluim 2 17; Sotah 38a) וירד AND HE CAME DOWN from off the altar.

AND AARON LIFTED UP HIS HANDS TOWARD THE PEOPLE, AND BLESSED THEM — “with the priestly benediction: The Eternal bless thee …. The Eternal make His face shine upon thee … The Eternal lift up His countenance upon thee …” Thus the language of Rashi. But if so, the section of Speak unto Aaron and unto his sons, saying: Thus ye shall bless the children of Israel, in the Book of Numbers, takes chronological precedence over this section! Perhaps it is [indeed] so since it is placed near to that which it says there, And it came to pass on the day that Moses had made an end of setting up the Tabernacle [which was on the first of Nisan — “the eighth day” herein discussed].It is possible to say that Aaron spread forth his hands towards heaven and blessed the people, just as Solomon did, as it is said, And Solomon stood before the altar of the Eternal in the presence of all the congregation of Israel, and spread forth his hands, toward heaven, and there it is said, And he stood, and blessed all the congregation of Israel with a loud voice, saying, etc. Therefore Scripture does not mention that Moses commanded him to do so [i.e., to say the priestly blessing, since it had in fact not yet been given].In the Beraitha of the section of consecration in the Torath Kohanim I have seen it said: “And he blessed them. This is an unspecified blessing [the nature of which] you do not know. Scripture [therefore] went back and explained it further on: The Eternal bless thee, and keep thee. The Eternal make His face to shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee. The Eternal lift up His countenance upon thee, and give thee peace.” Nonetheless, I could still say that the Rabbis of this Beraitha were saying as follows: “This blessing with which Aaron blessed the people of his own accord, is unspecified, and Scripture did not explain to us what it was. But the blessing that the priests have been commanded to say in all future generations, has been expressly set forth, it applying to all priests alike forever. Or it may be that [the Rabbis of this Beraitha] are of the opinion that here He commanded him [to say] the priestly blessing for that day, and later on [as stated in the Book of Numbers] this blessing was given to Aaron and his sons for the succeeding generations.”

"And Aaron lifted his hands toward the people" — facing them. And our predecessors transmitted from here the form of the lifting of the hands. "And he descended" — as I have shown you many times: he had already descended after performing the sin-offering, the burnt-offering, and the peace-offerings of the people. And the meaning of "and he descended" [is] on account of the altar, which stood three cubits high. Afterward Moses and Aaron came into the Tent of Meeting; and it is plausible that they came to pray that the fire should go forth, and upon their emerging they both blessed the people.

וישא אהרון אח ידיו, Aaron raised his hands, etc. Torat Kohanim claims that this verse is truncated and the words: "he descended from offering the sin-offering, etc." should have been written before the words "he raised his hands and blessed them." We therefore have to explore why the Torah chose this unusual sequence. Perhaps when Aaron realised that the Presence of G'd had not manifested itself (by consuming the fat and meat on the altar by means of heavenly fire) he may have felt that both he and the people had not yet been completely exonerated from their respective share in the sin of the golden calf. He therefore considered himself as having brought a curse on the people. By raising his hands already at this time and blessing the people, Aaron hoped to counteract that curse. Only after he had blessed the people did he feel that he had really completed the ritual of the sin-offering. He was then able to descend from the altar secure in the knowledge that he had done all he could. Perhaps the Torah wanted the blessing of the Israelites to be included in the procedure of offering the sin-offering because it also exonerated Aaron from his share in the guilt. The word וירד may also refer to a spiritual descent; when Aaron saw that the שכינה had not yet descended, he felt reduced in stature, i.e. וירד. Torat Kohanim on our verse reports Aaron as having cried out to Moses that the latter had commanded him to present these offerings on the altar only to now shame him when G'd had not indicated that He had accepted these offerings. Moses then entered the Tabernacle together with Aaron and after they asked G'd to show mercy the fire from heaven materialised.

וישא אהרן את ידיו, “Aaron raised his hands, etc.;” this verse has been truncated somewhat; it should have commenced with: “from having completed the rites of the sin offering and the burnt offering and he then raised his hand in order to bless the people.” וירד מעשות החטאת, “he descended from the altar from performing the rites of the sin offering,” i.e. burning up the parts not to be eaten.

וישא אהרן את ידיו אל העם ויברכם, “Aaron raised his hands in the direction of the people and he blessed them.” The meaning of the words אל העם, normally translated as “in the direction of the people,” should here be translated as: “for the sake of the people, i.e. to meet their needs.” The commentators who disagree with us and dress themselves up in fancy garments to lend weight to their words, are wrong when they said that the meaning of these words is that Aaron lifted his hand in order to indicate to the people that they should raise their right hand as affirmation. These commentators [Christian theologians, compare St. James version of the Bible, Ed.] quote a Midrash (see gloss of Maimoniot on Maimonides Hilchot Tefillah 14,3) that the word ידו with the vowels of the plural, is spelled without the letter י indicating that it is really a singular, i.e. “his hand.” Our answer to them is simply that traditionally we read the word as if it had been spelled with the letter י, i.e. that Aaron raised both his hands. Their argument that Aaron only raised his right hand is null and void. The reason that we encounter this unusual spelling is to indicate that the right hand is more important than the left hand concerning mystical matters which are revealed only to select individuals. This is why the Kabbalists have said that the word is spelled ידו in the singular to allude to the select individuals who are recipients of deeper insights from the “right” side of G’d. In this way justice is done both to the spelling and the traditional reading. When you compare the prayer Moses uttered when he prayed for the victory of the Israelites against the attack by Amalek in Exodus 17,11 you will also find this dual spelling of the word ידו, i.e. והיה כאשר ירים משה ידו וגבר ישראל. “Whenever Moses raised his hand (s) Israel would prevail.” In the following two verses the word is spelled as ידיו in the normal way. Had Moses used only one hand at a time, it is hard to understand why he needed two men to support his hands as is evident from verses 12 and 13 in that chapter. If the people who understood our verse as Aaron raising his hands towards the people (instead of towards G’d) would be correct, the Torah should have written instead of וישא אהרן את ידיו אל העם, the formula וישלח אהרן את ידיו אל העם. It is the custom for a father who prepares to bless his son to put his hand on his head, just as Yaakov did when he prepared to bless the two sons of Joseph. In that instance the Torah wrote וישלח ישראל את ימינו, “Israel extended his right hand.” In our verse the Torah employs the verb וישא to show that Aaron’s hands were stretched upwards (towards heaven). We have a parallel example in Kings I 8, 54-55 ויהי ככלות שלמה להתפלל אל ה' את כל התפלה והתחנה הזאת וכפיו פרושות השמים ויעמוד ויברך את כל קהל ישראל, “it was when Solomon had completed this entire prayer and entreaty with his palms outstretched heavenwards, he stood and blessed the entire congregation of Israel.” It is clear that the meaning of the verse is that Solomon’s hands were in an upright position aimed towards heaven.

וישא אהרן את ידיו אל העם ויברכם, “Aaron raised his hands toward the people and blessed them.” Rashi says that he blessed them with the standard blessing of the priests, the verses 24-26 in Numbers chapter 6. Nachmanides comments that if this were so then the paragraph in Numbers must have been inserted in the Torah out of turn. It is quite possible that this is indeed so, seeing that the paragraph following the blessing there dealt with events which occurred on the day the erecting of the Tabernacle was completed, i.e. the 1st day of Nissan of the second year, the day when the inaugural offerings were completed also. It is quite possible that Aaron raised his hands heavenwards, as did King Solomon when he blessed the people when the Temple was inaugurated (Kings I 8,22) If Aaron used the standard blessing used by the priests, this would account for the fact that we did not hear Moses instruct him to bless the people. וירד מעשות החטאת והעולה והשלמים, “he descended from having performed the sin-offering, the burnt offering, and the peace-offering.” The Torah does not mention Aaron having also performed the minchah, gift offering. Some commentators claim that seeing that the gift offering is only an offering preparatory to ensuring that the major part of offering is acceptable to Hashem, there was no need to mention this. We must assume that the Torah only bothered to mention the animal sacrifices.

And Moses and Aaron entered the Tent of Meeting, and they came out and blessed the people, and the Glory of Hashem was revealed to all the people.

ויבא משה ואהרן AND MOSES AND AARON CAME, etc. — Wherefore did they now enter the Tabernacle? I have found the following in the “Mechilta d’Miluim,” in the Boraitha that is appended to our Torath Cohanim (Sifra): Wherefore did Moses enter with Aaron? To instruct him regarding the incense ceremony. Or it may be that he entered for some other reason?! See, I draw a conclusion: the descent from the altar and the entry into the tent of meeting both required to be accompanied by a benediction, as stated in vv. 22 and 23 (and consequently both were, in a measure, of similar character). Now what was the descent from the altar? It was of the nature (it look place in connection with) a sacrificial act! So, also, the entry into the tent took place in connection with a sacrificial act! Thus you may learn: Why did Moses enter with Aaron? To instruct him regarding the incense ceremony which was the only rite performed on that day within the tent! (Cf. Talmud Yerushalmi Taanit 4). Another explanation is: When Aaron perceived that all the sacrifices had been offered and all the rites performed, and yet the Shechinah had not descended for Israel, since the heavenly fire had not fallen to consume the sacrifice, he was uneasy in mind and said: I feel certain that the Holy One, blessed be He, is angry with me and that it is on my account that the Shechinah has not descended for Israel. He therefore said to Moses: “My brother Moses! Do you act thus with me: you know that I have entered into this matter at your bidding and yet I have been put to shame! Moses at once entered the tent with him and they offered prayer and the Shechinah descended for Israel (Sifra, Shemini, Mechilta d'Miluim 2 18). ויצאו ויברכו את העם AND THEY CAME OUT AND BLESSED THE PEOPLE — They said the words that conclude “The Prayer of Moses” (Psalms 90:17): “May the beauty of the Lord our God be upon us” — i. e. May it be God’s will that the Shechinah may rest upon the work of your hands (see Rashi on Exodus 39:43). They invoked just this blessing and not another formula because during the whole seven days of the installation when Moses was setting up the Tabernacle and officiating therein and dismantling it daily the Shechinah had not rested upon it and the Israelites felt ashamed, saying to Moses: “O, our Teacher Moses! All the trouble which we have taken was only that the Shechinah may dwell amongst us, so that we may know that the sin of the golden calf has been atoned for on our behalf!” He therefore had said to them (v. 6): “This is the thing which the Lord commanded that ye should do so that the glory of the Lord may appear unto you” (i. e. only after these offerings will have been brought by Aaron (cf. v. 7) will God’s glory appear unto you). My brother Aaron is more worthy and excellent than I am, so that through his sacrifices and ministration the Shechinah will rest upon you, and ye will thereby know that the Omnipresent God has chosen him to bring His Shechinah upon you.

ויצאו ויברכו את העם, They emerged from the Tabernacle and blessed the people. Perhaps they had been commanded to do so by a prophetic vision. It is also possible that the Torah substitutes the word "blessing" here for the word "prayer." The prayer may have been that G'd's Presence should continue to manifest itself in the camp. Even though the people had already been blessed by Aaron, it was good to be blessed by both brothers each of whom represented a different nuance of spirituality, one that is unique to the Levite and the other the spirituality unique to the priesthood. In kabbalistic terms the two brothers Aaron and Moses represented the emanations חסד וגבורה respectively.

ויבא משה ואהרן אל אהל מועד, “Moses and Aaron entered the Tent of Meeting.” They did so in order to see the glory when heavenly fire would descend as proof that their sacrificial service had been accepted in heaven. וירא כבוד ה, “the glory of the Lord appeared.” How so?

ויבא משה ואהרן אל אהל מועד ויצאו ויברכו את העם, “Moses and Aaron entered the Tent of Meeting, and when they came out they blessed the people.” They both had to enter to enable Moses to teach Aaron the details of the incense offering. Aaron had not been allowed to enter beyond the entrance of the Tabernacle during the seven days of inauguration as we have read in 8,38 that Aaron and his sons were to remain at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting during this entire period. Now, on the eighth day, permission had been given for him to enter. Moses accompanied him in order to teach him the procedure. Moses had already acquired expertise in this procedure having performed it for the last seven days. You know that Moses had performed all the various procedures connected with the service in the Tabernacle from 8,19-21 “Moses sprinkled the blood, Moses slaughtered. Moses cut up the animal into pieces, he burned up the ram, etc. etc.” Up until the eighth day Moses had performed all these procedures. This is why Psalms 99,6 describes both Moses and Aaron as “His Priests.” When the Torah describes both Moses and Aaron as emerging from the Tabernacle and blessing the people, this means that they did so immediately after having offered up the incense. The reason is that at that moment prayer is accepted by G’d with a minimum of delay. It became the custom for the High Priest on the Day of Atonement to offer the incense and even to leave his pan inside the Temple in order to immediately leave the Sanctuary and offer his (famous) prayer for the economic welfare of the Jewish people in the coming year; at the same time he requested from G’d that all the various needs of the Jewish people be met (Yuma 53). This is also what prompted David to say in Psalms 141,2: ”Take my prayer as an offering of incense, my upraised hands as an evening sacrifice.” David singled out the incense offering by name from amongst all the others, because it is the most beloved. Hence prayer offered at the time of day when the incense would be offered is most effective.

ויבא משה ואהרן, “Moses and Aaron came (to the tent of Meeting);” According to Rashi, the reason Moses entered was to teach Aaron the details of the presentation of the incense. All the commentators wonder why Moses delayed this part of Aaron’s instructions until this late stage, seeing that the offering of the incense is slated to take place between the sprinkling of the blood and the burning up of the portions of the daily tamid sacrifice that needs to be burned up on the altar? The answer given is that up until his point the heavenly fire that was to consume this offering had not yet materialized. Moses wanted to await that happening.

ויבא משה ואהרן אל אהל מועד, to pray for the heavenly fire to descend וירא כבוד ה' אל כל העם. Wherein did this “glory of the Lord” manifest itself?

And fire went out from before Hashem and consumed upon the altar the burnt-offering and the fat portions; and all the people saw and gave praise and fell upon their faces.

וירנו Understand this as the Targum does: and they praised God.

"The burnt-offering" — the burnt-offering of Aaron, the burnt-offering of the people, and the daily burnt-offering, for so it is written: "besides the morning burnt-offering." "And the fats" — from the calf and the ram of Aaron, the he-goat, the ox, and the ram. "And they shouted" — [this is] a raising of the voice; and similarly [the expression] "and the shout of joy passed through the camp."

ותצא אש וגו, “Heavenly fire descended,” etc.; the heavenly fire that was visible in the time of Moses did not depart from the copper altar until the days of the Temple of Solomon. It disappeared only in the days of King Menashe, who had incurred G-d’s wrath more than any King of the kingdom of Yehudah before him.

ותצא אש מלפני ה' ותאכל על המזבח את העולה, “Fire emanated from heaven and consumed the burnt-offering on the Altar, etc.” Now, on the eighth day of the Tabernacle being inaugurated with various animal sacrifices all of which had been offered in order to atone for the sin of the golden calf, heavenly fire descended to accept these offerings. This fire remained a constant phenomenon until the generation of Solomon when he built the Holy Temple. (Zevachim 61). In fact it did not cease until that Temple was destroyed. According to our tradition King Menashe had extinguished it personally (about 100 years prior to the destruction of the Temple). We find an allusion to this in Leviticus 6,6: “the fire on the Altar will remain constant, it shall not be extinguished.” We find that during various times in our history there have been twelve recorded occasions when fire descended from heaven (to accomplish a specific task). Six of these occasions were for the sake of accepting sacrificial offerings; the other six occasions were demonstrations of Divine displeasure and anger. The first of these twelve occasions was the instance recorded here, where the fire which descended indicated G’d’s pleasure and acceptance of the sacrifices offered. The second such occasion occurred in the days of Gideon who had asked for a sign from the angel that he had not fantasized but that G’d really wanted him to become the leader of the nation in order deliver the people from the yoke of Midian. The wording there (Judges 6,17-18) is: ”If I have gained your favour, give me a sign that it is You who are speaking to me; do not leave this place until I come back to You and bring out my offering and place it before You.” He answered: “I will stay until you return.” In verse 21 of that chapter we read that Gideon’s offering was consumed by supernatural fire. Seeing that the angel had requested that Gideon perform five tasks, Gideon in turn requested a sign to be certain in his heart that the matter would come true. The angel had requested (Judges 6,25) that Gideon take the ox belonging to his father (and destroy it) as well as “a second” seven-year old bull and offer it as a sacrifice to G’d after he had first torn down the altar of the Baal which belonged to Gideon’s father. He asked him to cut down a sacred post, to build an altar for the Lord, on level ground on top of this stronghold. He was to take the other bull and offer it as a burnt-offering on that newly erected altar. The meaning of the word “second” when the prophet spoke about a second seven year old bull was the “second of the womb of its mother.” The angel went on to say to Gideon: “destroy the altar of the Baal belonging to your father as well as the sacred post which is upon it you shall cut down.” He then instructed him to build an altar for the Lord on a fortified place on a specified site on that fortress and to offer a burnt-offering consisting of this second bull, using the wood from the sacred post as firewood. The expression מעוז which we translated as “a fortified place,” refers to a protruding rock and was supposed to symbolise the Azzazel. Seeing that these instructions sounded very strange, Gideon requested a sign from G’d that this was indeed what G’d wanted. The fire which consumed his offering on that altar was that sign. The third time we find heavenly fire as demonstrating G’d’s approval, was when Manoach had offered a thanksgiving offering after his wife and he had been told that they would have a son who was to be raised as a Nazir and who would begin to redeem the Israelites fom the stranglehold exerted on them by the Philistines. [Israel only defeated the Philistines finally in the days of Chizkiyahu, Kings II 18,8, some 400 years after Shimshon. Ed.] We are told in Judges 13,16 that the angel told Manoach that there was no point in delaying him as he would not eat from the gift Manoach had in mind to prepare. He told him to prepare an offering to the Lord instead. When Manoach did so and the smoke from the flame and fat rose heavenward, the angel rose to heaven within that flame. According to Rabbeinu Saadyah gaon, Manoach had first (verse 19) referred to the slab of stone where he prepared the offering as צור, “a rock.” When he observed what happened he suddenly called this rock “altar,” (verse 20). Once there was evidence that their offering had been accepted by G’d, Manoach knew that the prophecy would be fulfilled. The fourth time heavenly fire represented G’d’s pleasure occurred in the time of David after pestilence had struck the people (as a punishment for the head count) and David purchased the threshing-ground of Arona the Jebusite as the site for the Temple to be. We are told in Chronicles I 21,26 that “David built there an altar to the Lord and he sacrificed burnt-offerings and peace-offerings. He invoked the Lord who answered him with fire from heaven on the altar of burnt offerings. Thereupon the Lord ordered the angel to “return his sword to his sheath” (the pestilence would cease). The fifth occurrence of heavenly fire signaling G’d’s approval occurred in the days of King Solomon when the Temple had been completed. When Solomon had completed the inaugural prayer and had blessed the people, heavenly fire descended on the altar and consumed the offering, and the attribute of כבוד filled the Sanctuary (Chronicles II 7,1). If you were to ask why there was a need for this demonstration and renewal of heavenly fire seeing that we said previously that it continued unceasingly ever since the inauguration of the Tabernacle in our chapter, the answer is simply that Moses’ copper altar was far too small to accommodate all the offerings presented by Solomon on that occasion (compare Zevachim 59). As a result, the Priests were forced to utilize the entire courtyard and convert it into a temporary altar (compare Kings I 8,64). It was forbidden to introduce alien fire into the courtyard as it would be classified as “alien fire.” It was also forbidden to take from the fire on the altar and use it to burn the meat and fat of the offerings in the courtyard. Transferring such fire from a site of intense sanctity to one of lesser sanctity runs counter to the general principle מעלין בקודש ואין מורידין, “one may add to levels of sanctity but not diminish it.” As a result of these problems there was a need for heavenly fire to become manifest in that courtyard for Solomon and the people to know that what they had done had met with G’d’s approval. The sixth time heavenly fire descended to demonstrate G’d’s approval was on Mount Carmel when Elijah had his famous confrontation with the prophets and priests of the Baal (Kings I 18,38) Elijah pleaded with G’d to respond to what he had undertaken without consulting G’d. This is why he had to plead twice, saying ענני ה' ענני, “answer me O Lord, answer me!” G’d responded positively in stages. The first response was when heavenly fire consumed Elijah’s offerings as well as the moat of water surrounding it. The second response by G’d was the rain which materialized seemingly out of nowhere, just as Elijah had predicted (verse 44-46). Rabbi Ami (Berachot 9), commenting on the repeated words ענני, claims that Elijah asked for two responses. He wanted a demonstration of heavenly fire which should consume the prophets of the Baal together with the offerings. His second request was that the people watching should not consider what was going to happen as a form of witchcraft. Now to the six occasions when heavenly fire represented signs of G’d’s anger or displeasure: The first such instance occurred here when Nadav and Avihu were killed by heavenly fire as we read in 10,2. The second incident occurred in Numbers 11,1 when the Israelites complained for no apparent reason. The destructive fire on that occasion stopped only in response to Moses’ prayer. The third instance occurred during the uprising of Korach and Datan and Aviram. We are told in Numbers 16,35 that “fire came forth from the Lord and consumed the 250 men who had offered incense” which had been rejected. The fourth such incident is reported in Job 1,16 where heavenly fire falling down and killing boys and sheep is mentioned. Both the fifth and sixth incidents occurred in connection with Elijah who called down such fire to burn the detachment of a captain and 50 soldiers whose task it was to capture him (Kings II 1,10 and 10,12). The reason that these people were punished was the arrogance they displayed vis-a-vis the accredited prophet of G’d. [The third detachment was spared as the captain related to Elijah with deference. Ed.]

ותצא אש מלפני ה' וגו', “fire came forth from Hashem, and consumed the burnt offering on the altar.” According to the sages who accuse the sons of Aaron Nadav and Avihu of having entered the holy precincts while in a state of inebriation, although no decree had yet been issued to forbid this, and we have a rule that no death penalty is applied unless the guilty party had first been warned that what he was about to do would carry such a penalty, one must assume that they were punished for something for which punishment had been withheld thus far, and now that the opportunity of further indictment presented itself, the penalty for prior misconduct was enacted. This answer would also explain why the method of their death was by burning, seeing that the death penalty for entering the holy precincts in a state of intoxication would be punishable by a different death penalty. Nachmanides argues that they were not punished because they were intoxicated, but hat it was their intoxication which led them to commit an error that carried the death penalty.

'ותצא אש מלפני ה, this fire emanated from the Holy of Holies, traveled via the golden altar in order to burn up the incense which was always offered before the daily communal burnt offering, as described in Yuma 33. This is also where the fire encountered the sons of Aaron beside the altar Subsequently, this fire moved to the altar in the courtyard of the Tabernacle and consumed the sacrificial meat consisting of both burnt offerings and peace-offerings.