Numbers · Chapter 28

And Hashem spoke with Moses, saying:

The reason for the placement of the section of offerings is that Hashem commanded Moses at that time to command the Israelites regarding the offerings they are obligated to bring, since he [Moses] would not be entering the land with them. He began by mentioning the daily burnt-offering. Now if it [this commandment] was already mentioned earlier, it is possible that what was mentioned there refers to [the offering at] Mount Sinai, or that the arrangement of the offerings was being set in order.

Command the children of Israel and say to them: My offering, the bread of the arrangement for My offerings, to be received with favor — you shall be diligent to bring before Me at its appointed time.

צו את בני ישראל COMMAND THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL — What is said above? Moses said, “Let the Lord set [a man over the congregation]” (Numbers 27:16). The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “Instead of giving Me a command regarding My children, command My children regarding Me!” A parable! It may be compared to the case of a princess who was departing this world and gave her husband charge concerning her children, etc., as it is related in Sifrei Bamidbar 142:1. קרבני MY OFFERING — this refers to the blood. לחמי MY FOOD — this refers to the fat-portions, and so it states, (Leviticus 3:16) “And the priest shall burn them (the fat-portions) on the altar, it is the food of the fire-offerings” (Sifrei Bamidbar 142:2). לאשי [MY FOOD] FOR MY FIRE OFFERING — i.e., the fat-portions that are assigned for the fire offerings of My altar (Sifrei Bamidbar 142:2). תשמרו YE (the children of Israel) SHALL WATCH [TO OFFER TO ME] — This implies that priests, Levites and ordinary Israelites shall stand by watching when the sacrifices are offered (Sifrei Bamidbar 142:2). From this command they (the Rabbis) derived the law of, and instituted the Maamadot (representatives of the people who were present when the sacrificial service was performed) (Taanit 27a). במועדו [YE SHALL OFFER TO ME] IN ITS APPOINTED SEASON — Every day is the “appointed season” for the continual offerings.

COMMAND THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL, AND SAY UNTO THEM: MY OFFERING, MY BREAD FOR MY FIRE-OFFERINGS. The reason [for stating this command here] is that after He had said, Unto these the Land shall be divided, He completed the commands relating to the laws of the offerings which they are to observe in the Land, since they did not bring any Additional Offerings [of Sabbaths and festivals] in the desert, as I have mentioned in Seder Emor El Hakohanim. Likewise they were not obliged to bring drink-offerings in the wilderness, as I have explained in Seder Shelach Lecha. But now He charged those who were to come into the Land with the duty of bringing all [these offerings] there — the Daily Whole-offerings, the Additional Offerings, and their meal-offerings and their drink-offerings. And although He did not say expressly here: “when you come into the Land,” He has already mentioned it in the section of drink-offerings, and He hinted at it in the first section dealing with the festivals. Now He started here with the [laws of the] Daily Whole-offering, [for] although it has already been mentioned in the section of V’atah Tetzaveh, He repeated it in order that it should all be arranged in one section. And Rashi wrote [in Verse 4]; “That one [i.e., the section in V’atah Tetzaveh] was an instruction [only] for the days of the installation [of the priests], and here He [repeated it] as a commandment for [all future] generations.” But this is not correct, since there it says, It shall be a continual burnt-offering ‘throughout your generations.’And according to the interpretation [of the Rabbis] many new teachings are added here [in this repetition of the section of V’atah Tetzaveh; namely]: “My offering — this is the blood. My bread — this refers to [those parts of the offering] that are to be burnt on the altar. My fire offerings — these are the handfuls [of flour] and the frankincense [of the meal-offering]. For a pleasing odor unto Me — these are the [two] bowls [of frankincense that were brought as a memorial] with the showbread. Ye shall observe — that it should only be brought from [animals which have been] kept [for a number of days, and examined so that no blemish occurs to them]. Ye shall observe — that one may only bring [the offering] from that [money] which was donated to the treasury [of the Sanctuary]. Ye shall observe — that priests, Levites and Israelites should stand over it. Ye shall observe — Scripture uses here the term shmirah [‘keeping,’ or ‘observing’], and elsewhere it [also] uses the term shmirah; just as there the offering requires observation [so that no blemish should be found in it] for [a period of] four days before it is slaughtered, so here too etc.” [See] the whole interpretation, as it is stated in the Sifre. By way of the Truth, [the mystic teachings of the Cabala], the verse also hints to the following: It states My offering, My bread ‘l’ishai’ — of ‘ishai’ (My Divine powers) — ye shall keep and be careful to offer unto Me to...

"My bread" — I have explained it [elsewhere]. "My fire-offerings" — I have explained it [elsewhere]. The meaning is: bread for My fire-offerings, a pleasing aroma to Me. "At its appointed time" — that one must not bring it before morning, and must not delay it past evening.

צו את בני ישראל, "command the children of Israel, etc." Why did the Torah choose to record this paragraph of offerings in this of all places, i.e. after the appointment of Joshua instead of in Parshat Emor where all the other sacrifices offered on the festivals are recorded? After all, it is quite clear that the offerings listed here had been part of the regular schedule of sacrifices ever since the Tabernacle had been inaugurated over 38 years earlier whereas Joshua had been appointed only in the 40th year? Perhaps the reason is that he Torah wanted to inform us that in the event that Joshua would want to offer daily burnt-offerings or the additional offerings on the festivals on his own, i.e. from his own funds, he would not be allowed to do so although he personally represented the community as the Talmud demonstrates in several instances. The Torah therefore recorded this legislation here to make certain that these offerings will be perceived as communal offerings paid for by the contributions of the whole community to the fund set up for this. This is the meaning of "command the children of Israel!" The Torah repeats this command by writing ואמרת אליהם, "and say to them," to point out that unless this detail is complied with the sacrifice is invalid. The Torah wrote אליהם instead of the customary להם in accordance with what I have explained on וירא אליו (Genesis 18,1) that when the word אליו or אלהם is used it suggests that the people so addressed should subordinate their own ego. [I suppose the exegetical aspect is that the letters אל also mean "don't." Ed.] I have seen a comment in the Yalkut Shimoni on our verse that the Israelites had assumed that the daily communal sacrifices were part of their wanderings in the desert and that as soon as they would be settled in the Holy Land this practice would be discontinued. G'd therefore recorded this legislation here to show that these sacrifices would be continued also after the conquest of the land of Canaan under Joshua. את קרבני לחמי לאשי, "My food which is presented to Me as a burnt offering, etc." The convoluted language is due to the daily communal offerings consisting of three parts. 1) The offering of the sheep as the sacrifice. 2) The tenth of an epha of flour which accompanied it as a gift-offering. 3) The drink-offerings consisting of a quarter Hin of newly pressed wine. With respect to the animal, the Torah speaks of קרבני, "My sacrifice;" with respect to the meal-offering (gift) the Torah speaks of לחמי, "My bread." Finally, with respect to the drink-offerings, the Torah speaks of ריח ניחחי, "sweet savour unto Me." The reason is that the drink-offering is poured onto the foundation of the altar descending into the hole called שיתין, and only its smell is noticeable on the altar. In each of these instances G'd uses the suffix "MY" to indicate that all of them are His and remain within His domain as proclaimed by David in Psalms 24,1: "The earth and all that is thereon belongs to G...

תשמרו להקריב לי, “you shall observe in order to offer for Me.” Just as the word שמירה in connection with the lambs for the Passover meant: “close supervision, to prevent any blemish developing,” so here too the meaning is “close supervision prior to slaughtering the daily communal animal sacrifices.” להקריב לי במועדו, “to present to Me at its appointed time.” This applies even if the appointed time occurs on the Sabbath, or if the person offering it is temporarily ritually unclean. (Compare Sifri) [I did not find the reference to ritual impurity in my edition of the Sifri. Ed.] According to the author, it must mean that if no priest can be found on that day that is ritually pure. This offering must not be skipped even during time of war. [There are stories in the Talmud describing that the priests paid fortunes to the besieging Babylonians or Romans to supply such animals for them. Ed. We find that the angel remonstrated with Joshua for not having seen to it that this offering was offered while the army laid siege to Jericho (Talmud, tractate Megillah folio 3) An alternate interpretation: the emphasis here is on the word במועדו, “at its appointed time,” it must neither be offered too early in the morning nor too late in the afternoon.

את קרבני לחמי, “My offering, My food for My fires;” the chapter dealing with the mandatory public sacrifices offered at regular intervals has been introduced here since Moses had already warned Israel regarding the offerings that the Israelites are to present; now that Moses saw that he was not going to enter the Holy Land together with the people he informed them of all these details (which were not applicable as yet). He commenced with the daily burnt-offering although the details of this offering had already been listed in Exodus 29, 38-41. At that time the reason was to inform us of what sacrifices were being presented during the seven days of inaugural celebrations of the Tabernacle. (compare Rashi). Nachmanides questions this as the Torah had used the expression “for all your generations” already at that point. According to the plain meaning of the text: the word קרבני refers to the blood; the word את includes the salt which had to be added to each offering as we know from Leviticus 2,13. The reason we dip bread nowadays in salt before eating it at the beginning of our meal is that the Torah called a sacrificial offering לחם, bread. The word לחמי refers to the fat parts of the sacrificial animal, (or all its flesh as the case might be) which was burned up on the altar. The word לאשי refers to all that is given over to the fire on the altar. The word תשמרו refers to the Israelites standing in attendance during this procedure. The word במועדו, which means “at its appointed time” and seems superfluous seeing that the offering under discussion is presented daily, means that no other sacrifice is to be offered earlier in the day than these daily total-offerings. By the same token, no offering was to be presented after the evening daily burnt-offering. Another meaning of the word במועדו is that the legislation overrides the Sabbath legislation and that even on the Sabbath (Sifri 142) these daily burnt-offerings were offered as usual even if the laws of ritual impurity had to be set aside in order for this offering to be presented (compare Pessachim 76).

צו את בני ישראל, “command the Children of Israel, etc.” Rashi comments that in spite of the fact that a similar instruction had already been issued in Exodus 29,38, the instructions there were limited in validity to the seven days during which the Tabernacle was being consecrated. The legislation commencing in our verse is for all times when sacrifices can be brought. Nachmanides writes that Rashi is not correct, as in Exodus 29,42 the Torah had added the word תמיד לדורותיכם, which means that the legislation is of unlimited duration. We must therefore understand the legislation as follows: After the manner in which the land of Israel would be shared out among the various tribes had been explained, i.e. לאלה תחלק הארץ, (26,53) the Torah concluded the whole subject of the sacrificial offerings, seeing that while in the desert the offerings known as מוספים had not been presented at all, and there had also not been any libation offerings, נסכים in the desert. Now that the people were on the threshold of entering the Holy Land, the Torah had to restate some of these laws in the manner in which they would apply once the people were on their own land. This applied also to the offerings whose details were not introduced under the heading of כי תבואו אל הארץ, “when you will come to the land, etc.” The latter introduction had only been used in connection with the libation offerings in Numbers chapter 15. את קרבני לחמי, “My offering, My food; etc.” In the Sifri the word קרבני, “My offering,” is understood as referring to the blood of the offering that gets on the altar, whereas the word לחמי, literally “My bread,” is understood as applying to the meat parts burned up on the altar. The words לאשי, literally “to My fires,” are understood there as applying to the meal-offering, the parts the priest closes his fist over as well as the frankincense. The expression ריח ניחוח, literally “sweet fragrance,” is applied to the spoonfuls of incense presented with the showbreads each Sabbath. The תשמרו –in the same verse- means that no animal is to be offered on the altar unless it had previously been observed for a number of days and it was found to be unblemished. It also means that during the procedure of the slaughter, etc., delegates of the other tribes of the Israelites, Levites, as well as priests should be nearby. The word תשמרו which appears here as well as in Exodus 12,6, where the first communal offering, the Passover, has been described as being checked out during 4 days, is to tell us that any sacrificial animal must be examined during no less than four days before it is offered on the altar.

And you shall say to them: This is the offering that you shall bring before Hashem — two yearling male lambs without blemish, each day, as a continual burnt offering.

ואמרת להם AND THOU SHALT SAY TO THEM — This is an instruction to the Beth Din (Sifrei Bamidbar 142:3). שנים ליום This may be understood according to its plain sense: TWO [LAMBS] FOR EACH DAY, But in the main it is intended to teach that they should be slaughtered at a spot opposite the day (i.e. the sun) — the morning continual offerings at the west and that of the evening at the east of the rings fixed in the ground and in which were inserted the animals feet (Sifrei Bamidbar 142:3; Yoma 62b).

-4. ואמרת להם זה האשה, "You shall say to them 'this is the fire-offering,' etc." G'd repeats once more: ואמרת. Why? The words זה האשה also do not seem called for. It appears the Torah wanted to make sure we would not think that the single sheep to be offered was a minimum only and that if the priests decided to, they could offer any number of sheep. The Torah therefore wrote "tell them only this is the fire-offering," i.e. only one sheep, neither more nor less. The same applied to the sheep to be offered in the evening. We must understand verse 3 as telling us that this sacrifice had to be offered on a daily basis. Verse 4 tells us that only the quantity specified by the Torah here and none other was acceptable for this type of sacrifice.

ואמרת להם, “you shall say to them.” This is a warning to the Court (Sifri). זה האשה, “this is the fire offering;” seeing the paragraph had commenced with the words: “My offering, קרבני, why did the Torah now call it אשה? The fact is that the word is the explanation of לחמי לאשי, אשר תקריבו לה', for the requirement of Hashem, i.e. it must not be disqualified by inadmissible thoughts during its presentation, פגול. כבשים, “sheep,” no other animals. בני שנה, ”one year old;” i.e. not a day older than one year old but as young as eight days. תמימים, “unblemished.” This is the corollary of Leviticus 22,21: “it shall not be blemished.” The word תמימם is spelled here with the letter י before the final ם missing. This indicates that both these sheep should be identical. [This is a conjecture in the Talmud Yoma 62b which is ultimately rejected]. There were to be a total of 730 such sheep for the year, assuming the year had 365 days [as opposed to the lunar year which on average has 354 days]. The number 730 is alluded to in the first letters of the words תמימם שנים ליום. שנים ליום, “two per day.” The two offerings may be viewed as advocates, pleading the case of the Jewish people before a heavenly tribunal; the site where these two sheep were being slaughtered corresponded to the relative motion of earth to sun during the day, the morning sacrifice at the north-west corner of the courtyard, the afternoon sacrifice at the north-east corner. עולה תמיד, “a permanent burnt-offering.” This offering will always function as advocate on behalf of the Jewish people. ליום עולה, “for the day a burnt-offering” [This contradicts the cantillation. Ed.]. According to Yuma 10 when the dawn rose the lookout in the Temple would call out ברק ברקאי, “the morning-star is shining.” This is the reason why the expression עולה was not mentioned in what appears to be a parallel passage in Exodus chapter 29.

The one lamb you shall perform in the morning, and the second lamb you shall perform between the evenings.

את הכבש אחד THE ONE LAMB [SHALT THOU OFFER IN THE MORNING] — Although it has already been stated in the section beginning with the words ,ואתה תצוה (Exodus 29:38 39): “Now this is what thou shalt offer … [The one lamb thou shalt offer in the morning]”, that was an instruction for the days of the installation ceremony of the priests, but here it states the commands for all generations.

"The one lamb" — R. Moses ha-Kohen the Spaniard said that this is an abbreviated construction, meaning: "the lamb" — [that is,] one lamb. In my view, the definite article [he] draws itself along with the word following it [as well]. And I have shown you instances of "lamb" [keves] used in the plural in like fashion.

את הכבש אחד, “the one sheep;” Rashi explains that although this commandment had already been written in Exodus 29,38, at that time it applied only to the days during which the priests were consecrated. Now it applies permanently. If you were to argue that we find the word: לדורותיכם, “for your generations,” in the passage containing this law in Exodus, the word there might be understood as applying only to the minimum number of generations, i.e. two generations, whereas here it applies to all future generations when the Temple would be standing. This is also why it is introduced herewith the word: צו, “issue a command!” (verse 2) (Sifra, at the beginning of the portion Tzav.)

את הכבש אחד, “One of the lambs,” we would have expected the Torah to write את הכבש האחד, however the omission of the letter ה here is to alert us to the fact that the word אחד has a numerical value of 13 to teach us that 13 priests were involved in this procedure (Yuma 25). This number is also not accidental but is in itself a reminder that the offering was addressed to the אחד, to the One and Only G’d. In Exodus chapter 29,39 the Torah does write: את הכבש האחד, as is grammatically appropriate when speaking of an animal singled out from its flock as superior. תעשה בבוקר, “you are to prepare it in the morning.” The numerical value of these two words is the same as לארבע שעות, i.e. during the first four hours of the day. בבוקר, “in the morning.” a period from sunrise until the sun has spread its rays across the horizon. The universe was created during the day as we know from Genesis 2,4: “on the day the Lord G’d made earth and heaven.”

The one lamb you shall offer in the morning. Since it says and the second lamb, it should have said “the first lamb,” and why did it mention the morning burnt offering only once while the offering toward evening it mentioned twice, and you will also find this in the portion of “And you shall command” (Exodus 29:39-41). And it seems that this can be reconciled along the lines of what our Sages said (Tanchuma Pinchas 13), “Righteousness lodges in it.” No person spends the night in Jerusalem with sin in their hand. The morning tamid sacrifice atones for all the transgressions of the night, and the afternoon tamid atones for all the transgressions of the day. And the verse states (Micah 2:1), Those who plan evil on their beds, at the light of morning they execute it. From here we learn that night is not a time for action but rather a time for contemplation and thoughts of wrongdoing. And the sin of contemplation is singular, without a second, because contemplation can exist without action. Therefore it says, The one lamb you shall offer in the morning, for it atones for those who plan evil on their beds, and it is possible that one may regret their evil intentions and not bring their evil thoughts to action. That is why it uses the term one [singular], because there is one [sin] without a second to it. And therefore it mentions the morning offering only once. But the sin of the day is undoubtedly doubled. Even though one contemplated doing it at night, nevertheless, during the day, at the time of action, they think about it again. For without a doubt, they did not perform the action without thought and intention, because if so, they would be neither deliberate nor unintentional, but rather forced. Therefore, the afternoon tamid needs to atone for two transgressions: for the thought and for the action. That is why it is mentioned twice in the Torah portion. And as for what they said, “No person spends the night in Jerusalem with sin in their hand,” why didn’t they say instead, “No person rises from their bed with sin in their hand”? Because the phrase “in their hand” implies that it refers to a sin of action, literally done with their hands. And if so, at night one never has sin “in their hand” because contemplation is not “in their hand.” And [the statement] comes to teach us something significant: that the tamid sacrifice atones even for the transgressions of the day, despite them involving both thought and action. And all the more so the morning tamid, which atones for thought alone. And it says, “Two daily [sheep] as a continual burnt offering.” It should have said “continual burnt offerings” [in plural]. It appears that due to this difficulty [in the text], they said that each one atones for a separate matter, since both are [considered] one burnt offering, so why did the Scripture divide them into two times? Rather, it is because the morning one atones for the transgressions of the night, and the evening one atones for those of the day. However, according to our approach, it seems appropriate to explain that since it is said, And there was evening and there was morning, one day (Genesis 1:5), and earlier in the section of Genesis we wrote that the reason it says one day is to exclude the view of heretics who say that the One who created morning did not create evening, since two opposites cannot come from one source. Therefore, it says one day [to indicate] that the evening and the morning are all the day of the One, blessed be He, because one God created both of them. Similarly, it is said about these burnt offerings, a continual burnt offering [in singular], because both are one burnt offering to one God. And as for the morning tamid sacrifice that was slaughtered in the west, this indicates that it atones for transgressions committed during the night [after the sun has set in the west], while the afternoon tamid sacrifice was slaughtered in the east to indicate that it atones for transgressions committed throughout the day [after the sun has risen in the east]. Some say that the reversal of their slaughtering locations was intended to destroy the beliefs of those who worship the sun and moon, [showing that] everything belongs to one God, blessed is He and blessed is His name, may He be exalted.

And one-tenth, in three se'ah measures, of fine flour as a meal offering, mixed with a quarter of a hin of pressed oil.

סלת למנחה FLOUR FOR A MEAL OFFERING — the meal offering that usually accompanies drink offerings (cf. Rashi on Leviticus 23:37).

ועשירית האיפה סלת, “and the tenth of an eyphah of fine flour;” just as the “fine flour” mentioned in the passage in Exodus referred to flour from wheat, so here too it refers to flour ground from wheat. (Exodus 29,42). Whenever the Torah mentions the word סלת, it refers to fine flour made from wheat. בשמן כתית, “with beaten oil;” the olives were ground in a mortar and oil resulting was squeezed out by hand. It was not stored in a vat to prevent any residue from accumulating at the bottom of the vat. (B’chor shor) רביעית ההין, a quarter of a hin, i.e. three logs.

A continual burnt offering, which was performed at Mount Sinai, to be received with favor as an offering before Hashem.

העשיה בהר סיני WHICH WAS OFFERED BY MOUNT SINAI — i.e., like those continual burnt offerings which were offered during the days of the installation ceremony (which took place whilst the people were encamped by Mount Sinai). — Another explanation of העשיה בהר סיני is: It compares the continual burnt offering to the burnt offering of Mount Sinai — to that which was offered on the fifth day of the third month, before the Giving of the Torah (see Rashi on Exodus 19:11), of which it is written, (Exodus 24:6) “And he put it (the blood) in basins”: this teaches, therefore, that it (the continual burnt-offering) requires a vessel for the reception of the blood (Sifra, Tzav, Chapter 18 8).

"Made at Mount Sinai" — the meaning is: as you did at Mount Sinai. This, too, is evidence that they did not bring up burnt-offerings in the wilderness after they set out from Sinai, as I have explained with conclusive proofs.

עולת תמיד העשויה בהר סיני, before the sin of the golden calf when there was not yet a need to accompany this sacrifice with libations.

עולת תמיד העשויה בהר סיני, “it is a continual burnt offering which was offered at Mount Sinai. In other words, this practice began when the Jewish people were encamped around Mount Sinai, as we know from Exodus 24,5: וישלח את נערי בני ישראל ויעלו עולות, “Moses sent forth the young men of the Children of Israel and they offered burnt offerings. He intended that this practice should remain in use forever.

העשויה בהר סיני, “which was instituted at Mount Sinai.” This is a reference to the offerings brought daily during the inaugural procedures of the Tabernacle (Exodus 29). This was a period prior to the attribute of כבוד moving from the top of the mountain to the top of the Tabernacle. The wording here seems to suggest that after their stay around Mount Sinai the Israelites did not continue to offer these burnt-offerings in the desert at all. In Chagigah 6 Rabbi Eleazar understands the words עולת תמיד העשויה בהר סיני as meaning that the relevant procedures were taught at Mount Sinai whereas the offerings were not offered there at all. Rabbi Akiva, however, understood the verse to mean that this procedure was first introduced at Mount Sinai. [Presumably prior to the building of the Tabernacle, as the Tabernacle was not built till nine months after the sin of the golden calf. A better explanation is that of Tosafot that the disqualification of the Israelites was the sin of the spies. This leaves other problems. Ed.] and never again interrupted. This poses the problem of a verse in Amos 5,25: “the meat-offerings and gift-offerings which you offered to Me during the forty years in the desert.” Why did the prophet not mention the burnt-offerings offered during that period? The answer given is that during those 40 years the daily-burnt-offering represented only the tribe of Levi who had not been guilty of the sin of the golden calf and who therefore were not out of grace. This teaches that even according to the view of Rabbi Akiva who holds that once introduced this procedure was not abandoned even temporarily, the meaning of the offering was different.

And its libation — a quarter of a hin for the one lamb. In the sanctuary it shall be poured, a libation of aged wine before Hashem.

ונסכו (more lit., its pouring forth — i.e. its offering that was poured forth) — wine (cf. Numbers 15:5). בקדש הסך CAUSING IT TO BE POURED FORTH ON THE HOLY SPOT — upon the altar they shall be poured out. נסך שכר A POURING FORTH OF STRONG DRINK — wine that has intoxicating power. This excludes wine straight out of its vine press (new wine which is non-intoxicating) (Bava Batra 97a).

AND THE DRINK-OFFERING THEREOF — “of wine. IN THE HOLY PLACE THOU SHALT POUR — upon the altar they shall be poured out. A POURING FORTH OF STRONG DRINK — wine which has an intoxicating power. This excludes wine straight from the [wine-]press.” This is the language of Rashi. But it is not correct, for the Rabbis have already said: “Wine straight from the wine-press one may not bring [for the drink-offering, since it is non-intoxicating], but if one did bring [such wine], it is valid” [and there is no need to bring other wine]. Thus [we see that] wine straight from the wine-press is not excluded on the basis of a [Scriptural] verse [for in that case, he would have to bring other wine instead of it], but it is merely a prohibition of the Rabbis to be observed as a rule directly [but if not observed, it does not invalidate the drink-offering]. However, [the correct interpretation is]: “Strong drink, to exclude wine which is diluted [with water],” which is invalid even if already brought [so that one must bring other wine which is undiluted]. And this is how it is interpreted in the Sifre. And there they [furthermore] said: “In the holy place thou shalt pour — it was to be poured in the holy place, and in the holy place it was absorbed.”Now Scripture mentions in the [case of the] Daily Whole-offering and [the Additional Offerings of] your New Moons the amount of fine flour in the meal-offering [which accompanied them], and the amount of wine in the drink-offerings [which accompanied them], but in the [case of the Additional Offerings of the] Sabbath, the Festival[s] of Unleavened Bread, Weeks, the New Year, the Day of Atonement, and the first day of the Festival of Tabernacles, He mentioned the amount of the meal-offering, but did not specify the amount of the drink-offerings. The reason for this is that although in the section [dealing with] the drink-offerings He commanded how much the meal-offerings and the drink-offerings should be for the bullocks, for the rams, and for the lambs, in vow-offerings, freewill offerings, and [the offerings of] the festivals, we find a double meal-offering for the lamb brought with the sheaf [of barley], and on the day of Atzereth [they brought] two tenth-parts of an ephah [baked] with leaven, and so also we find [unleavened cakes, wafers, and cakes of leavened bread] in a thanks-offering, which were a meal-offering. Therefore Scripture had to specify [here] in the case of all the festivals that their meal-offering does not change, as it changed in these [above-mentioned cases]. But the drink-offerings never varied; therefore He mentioned them at first in [the case of the] Daily Whole-offering, and did not refer to them afterwards in the case of [the Additional Offering of] the Sabbath. He did refer to them again [when speaking] of the New Moon, in order to mention also the drink-offerings of the bullocks and the rams, but afterwards He did not have to mention them at all. [Likewise] He mentioned on the first day ...

"Pour out a libation of strong drink [nesekh shekhar]" — the nun of the root is absorbed into the samekh. As for the interpretation [of shekhar], we rely on the words of the ancients, of blessed memory.

הסך נסך שכר לה', “to be poured as an intoxicating libation for the Lord.” Wine at least 40 days old is intoxicating. The word שכר in our verse therefore disqualifies wine which has not aged long enough (Rashi). Nachmanides disagrees with Rashi, seeing that the sages in Baba Batra 97 stated that whereas fresh wine is not to be offered as a libation in the first instance, if it had been used by mistake it is acceptable. It follows that such new wine could not have been excluded by a Biblical verse. What the verse here does exclude is wine which has been watered down to make it less potent. Any wine so watered down is unacceptable for the libation mentioned. We find confirmation of Nachmanides’ view in Sifri 143. The repetition of the words הסך נסך is an allusion to a second kind of libation, the water libation offered on Tabernacles (Taanit 3). A Midrashic approach, Tanchuma Pinchas 11: The reason that the passage dealing with the daily communal sacrifices adjoins the one in which Moses asked for his successor to be appointed is to show that G’d told Moses: “before you tell Me what to do for My son (the Israelites) tell them what they have to do for Me.” This is also the meaning of Isaiah 45,11: האותיות שאלוני על בני ועל פעל ידי תצוני, “Will you question Me on the destiny of My children, will you instruct Me about the works of My hands?” The matter can best be illustrated by a parable. A king married a certain lady. The king had a friend who, whenever the king was angry at his wife, interceded on her behalf and calmed him down. When this friend was close to death (seeing he was an elderly man) he asked the king to tell him what he really thought of his wife. The king replied: “before I tell you what I think of my wife, i.e. before you tell me how to treat her, you better find out what she thinks of me and warn her not to insult my dignity.” את קרבני לחמי, “My offering, My bread.” The words שנים ליום, mean “two sheep per day, one in the morning and one in the evening,” not both at the same time (verse 4). We find that King Solomon consumed far more than that as is spelled out in Kings 5, 2-3: “Solomon’s daily provisions consisted of 30 kors of semolina, 60 kors of ordinary flour; 10 fattened oxen, 20 pasture-fed oxen, 100 sheep and goats, besides deer, gazelles, roebuck and fatted geese.” The author (of Kings) appears to contrast Proverbs 13,25: “a righteous person eats (enough) to satisfy his soul (life-force), whereas the belly of the wicked will always feel in need.” Eliezer, Avraham’s trusted servant is an example of the righteous mentioned by Solomon, seeing that he asked Rivkah to only let him sip a little water from her jug (Genesis 24,17). Esau, on the other hand, demanded from Yaakov that he let him “gulp down the red stuff” (Genesis 25,30). We find that in Job 37,23 Elihu tells Job that “Shaddai we cannot attain to Him, He is great in power and Justice,” whereas in Job 36,22 the same Elihu proclaims: “see, G’d is beyond reach in His power; who governs like Him?” [This suggests we can appreciate His greatness. Ed.]. How can these two verses be reconciled? When G’d gives to us He gives according to His power; when He asks of us He asks much less than is due Him, demanding only that we give according to our means. To illustrate: the Torah writes in Exodus 26,1 that the coverings for the Tabernacle be made of ten carpet-like strips of cloth; this is an illustration of the verse in Job 37,23, seeing “we cannot attain to Him, providing Him with His needs.” Similarly, when the Torah asks the Jewish people to provide olive oil for the Menorah in the Tabernacle (Exodus 27,20) the request is one well within the power of the Israelites to fulfill. Similarly, the Torah asks the farmer to present merely the first ripe fruit of his orchard to the Lord (Exodus 23,19). On the other hand, when the Bible describes G’d’s largess to man, such as in Ezekiel 47,12 the wording is: “all kinds of trees for food will grow up on both sides of the river. Their leaves will not wither nor their fruit fall; they will yield new fruit every month; each tree will produce new ‘first-fruit’ every single month.” This is a perfect illustration of the imbalance of what G’d asks of us and what He is prepared to provide for us. The author quotes a few more verses depicting the generous measure of G’d’s largess. A Kabbalistic approach on the words את קרבני לחמי לאשי: every one of these four words reflects the attribute of Justice, seeing the attribute of Justice is speaking. The word את is known as representing the attribute of Justice from Ezekiel 2,2: ואשמע את מדבר אלי, “I heard את speaking to me.” The words קרבני לחמי are both derived from קרב, “battle,” and לוחם, “fighting” as in מלחמה. The word לאשי, is derived from אשה לריח ניחוח. The meaning of these words is that this offering is designed to draw down to “Me” the largesse of the attribute of Hashem. The word תשמרו is a warning that when you the Israelites offer this sacrifice it must be exclusively addressed to Hashem, the attribute of Justice saying that even it addresses itself to Hashem. When will that occur? When you the Jewish people, offer these two sheep twice daily as a daily burnt-offering. This sacrifice is to be offered twice daily, morning and evening, together with fine flour, etc., and the wine libation as listed in our paragraph. The components of this offering, i.e. meat, bread, and wine are the principal ingredients of our diet. Seeing that the earth which provides these food items either directly or indirectly does so under the influence of the two great luminaries, one of which is active by day and the other at night, it is appropriate that when we offer this sacrifice we do so at times which allude to the activities of sun and moon respectively. After all, their orbits determine morning and evening. They have been given authority to rule our terrestrial universe and everything which grows in it or moves on its surface. Seeing that the domains of sun and moon do not overlap, it would not be appropriate to offer both these animals during the same time of the day. We have already explained that even the slaughtering of these two sheep does not take place in the same corner of the Temple’s courtyard. The Talmud Yuma 62 makes clear that the wording שנים ליום means that that both animals are to face in the same direction but on different sides of the “center line,” i.e. north-east and north-west respectively. The daily morning and evening burnt-offering was an instrument of atonement for the Jewish people, and acted as a shield for the people. The sign that this is so is found in the words of Proverbs 4,9; עתרת תפארת תמגנך, ”a crown of beauty will protect you.” Our sages of the Talmud have incorporated this idea in the benediction recited when welcoming the new moon when we say: שתתחדש עטרת תפארת לעמוסי בטן , “may the crown of glory renew itself for the people burdened (with a destiny since its inception) from the womb.” The offering of this daily communal sacrifice by the Jewish people has been responsible for the continued existence of the world, its sustenance, and the fact that its food-supply is blessed. The source of this blessing resides in the celestial spheres, is transferred to the inner sanctum of the celestial temple to Eden, thence to the garden, thence to the disembodied creatures (angels) and ultimately to our terrestrial universe.

שכר, “intoxicating liquid.” Rashi understands the word as excluding newly made wine that has not yet become alcoholic, the liquid not yet having fermented. Nachmanides queries that since we know that such wine if it had been offered is not disqualified retroactively, we can see that the requirement was only a cautionary decree by the Rabbis, this could not be the meaning of the word here. He concludes that therefore the meaning is that watered down wine is not acceptable. Nachmanides writes further that the Torah mentions the amount of fine flour to be used as part of the daily meal-offering accompanying the daily burnt offering, and it also mentions the amount of wine used in the libation, both in the daily offerings and on the corresponding offerings on the New Moon. Similar measurements for the libations are, however, not mentioned in connection with the corresponding offering on the Sabbath and all the other festivals. The reason maybe that although these measurements are mentioned in the section dealing with the libations (Numbers 15,4-12) in connection with the meal-offerings and libations for the bull, ram, and sheep when these are free-willed offerings such as different categories of vows and individual offerings on the festivals, we find different measurements (double) in the meal offering accompanying the Omer, or that on Shavuot the meal-offering also comprises 10 loaves of leavened bread. Similarly, these standard measurements are varied in connection with the קרבן תודה, people who have to present thanksgiving offerings. Basically, seeing that the libations do not vary in measurements, allowing for the size of four-legged animal that they accompany, they, i.e. their measures have been written first in conjunction with the daily communal offerings known as תמיד. They do not have to be mentioned again as they are not subject to variations in their measures at all. The size of the מנחה on the first day of Tabernacles has been mentioned (29,14) something that did not need to be repeated on the subsequent days of that festival other than a brief note such as “and their meal offerings and libations in accordance with the law.” The משפט, “law,” referred to is the size of the libation on the first day of that festival. This still leaves us with the question of why there was a need to specify the size of the libation on the New Moon more so than on any other days in the calendar. Perhaps one can explain this by saying that seeing the legislation of the offerings on that day introduces the concept of the so-called מוספים, “additional” communal offerings, the Torah saw fit to also give details of the accompanying libation of each mammal being presented.

And the second lamb you shall perform between the evenings; like the meal offering of the morning and like its libation you shall perform it — an offering received with favor before Hashem.

ריח ניחח A SMELL OF ניחח — one that causes satisfaction (נחת רוח) to Me, that I gave commands and My will was executed (Sifrei Bamidbar 143:3; see Rashi on Leviticus 1:9).

כמנחת הבוקר וכנסכו תעשה אשה ריח ניחוח, even though you have already offered the daily burnt-offering of the morning which in all respects corresponds to this one, also the second one will be received by G’d with equal goodwill, to also become a pleasant fragrance.

וכנסכו, “and as its drinkoffering;” this is a reference to the libation consisting of wine, as well as to the drink offering accompanying the communal gift offering presented every morning.

And on the Sabbath day: two yearling male lambs without blemish, and two-tenths of fine flour as a meal offering mixed with oil, and its libation.

וביום השבת שני כבשים, "And on the Sabbath day, two sheep, etc." The reason that the additional communal offering on the Sabbath was smaller than any of the parallel offerings on the festivals and even the intermediate days of the festivals is the mystical dimension of לחם משנה, the two loaves we eat on the Sabbath at each meal. The two additional sheep offered on the Sabbath symbolise the idea which has been eternalised in the custom of the two loaves, themselves a reminder of how G'd provided a double portion of manna to the Israelites in the desert each Friday. The mystical element of the number seven is alluded to by the fact that only this day is also called "the seventh day." Even though some festivals have a seventh day, the significance of the seventh day of a festival does not have anything in common with the mystical dimension of the seventh day which occurs regularly every week.

וביום השבת, “and on every Sabbath, etc.” All of the offerings are described as being offered with either the word עשיה, something being carried out, or with the word הקרבה, something being presented. Seeing that basically such activities as offering sacrifices are forbidden on the Sabbath, the Torah avoids the use of these terms in connection with the communal offerings that are mandatory on the Sabbath nonetheless. The reader may therefore be misled by the absence of these words in connection with the communal offerings on the Sabbath. שני כבשים, “two male sheep” the Torah did not demand more than the minimal as additional communal sacrifices on the Sabbath. In fact that additional offering is equal to the daily morning and evening offerings. No sin offering is offered on the Sabbath as a communal offering, contrary to the musspah, additional offerings on the various festival days. The major reason is that seeing that parts of the sin offerings were meant to be consumed by the priests, the Torah did not want them to benefit from animals that were slaughtered on the Sabbath, something that in their private lives they were not allowed to do on the Sabbath. The Sabbath was “desecrated” only for offerings which were presented only to G-d. This is why the Torah adds the words: רצית קרבנותיה, “You received the offerings pertaining to the Sabbath with goodwill.” The exception to this rule is when New Moon occurs on the Sabbath and there is an additional offering including a sin offering on that day, due to the calendar day occurring on the Sabbath. (B’chor shor) At any rate, on ordinary Sabbath days the Torah made a distinction. ונסכו, “and the drink offering thereof.” This again refers to a libation consisting of wine.

וביום השבת שני כבשים, “and on the Sabbath day, two male lambs (additionally).” On the holidays including New Moon and New Year and the day of Atonement a total of seven male sheep were part of the day’s communal additional offerings. These were additional to the daily two lambs. On the Sabbath, however, only two additional male lambs were offered. According to the Talmud Yuma we quoted these definitely had to match each other in their size, appearance and value if possible. The word למצוה, “for performance of the commandment,” used in the Talmud when stipulating this means that this was an a priori requirement, i.e. efforts had to be made to find two such matching animals. In the event it was impossible to find such, the next best match was acceptable. The reason that on the Sabbath only two extra male lambs were required for the Mussaf offering is that the Sabbath, by definition, has a dual significance, i.e. the Torah once wrote the word זכור and once the word שמור in the two versions of the Ten Commandments concerning its observance. In other words, the positive and negative aspects of the Sabbath observance carry equal weight When the Torah speaks of Sabbath observance, G’d refers to this as את שבתותי תשמרו, “observe My Sabbath days,” i.e. each Sabbath has two aspects to it (Leviticus 26,2). Every piece of legislation in connection with the Sabbath appears in pairs, even the amount of manna which fell on Friday (on account of the Sabbath) comprised two omer instead of one. Warnings of penalties are worded as מות ימות, promises of reward for its observance are similarly expressed in dual form, i.e. the hymn recited on the Sabbath is called both מזמור and שיר. Also the reward promised for its observance is described in such terms, i.e. Isaiah 58,13-14: “then you will enjoy the favour of the Lord, I will set you astride the heights of the earth, and let you enjoy the heritage of your father Yaakov.” According to a Midrash based on the wording of the mussaph prayer on Sabbath, G’d explained the reason why He is content with only two extra male sheep on that day as that He does not want to ask us for more than we ourselves enjoy on the Sabbath, i.e. two extra meals. ושני עשרונים “and two tenths, etc.” These correspond to the two loaves of bread over which we recite the benediction on the Sabbath meals. The reason that at this point the Torah omits the words והקרבתם or תקריבו, is that while the Israelites were in the desert these mussaf sacrifices were not offered up. The people had not been commanded concerning them until now, at the end of their wanderings in the desert.

וביום השבת, “and on the Sabbath day, etc.;” there is a comment by Midrash Shocher tov on Psalms 92,1 that amongst all the mussaph offerings there is none that is as inexpensive as that of the Sabbath, i.e. consisting of only two not more than one year old sheep. According to the author of that Midrash the Sabbath complained to G–d about this. G–d told the Sabbath that this day is distinguished by a number of things that occur on it or relating to it in duplicates. It has two hymns dedicated to it; its special offering consists of two sheep; it is known as עונג, “pleasure, delight,” not once but twice; when it is deliberately desecrated it brings a dual penalty, i.e. מות יומת, the show breads are paired on the table in the Temple. This is also why we speak of this mussaph offering being כראוי, “tailored to its essence.” This is an expression that has not been applied to the mussaph offerings on any other occasion. The Midrash elaborates by means of a parable: a King told his servants to prepare his meal for “my sons”. The servants prepared two separate meals. After both his sons had consumed these meals, the king asked for a meal to be prepared for him. The servants asked him which kind of meal he desired. The king asked what kind of meal they had served to his sons? The servants spelled out the details for him. The king then responded that they should not prepare a more elaborate meal for him than they had prepared for his sons. [My version of this Midrash does not quote the Sabbath as having complained to G–d. Ed.] G–d acted in a similar manner when He provided the Jewish people with a double portion of manna for the Sabbath even before the Sabbath had commenced. Seeing He gave His people the equivalent of two loaves of bread before the Sabbath, He wished this to be remembered by “feeding” Him the equivalent of two loaves of bread as the special offering on the Sabbath. This is what the two sheep of the mussaph offering on that day represent. Seeing that we are on the subject of preparations for the Sabbath, let us explain also the central part of the Sabbath Mussaph prayer which commences with the words: תכנת שבת, “You (G–d) have instituted the Sabbath, etc.” The sequence of the letters תכן in the word תכנת, are a reminder of Exodus 5,18, where in response to Moses requesting a three day vacation for the Israelites to serve the G–d of his people, Pharaoh not only refused, but doubled the work load of the people by denying them the straw that had been given to them for making bricks, and insisting that the daily number of bricks required תכן לבנים, remain the same. The “institution” the author of the prayer speaks of refers to G–d having named each day of the creation sequentially so that the Sabbath would be the seventh day, a number which G–d is especially fond of. (Compare Vayikra Rabbah 29,11) [The author of the Midrash there makes a long list of proving the statement he has just made. Ed.] He claims that this is why G–d took a special liking to Chanoch, the outstanding human specimen of the seventh generation.] רצית קרבנותיה, ”You took pleasure in its offerings.” Any offerings of animals which had been alive for at least one Sabbath are especially welcome to G–d. [In fact animals which have not been alive on at least one Sabbath are not considered as fit as such. [Compare Leviticus 22,27 Ed.] צוית פירושיה עם סדורי נסכיה, “You did commanded its special obligations with the order of its drink offerings.” The word “You did command,” implies that violation of the command carries a serious penalty. Rashi explains this in connection with the words זכור, “remember,” and שמור, “make sure you do not violate,” appearing on the two versions of the Sabbath Commandment in the two sets of Tablets. (Exodus 20,8) He explains that these two versions of the same commandment were uttered by the Lawgiver at the Revelation as if they were a single utterance. We find something similar in connection with one of the commandments concerning incestuous relationships, where the Torah wrote לא יקח איש את אשת אחיו, “a man is not to take as a wife a woman who had been the wife of his brother, but where the reverse i.e. “the nakedness of the wife of the wife of your brother you must not reveal.” (Leviticus 19,15) In Deuteronomy 25,5, we find a similar construction concerning the levirate marriage. One utterance, but two written recordings. The Torah writes: יבמה יבא עליה ולקחח לו לאשה ויבמה,”her brother-in-law shall sleep with her, and take her as a levirate wife.” Although some of these statements appear on the face of it as if they contradict one on another in some way, the one concerning the Sabbath does not contain a contradiction but appears to complement one the other. Some scholars see in even this commandment some contradiction to the extent that the word זכור, which our sages interpret as making kiddush over wine when it commences, i.e. a positive commandment, which would relieve women from observing it as positive commandment linked to a specific time frame are not binding on women, and it is clear to the whole world that Sabbath observance applies to women no less than to men. [The double portion of manna was provided for men and women equally, i.e. both were included in that legislation. Ed.] The expression שמר only appears in the Torah in connection with negative commandments, i.e. violation involves an act. (Compare Talmud, tractate Zevachim, folio 106. At first glance it looks as if שמר is the opposite of זכור. Actually, this is not so, as women are no less obliged to sanctify the Sabbath seeing that the Talmud stated specifically in tractate B’rachot, folio 20 that whosoever is obligated not to violate the negative commandments of the Sabbath is also obligated to fulfill the positive commandments pertaining to that day. One might raise the question of why we do not publicly read both of these paragraphs every Sabbath? We do this every New Moon, and on every festival, whenever we pray a mussaph prayer in remembrance of the sacrifices offered in honour of such days. The fact that these two paragraphs consist of only two verses each is no excuse for not reading them in public on every Sabbath, and the Talmud, tractate Megillah folio 22, prohibits the public reading of paragraphs of the Torah that are not at least three verses long. The fact remains that we add this paragraph to the public reading of the Torah on every New Moon day that occurs on a Sabbath. The reason that we do so on those days is that New Moon is a day associated with the need to obtain atonement of sins as pointed out in the Talmud, tractate Taanit, folio 27; This is supposed to date back to the time of Avraham in Genesis chapter 15, when upon being told by G–d that he would have biological offspring who would develop into a great nation, he had asked for some sign as confirmation that he had not imagined G–d speaking to him. He wanted to know by what merit he had deserved such a promise and such a future. G–d spelled this out to him in verse 8 and 9 of that chapter when He asked him to prepare some sacrifices to Him. In other words, these sacrifices would earn him the merit that this promise of G–d would be fulfilled. When Avraham heard this, he responded that this was all well and good as long as there would be a Temple in which to offer these sacrifices daily. What would ensure that even during years of exile, which G–d had indicated that his descendants would have to endure, there would not be a chance to offer these sacrifices? G–d replied that these exiles would recite the relevant portions of the Torah in which the legislation about the sacrificial offerings is written, and then He would consider this as a substitute for their not having been presented on an appropriate altar. On New Moon we recite a verse in the mussaph prayer relating to a male goat that had to be presented on that day as a sin offering. An alternate approach: When the Torah dealt with the subject of the festivals at length in Leviticus chapter 23, it wrote: “these are the festivals for the Lord which you are to proclaim (ahead of time)”, and it is forbidden to interpret a text contrary to the plain meaning, p’shat, and the Sabbath is obviously not included in this commandment as it occurs at the end of every week, and the people are all aware of this, neither is that day ever referred to as a moed, days which are related strictly to certain days of the calendar, whereas New Moon is included in the days called: moed. (Lamentations 1,15, based on the Talmud in tractate Taanit, folio 29). The sages felt the need to explain why, for instance, the sin offering in the mussaph offering is described as לה', “for the Lord,” i.e. on behalf of the Lord, a formulation we do not find elsewhere. The sages of the Talmud tractate Sh’vuot folio, 9 suggest that this offering is offered on behalf of the Lord for having diminished the size of the moon, which had originally been the same size as the sun. This is a very puzzling explanation. We may have to understand it as follows: G–d, in speaking of a sin offering on His behalf, refers to our offering an atonement offering on His behalf throughout the generations on New Moon and this will comfort the moon for having been demoted. The “comfort” will help babies not to be infected with certain diseases called diphtheria to small children, seeing that the first renewal of the moon occurred on the fourth day of the week, the day on which G–d had “hung” the luminaries during the six days of the creation. (Compare Talmud tractate Taanit folio 29.) This is also how Rashi explains this when commenting of Genesis 1,14. He draws our attention to the defective spelling of the word meorot, luminaries, which ought to have been spelled מאורות, seeing it is derived from the word אור, “light,” but the first letter ו has been omitted. By omitting this letter, what remains is the plural of the word מארה, “curse.” On the first day of the month when the light of the moon is at its weakest, the children are more at risk than during any other day of the month. Hence G–d, in a manner of speaking, apologises for this, so that this day makes that sacrifice atonement for anything that could have harmed these children in the normal course of events. [G–d does not “apologise” to the moon, -He had diminished the size of the moon for a valid reason- but to our children who would have been at greater risk had we not offered this extra sin offering on each New Year’s day. Ed.]

The burnt offering of the Sabbath, to be performed on the Sabbath, in addition to the continual burnt offering and its libation.

עלת שבת בשבתו lit., THE BURNT OFFERING OF A SABBATH ON ITS SABBATH — and not the burnt offering of this Sabbath on another Sabbath. Take the case that one had not offered the sacrifice on this Sabbath, I might think that he might offer two on the following Sabbath! However, it states “on its Sabbath’, thus showing that if its day (the Sabbath on which it had to be brought) be past, its (that Sabbath’s) offering is cancelled (Sifrei Bamidbar 144:2). על עלת התמיד BESIDES THE CONTINUAL BURNT OFFERING — these two lambs are additional offerings for the Sabbath besides (על) those two lambs of the continual burnt offering. And this tells us that these additional offerings must be brought only between the two continual offerings (Sifrei Bamidbar 144:2). Similarly in the case of all additional offerings it is stated that they are to be brought על עלת התמיד to point to this deduction.

"On its Sabbath" — [the word] refers back to the day of the Sabbath, even though one finds [the suffix also in the phrase] "every keeper of the Sabbath, not profaning it." The meaning is: each and every Sabbath, just as [we have] "day by day." "In addition to the daily burnt-offering" — the meaning is: after the daily offering, the Sabbath burnt-offering is placed upon it.

עולת שבת בשבתו, “the burnt offering for the Sabbath, on its Sabbath; Festival days and New Moon both have an element of enabling atonement connected to them. This is why the Jewish people are advised of these days ahead of time, and are called upon to do repentance on them. Our sages tell us in the Talmud tractate Megillah folio 31, that as long as we read from the Torah the sections dealing with these days on their respective days or on the Sabbath preceding them, we are considered as if we had offered the sacrifices ordained to be offered on those days even if we had been prevented from doings so, such as when in exile and there being no Temple to do so. [On some of the festivals G-d sits in judgment of parts of His creation, such as the fruit of the earth, the trees, or if there will be sufficient rain, etc.. Since His decisions affect us greatly, doing some penitence even on those days is very appropriate, and is reflected in our liturgy on those days, and we do not restrict ourselves to Rosh Hashanah and the Day of Atonement. Ed.] In connection with the additional communal offerings on the Sabbath, no hint of the day serving as atonement in any form is given. The offerings on that day have only one objective, to provide G-d with a pleasant fragrance from His children, i.e. ריח ניחוח. This is also why the Mussaph prayer on the Sabbath is quite differently worded from the parallel prayers on the festivals. In those prayers the fact that we have been sinful and are therefore still in exile, is not mentioned with a single word or hint. ונסכה, “and its drink offering.” This is a reference to the drink offerings consisting of wine accompanying the daily communal burnt offerings.

עולת שבת בשבתו, “the Sabbath burnt-offering on its Sabbath.” This means that the procedure is to take place on each Sabbath, as if the Torah had written דבר יום ביומו, “a daily procedure day by day” (Exodus 8,13). על עולת התמיד, “in addition to (after) the daily total-offering.”

And at the beginnings of your months you shall bring a burnt offering before Hashem: two young bulls, one ram, seven yearling male lambs, without blemish.

"At the beginnings of your months" — R. Moses ha-Kohen the Spaniard, of blessed memory, said that its meaning is [specifically] the month of Nisan, since it is written, "It is the first for you," and thereafter it says "this is the burnt-offering of the month, month by month" — [implying] they shall do so in every month. He therefore added [the phrase] "for the months of the year." His interpretation is sound, and even though one might object on account of the yod [the plural form] in "beginnings of your months," [this is answered] by the fact that we find here [the phrase] "tomorrow is the new moon" — his statement is straightforward.

ובראשי חדשיכם, it was an ancient custom among the Israelites to treat the day of the new moon as a semi festival. We know this already from Samuel I 20,19 where Yonathan describes the day as one on which no work is performed in the field, a day not defined as יום המעשה, “a working day.” This is why this day has retained a special significance for the Jewish people, i.e. the Torah describes it as ראשי חדשיכם “the beginning of your months.” You will not find the regular festivals, מועדים described as “your festivals.” We do not find the Sabbath described as “your Sabbath” or the festival of Shavuot as “your day of the firstling fruits.” [the author will go to some length to explain that the ending כם in the word שבועותיכם in verse 26 does not refer to that festival. Ed.] Neither do we find the expression סכותיכם, etc. The reason for this ancient custom of treating the day of the new moon almost like a festival is that historically, success of the Jewish people in matters terrestrial has always been linked to the lunar cycle. The moon is a phenomenon which has no light of its own, a phenomenon which depends on receiving and reflecting light from an external source. Although prior to the sin of the golden calf the Jewish people’s fate was totally independent of any foreign domination, described as חרות על הלוחות, a kind of absolute independence, freedom engraved on the Tablets (the first set no doubt), (compare Exodus 32,16) as well as Eyruvin 54 and Tanchuma, Ki Tissa 16), once they had sinned they (divested themselves of this privilege, (and) no longer made use of this “Royal crown” at all times as did the other nations, so that they did no longer appear to enjoy this advantage over the other nations of the world. Ever since that spiritual disaster, the Jewish people could enjoy their original privilege of independence from the restrictions imposed by the fact that one is part of the “laws of nature” only on rare occasions in their history, whereas most of the time they were dependent on “light”, i.e. good fortune, from external sources not under their control. To that extent, their history reflects the situation of the moon with its periods of ascent and decline month after month. When the moon is not directly exposed to the light of the sun it becomes invisible. The expression אין מזל לישראל, (Shabbat 126) means that the Jewish people do not generate light of their own, do not work at being masters of their own fate, but rely entirely on G’d to guide their fates. They receive this Divinely emanated light when their deeds are pleasing to G’d. This is why in the parlance of our prophets G’d Himself is referred to as: “אור ישראל” Israel’s source of light. (compare Isaiah 10,16 as well as Psalms 27,1 where David refers to G’d. as אורי וישעי, “my light and my salvation.”) Whenever the Jewish people are in a state of sin, their sins act as a barrier between them and their G’d so that they are deprived of their source of light. When Isaiah describes...

ובראשי חדשיכם, and on your new moons, etc. The suffix "your" is used to remind us that it is up to a collegium of terrestrial judges to determine the date the new moon should be celebrated.

ובראשי חדשיכם, “and on your New moon days, etc.;” this paragraph refers specifically to the day ushering in the month of Nissan, the month in which we were redeemed from Egypt our national birthdayas specifically stated in Exodus 12,2. פרים בני בקר שנים ואיל אחד, “two young bullocks and one ram;” The same animals are to be offered as mussaph offerings on Passover and on the festival of weeks, 50 days later; New Moon and these festivals are occasions when a great number of Jewish people are assembled around the Temple in Jerusalem. On Rosh Hashanah, the Day of Atonement and Sh’mini Atzeret, only one young bullock is offered as part of the mussaph offering. On Rosh Hashanah the reason is that there is anyways another bullock that is the burnt offering of the new Moon which occurs on the same date. On the day of Atonement, the bullock offered by the High Priest on his own behalf consists of a young bullock. Also, one of the male goats serves as a sin offering for the whole people, a source for their atonement on that day. On Shimini Atzeret, after for seven days a total of 70 bullocks had been offered on behalf of the seventy nations of the world, one, such young bullock is offered on behalf of the Jewish people.

ובראשי חדשיכם, “and on your New Moons, etc.” The reason the word ובראשי is in the plural instead of ובראש, is to avoid misunderstanding. Had the Torah written the singular ובראש I could have understood this legislation to apply only to the first day of Nissan, a day previously singled out as beginning of the month. This day had been referred to as ראש חדשים in Exodus 12,2. By writing ובראשי חדשים, the Torah made plain that the following mussaf offerings were to be offered on the first of every month. Not only this; every month has two beginnings. In the evening it is recognizable through the appearance of the moon, in the morning through the offering of the requisite sacrifice. The special offering for the New Moon could not be offered at night as no offerings may be offered at night with the exception of the Passover which is offered after the daily evening burnt-offering. פרים בני בקר שנים ואיל אחד כבשים בני שנה שבעה תמימים, “two young bulls, one ram, seven male lambs in their first year, unblemished.” Our sages in Bamidbar Rabbah 13,13 explain that the bulls symbolize the patriarch Avraham of whom the Torah wrote: “he ran to the cattle” (Genesis 18,7); the ram symbolizes Yitzchak, as it was offered in his place by Avraham (Genesis 22,13). The seven sheep symbolize Yaakov of whom it is written that “he separated the sheep” (Genesis 30,40). The male goat mentioned at the end of the paragraph symbolizes the goat the brothers killed and dipped Joseph’s blood therein. It is worthwhile to note that the total number of animals offered on New Moons was 11 as this number corresponds to the 11 hours which the sun is older than the moon. The sun was created (made operational) on the fourth day at the beginning of the day (night), whereas the moon was made operational 11 hours later. The number 11 also recalls the fact that the solar year is (on average) 11 days longer than the lunar year (12 months), seeing the solar year is 365 days and the lunar year 354 days. The reason that the bulls were being offered in respect of Avraham (and Sarah) is because Avraham and Sarah originally were like טומטום ואנדרונינוס, hermaphrodite and epicene (people whose sexual organs were underdeveloped preventing them from bearing or siring children). The ram offered in respect of Yitzchak symbolised the uniqueness of the ram Avraham had slaughtered at the time, of which we learned in Avot 5,6 that it had been designated as such an offering since the days of the creation. The seven sheep offered in respect of Yaakov acknowledge symbolically that his features are engraved on the throne of G’d above the seven heavens (Bereshit Rabbah 68,18). The three tenths ephah of fine flour mixed with oil as a gift-offering for each of the bulls correspond to the three verses in which G’d is described as appearing to Avraham (Genesis 12,7; 17,1; 18,1). The two tenths ephah of fine flour mixed with oil as gift-offering which accompanied the ram offering were in respect of the two verses in the Torah in which G’d is described as appearing to Yitzchak (Genesis 26,2; 26,24). The reason that only one tenth ephah fine flour mixed with oil was brought as gift-offering alongside the seven sheep is that we have only one verse in which G’d is described as appearing (וירא) to Yaakov (Genesis 35,9). The reason that the Torah repeats the word עשרון in connection with the single tenth ephah of fine flour mixed with oil as gift-offering in respect of the seven sheep symbolising Yaakov, is that it alludes to both of Yaakov’s names, יעקב and ישראל. It also alludes to the two blessings he received (from his father), one instead of Esau’s blessing, the other prior to his departure to Charan. He also received 10 blessings when he was called Yaakov when his father gave him the first blessing (compare Genesis 27,28-29 and Genesis 32,30 [where the individual blessings are not enumerated; presumably G’d confirmed Yitzchak’s blessing. Ed.]). Yaakov also used the word עשר twice when he promised to tithe (twice) everything G’d would give him (Genesis 28,23). This applied especially to his son Levi as we pointed out in connection with Pirke d'Rabbi Eliezer chapter 37 why Levi was considered the tenth son (compare author’s comments on Genesis 28,22). It may be worth considering in this connection that Jeremiah 31,8 quotes G’d as saying: “Ephrayim is My firstborn.” When you count backwards from Ephrayim you will find that Levi is the tenth son. When you count from Levi to Aaron in descending order, i.e. Gershon, Kehat, Merari, Livni, Shimi, Amram, Yitzhar Chevron, Uzziel, Aaron you also have Aaron as the tenth (collective) descendant of Levi named by the Torah (compare Chronicles I 6,1-3). This is also why we find in Chronicles I 23,13: “Aaron was set apart, he and his sons, forever to be consecrated most holy, to make burnt-offerings to the Lord, etc.”

ובראשי חדשיכם, “and on your New Moons, etc.” Some commentators understand this verse as applying to the New Moon of the month of Nissan, seeing that the New Moon of that month has been described asראשון הוא לכם לחדשי השנה, “it is the first New Moon for you of the moons of the year.” (Exodus 12,2) This would explain why the Torah concludes (verse 14) our paragraph with זאת עולת חדש בחדשו לחדשי השנה, ”this is the burnt offering of each New Moon on the successive moons of the year.”

And three-tenths of fine flour as a meal offering mixed with oil for each one bull, and two-tenths of fine flour as a meal offering mixed with oil for the one ram;

ושלשה עשרנים AND THREE TENTH DEALS [OF FLOUR] — according to the rule of the drink-offerings which are brought with a bullock, for so are they (three tenth deals) fixed in the chapter dealing with the drink offerings (Numbers 15:9).

ושלושה עשרונים...לפר, “three-tenths ephah of fine flour for the meal-offering with a bull.” The measurement specified here was for each bull,; similarly, the measurement for the flour for the meal-offering accompanying the sheep or ram was for each of the respective animals. This is derived from the repetition of the word עשרון, עשרון. Not only that, but the addition of the words לשבעת הכבשים, “for the seven sheep” in verses 21 and 29 make it plain that the measurements given were not for the whole offering but for each animal that was part of that offering. The reason why the hint is given with the sheep is that there were so many sheep that were being offered on the altar. The Torah did not bother to spell out the details of each libation/meal offering separately for each animal as there were no fewer than a total of 196 such animal offerings on the seven days of Tabernacle alone. [Not including the Sabbath. Ed.]

And one-tenth, one-tenth, of fine flour as a meal offering mixed with oil for each one lamb — a burnt offering to be received with favor, an offering before Hashem.

And their libations: half a hin shall be for the bull, and a third of a hin for the ram, and a quarter of a hin for the lamb — this is the wine. This is the burnt offering of the new moon at its renewal, so for each of the new months of the year.

זאת עלת חדש בחדשו THIS IS THE BURNT OFFERING OF EVERY MONTH IN ITS MONTH — so that if its day is past its offering is cancelled, and there is no supplementary period for it (Sifrei Bamidbar 145:2).

"In its month" [be-chodosho] — like "on its Sabbath" [be-shabbato]. According to the plain sense, no other interpretation is possible here, for the verse contains no mention of the moon. Moreover, we do not find this word [chodesh] except in the heavy, doubled conjugation [binyan ha-kaved ha-dagush], yet here the dalet is without dagesh.

בחדשו, of every new moon, i.e. at the time when the lunar cycle renews itself. It must be offered on that day, and no other day.

ונסכיהם חצי ההין, “and their libations, half a hin, etc. A half hin equals 6 login seeing the measure hin comprises 12 login. יהיה לפר, “for each bull.” Seeing that the bulls were in respect of Avraham, and he had entertained and served bulls to the unexpected visitors (who turned out to be angels) during the hottest part of the day six hours after sunrise (compare Genesis 18,1-8). ושלישית ההין לאיל, “and a third of a hin for the ram, etc.” This was in respect of Yitzchak whose binding occurred four hours after sunrise. ורביעית ההין, “and a quarter of a hin with each sheep.” This corresponds to Yaakov who uttered 18 benedictions. When Yaakov encountered sudden sunset (Genesis 28,11), the Torah uses the expression ויפגע במקום. We have a tradition that the term פגיעה in the Bible always refers to prayer (Berachot 26, based on Jeremiah 7,16 אל תפגע בי, “do not plead with Me.”) Yaakov is credited with inventing the daily evening prayer (עמידה) on that occasion. It is worth noting that the small quantity of a quarter of a hin wine is used only with a sheep offering, never with a ram or bull offering. There is a mystical dimension to this. I have alluded to this in my commentary on Leviticus 26,42: “I will remember My covenant with Yaakov.” זאת עולת חדש בחשדו, “this is the New Moon offering whenever the moon renews itself.” This means that if, for some reason, the day passed without this offering having been presented it cannot be made up for subsequently (Sifri 145).

And one he-goat as a sin offering before Hashem — it shall be performed in addition to the continual burnt offering and its libation.

ושעיר עזים וגו׳ AND ONE KID OF THE GOATS [FOR A SIN OFFERING] — All goats brought as additional offerings are intended to atone for those sins committed by causing uncleanness to the Sanctuary or its holy things, — all as is set forth in Treatise Shevuot 9a. The goat of the New Moon differs from other goats brought as additional offerings in the fact that the word לה׳ is stated of it: that it is a sin offering to the Lord. The Halachic explanation of this is: it is to teach you that it only makes atonement for uncleanness where there is no consciousness of having caused it either before or after it has been done (cf. Rashi on Leviticus 16:16 and Note thereon), so that no one is cognisant of the sin except the Holy One, blessed be He, alone. (It is a חטאת לה׳, a sin offering for a sin known only to God). And that the same applies to other goats (i. e., that they atone for uncleanness under the same conditions) we derive from the law about this goat. — But its Aggadic explanation is as follows: The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “Bring an atonement offering for My sake, because I diminished the size of the Moon" (cf. Rashi on Genesis 1:16; Shevuot 9a, Chullin 60b). על עלת התמיד יעשה BESIDES THE CONTINUAL BURNT OFFERING SHALL IT BE DONE — It means: shall all this sacrificial rite (not the kid of the goats just mentioned) be done, ונסכו AND ITS DRINK OFFERING — the words “and its drink-offering” do not refer to the goat, because sin-offerings have no drink-offerings.

"And one he-goat as a sin-offering to Hashem" — this is like [the goat] "upon which the lot fell for Hashem, and he shall make it a sin-offering." Know that in the Holy Tongue, a sin-offering [chatat] with the lamed [i.e., "as a sin-offering"] is attached only to a sinner — as you see: "and I will have sinned against my father." This is the opposite of the derash, yet there is a hidden meaning in it.

ושעיר עזים, “as well as one he-goat;” this is to serve as sin offering for the whole Jewish community. It symbolises the guilt of the whole Jewish people, i.e. the 10 brothers of Joseph who had been involved in his sale, and who had never offered an atonement offering at the time. In connection with this he-goat, the Torah adds the words: “for the Lord,” meaning that all of these sin offerings had to be offered as “for the sake of heaven.” על עולת “together with the burnt offerings already mentioned.” על עולת התמיד יעשה ונסכו, “it shall be offered as a continual burnt offering together with its drink offering.” ונסכו, this word, as on previous occasions, refers to the libation consisting of wine as a gift offering on a daily basis.

ושעיר עזים אחד לחטאת לה', “and one male goat as a sin-offering for Hashem.” According to the plain meaning of the text he word לה' means the same as in Leviticus 16,8: “one male goat as sin-offering for Hashem.” Alternatively, the word לה' may mean “in respect of a sin committed against Hashem.” This would be a normal construction in Hebrew where the prefix ל often occurs as not meaning “for” but “against.” Examples are: Genesis 39,9 וחטאתי לאלו-הים and I would commit a sin against G’d.” Or, Genesis 44,32: וחטאתי לאבי, “and I would have committed a sin against my father.” According to Chulin 60 (one opinion) the meaning here is the reverse of the usual, G’d commanding the offering on His own behalf, “atoning” for having reduced the moon from its original size. This is one of the mysteries of the Torah. A Midrashic approach: The words חטאת לה' refers to the kind of sin unknown to anyone except Hashem. This is the way the Talmud in Shevuot 9 understands the expression. Another explanation offered by Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish there is that G’d offered to atone for having diminished the size of the moon by means of this offering. [The important thing to remember is that nowhere else does the sin offering in a mussaf sacrifice conclude with the words לה', a peculiar expression seeing all sacrifices are לה' for Hashem and no other deity or even attribute of G’d. Ed]. In Chulin 60 we find a lengthy description of what is meant here. Rabbi Shimon ben Pazzi raised the point that the Torah appears to contradict itself when it wrote in Genesis 1,16: “G’d made the two large luminaries, the great luminary and the small luminary.” If they both were first described as “large,” how could the verse continue in the same breath describing one as “small” and one as “great?” In answer to this question a dialogue between the moon and G’d is cited. The moon said to G’d: ”how can two kings both wear the same crown?” G’d replied: “reduce yourself in size.” Thereupon the moon countered: “why should I have to reduce myself in size (importance) merely because I asked a legitimate question?” Thereupon G’d said: “O.K. so you shine by day as well as by night.” To this the moon replied: “what good is my light during the day when there is no one to appreciate it?” To this argument G’d replied: “the Jewish people are going to count their days and years according to your orbits.” The moon was not satisfied with this, saying: “they will have to count days in accordance with the seasons, i.e. by relying on solar orbits.” G’d appreciated this argument and reassured the moon by saying: “the righteous will bear names referring to you.” Thus we find Yaakov referred to as יעקב הקטן in Amos 7,2, and Samuel referred to as שמואל הקטן; David is referred to as דוד הקטן in Samuel I 17,14. In spite of all this G’d did not succeed in satisfying the moon. As a last resort, G’d told the Jewish people to offer a male goat as sin-offering on His behalf seeing He had reduced the size of the moon. In order to understand this strange-sounding dialogue between G’d and the moon we must appreciate that the word הגדולים in Genesis 1,16 means that originally sun and moon were equal in size and power. The moon was reduced in size and this is why the Torah refers to it as the small luminary in the second half of the verse we quoted. The reason that it was reduced was that it had complained. However, we must not view the moon as displaying egotistical motives, [otherwise why would G’d feel guilty? Ed.]. When the moon referred to the inability of two kings wearing the same crown it meant that anything which appeared like power-sharing would reflect negatively on G’d. If two luminaries were to wear the same crown it would appear as if G’d were unable to create two servants each of whom had the ability to generate its own light without relying on an outside force, a companion to assist Him. The nations of the world would be encouraged to say that G’d was unable to supply original light to each of the luminaries as they had to trade “crowns” with one another. The moon’s error was the suggestion that G’d did not know what He had been doing when He created the universe as the moon had found it. One does not second-guess G’d the Creator. As a result, the moon had to be “punished.” After the moon had been reduced in size and had felt suitably ashamed for its behavior, G’d said to it: “go and govern both by day and by night.” He added that the Jewish people would count their months according to its orbit, and that the righteous would bear names associated with the moon. G’d did all this in order to put the moon’s mind at rest, so much so that He accorded the moon honor in assigning an additional male goat to the mussaf offering commemorating this dialogue for all times. This is the real meaning of the enigmatic words by Rabbi Shimon ben Pazzi who portrayed G’d as saying: “bring an atonement on My behalf.” G’d’s major concern in all this was that none of His creatures should have complaints about the way in which He had seen fit to create the universe and to assure its proper functioning. No creature should feel disadvantaged by its creator vis-a-vis any other part of the creation. It is also possible that the entire episode and the manner it is alluded to in the Torah serves as an encouragement to would be repentant sinners to come forward and change their life styles. They would learn from this episode in the celestial regions that once the guilty party had recognized the error of its ways G’d would go out of His way to compensate such repentant sinners for their having accepted instruction from Him. This also explains why the righteous are actually compared to the sun in Judges 5,31: “and the ones who love Him will emerge like the sun in its might,” seeing that they had to suffer various insults just as the sun had to be the victim of the moon’s complaints. Rav Yitzchak Alfassi writes in his halachic work at the end of the first chapter of tractate Shevuot that the word עלי in Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish’s parable הביאו כפרה עלי, “bring an atonement on My behalf,” should really be understood as אלי, “to Me,” not “on My behalf.” Most commentators agree with him. A rational approach to our verse: the word לה' “for Hashem” had to be written so that the offering would not be understood as being addressed to the moon. The reason that the male goat was used as such an offering altogether was to uproot the still deep-seated tradition that sacrifices had to be offered to the moon at the moon’s renewal each month. We do not find the expression חטאת לה' in connection with any other sin-offering presented as part of the mussaf ceremonies on Holidays. The usual expression is simply חטאת, i.e. a sin-offering parts of which were consumed by the priests. Seeing that those sin-offerings were not burned up on the altar the description חטאת לה', “a sin-offering for Hashem,” would have been inappropriate. If, in spite of the fact that this sin-offering was also consumed by the priests the Torah nonetheless chose to describe it as חטאת לה', this was in order to drive home the point that it was not intended to assuage the moon’s feelings in any way. It was to remove any vestige of doubt that this offering as opposed to all the others was addressed to some other deity than Hashem. This is the way that Maimonides understands the wording here (compare Moreh Nevuchim 3,46). If we follow this approach the explanation of the parable quoted by Rabbi Shimon ben Pazzi must be understood along the following lines: Originally, sun and moon were equal in size, i.e. this is the meaning of “the two great luminaries,” the sun completely facing the moon like a mirror so that the moon felt that its own light was not noticeable. The sun shone by day, the moon by night, but the moon only reflected the light of the sun, did not have light of its own. When the Torah describes the moon subsequently as being the “small” luminary, the meaning is that after the dialogue the moon’s size as perceived from the terrestrial perspective would appear smaller, in particular as it would wane towards the end of each month. [It is evident that there would have been no point even originally in the sun and the moon providing equal amounts of light, one by day and one by night, as who would have known when it is night? Ed.]. The basic difference in the moon before and after the dialogue with G’d was that whereas the sun remained in the sky completely unchanged, the moon’s position in the sky was altered so that it appears different; nonetheless, G’d did not change His universe on account of the moon’s complaint. Had He done so, He would have agreed that His universe had been imperfect. The word “crown” used by the moon to describe two kings wearing the same crown, meant that the “light” was the “crown.” The moon argued that seeing it needed to provide light for the terrestrial universe just as did the sun, it should be a source of light of its own just as the sun was such an independent source of light. It did not argue that it wanted to be a light of the same potency as the sun but that the quality of its light, though smaller, should be self-generated and therefore as clear as that of the sun. This, according to Rabbi Shimon ben Pazzi, and possibly acknowledged by G’d, was a fair and reasonable request. When G’d said to the Moon: “go and reduce yourself in size,” He meant: “do you think that the light of the sun is self-generated and that therefore it is something to be taken for granted that will endure indefinitely? This is an error on your part. When you will move out of its range you will experience that you will receive even less of its light.” The moon replied that it was unfair that it should be the one to reduce itself further seeing it had made a reasonable statement. To this G’d replied that if He had seen fit to make the moon as a receptacle for light (instead of as a source of light) He had done so for a good reason. There was a need for such reflected light. However, in view of the fact that the moon’s comments had been well-intentioned, G’d’s Children, i.e. the people of Israel, would offer a sin-offering on New Moon throughout the generations (compare Rashba on Shevuot 9). Rabbi Shimon ben Pazzi had understood that originally both sun and moon had not only been equal in size but also equal in the ability to dispense light they had generated themselves. Afterwards, G’d decided to make changes in that system for the sake of the world and its inhabitants. Had He not done so the world would have experienced daylight around the clock. This would have deprived the inhabitants of the terrestrial universe of the positive aspects of the night as a result of which the universe and its inhabitants could not have endured indefinitely. This is why G’d made changes in the laws of nature as they had been prior to the creation of life on earth. [Remember the sun and moon were placed in orbit on the fourth day, whereas the living creatures on the surface of the earth were not created until the fifth day, so that G’d’s change does not mean that He found His handiwork inadequate. Ed.]. After all, even prior to this, G’d had made adjustments to the globe when He commanded the oceans to recede in order for the dry land to emerge and to produce vegetation in preparation for animals which would feed on that. This too had not implied that the situation prior to that had been the result of a miscalculation by the Creator. When Solomon (Kohelet 1,15) says that מעוות לא יוכל לתקון, that “that which has been twisted cannot be made straight,” he meant that the number of days which are missing in the lunar calendar annually as a result of the moon being reduced in size will not be replaced. Changes that G’d made in the universe during its development are not reversible after completion of the work of creation. [If G’d made what appear to be changes during the stages of creation this proves that what existed prior to such changes was not twisted, but corresponded to the needs of the universe at that time. Ed.]. (Compare Kohelet Rabbah 1,16). A kabbalistic approach to the words לחטאת לה'. G’d did say: ”bring an atonement offering עלי, seeing that I reduced the moon in size.” By using the word עלי, G’d did not apologise; He merely meant “because I have found it appropriate for My purposes to reduce the moon in size.” When we understand the word עלי in Shevuot 9 quoted in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish in this fashion, we must understand the entire Midrash of Rabbi Shimon ben Pazzi in Chulin 60 as follows: [The key to understanding the following is that in the parable the two kings are not sun and moon but two different emanations, i.e. כבוד and תפארת, presented as similar to moon and sun respectively in their influence on the terrestrial universe. Ed]. The moon said to G’d: “is it possible for two kings to wear the same crown?” At this point the attribute בינה pointed out that it was entirely possible for two kings to wear the same crown, i.e. to derive its inspiration from the same source just as did the emanations כבוד and תפארת, both of which derive their input from the same celestial emanations This must be viewed as if the attribute of כבוד said this to the emanation בינה (here equated with G’d as it is a higher emanation). The emanation בינה replied that it was absolutely possible, to wit the emanation תפארת and כבוד make use of the same conduit, צנור. There is no need for each king to have a conduit of its own to draw down to it from the celestial regions its respective requirements. Nonetheless, the attribute כבוד desired to have its own conduit (“hot line” in our parlance) to the emanation בינה; it was not content to share such a conduit with the emanation תפארת. To this the emanation בינה replied: “go and reduce yourself;” i.e. stop sharing the celestial input via the emanation תפארת which served you thus far. Thereupon the attribute כבוד said: ‘why should I be denied direct celestial input when what I said was perfectly reasonable?” To this בינה replied: “go ahead and rule by day and by night.” G’d added: Israel will count both its days and its nights by means of you. Moreover, the righteous will have your name associated with them, such as Yaakov “the small,” Samuel “the small one,” etc. (as we pointed out in the earlier version of this Midrash). The word שמך, “your name” in the parable is to be understood as the name of G’d אדנ'י, i.e. the “smaller” name of G’d. The attribute כבוד was not satisfied until G’d said that a sacrifice dedicated to Hashem (the great name) would be offered on each New Moon compensating it for its diminution vis-a-vis the emanation תפארת. This is what is meant by the words אמר הק'בה in Rabbi Shimon ben Pezzi’s parable, i.e. the attribute of Mercy said this. He instructed the Israelites to offer this male goat sin-offering as a sacrifice on behalf of the (sub)emanation כבוד. The purpose of the offering as far as the Jewish people are concerned is to draw down to it the outpourings of the attribute of Mercy which, through the association of the fate of the Jewish people with the emanation כבוד which had forfeited the “hot line” to בינה had been severed. The association with the moon without the sin-offering to the attribute of Hashem on New Moon would otherwise place the Jewish people under the aegis of the attribute of Justice, as is the moon itself. The entire matter is a part of the mystical dimension of G’d’s relationship with the Jewish people. This is alluded to in the words זאת עולת חדש בחדשו. The attribute in question represented by the offering “rises” i.e. עולה, to become the recipient of G’d’s merciful outpourings. At an unspecified time in the future, the light of the moon and the sun will be equal in power and origin just as it was originally when both were described as גדולים, great. This is what Isaiah 30,26 spoke about when he wrote: ”and the light of the moon shall become like the light of the sun, and the light of the sun shall become seven-fold.” At such a time, the power of the moon which is the attribute of Justice will become unified with the attribute of Mercy. I have already explained this in connection with my commentary on Exodus 15,3: זה א-לי.

And in the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month, is the Passover before Hashem.

"On the fourteenth day of the month" — yet it does not mention "between the evenings." This too is a reinforcement for those who transmit [the tradition], even though they have no need of it.

ובחודש הראשון בארבעה עשר יום לחדש פסח לה', “and in the first month on the fourteenth of the month, a passover for the Lord.” In this verse the words בין הערבים which usually appear in connection with the passover are missing. Also the burnt-offering which has to be brought on the Sabbath during the seven days of Passover is not mentioned; neither does the Torah make any reference to the offering of the first new barley, commonly known as Omer which is presented on the second day of the Passover and which is mentioned in Leviticus 23,12. Here the Torah phrases the prohibition to perform work on the Holiday as כל מלאכת עבודה, instead of the more all encompassing expression כל מלאכה, “all manner of work,” used in connection with the Sabbath. The difference is that it is permitted to use fire on the festival in connection with preparing food for the same day. Seeing that in Exodus 12,16 where the Torah also speaks of the Passover it does use the expression כל מלאכה to refer to the work-prohibition it had to add the words: “except what is needed to prepare food for every person,” in that verse.

ובחודש הראשון בארבעה עשר יום לחודש, “And in the first month on the fourteenth of the month, a Passover for the Lord.” This was a special warning to present the Passover, (each householder, as rule) it was mentioned here once more in conjunction with the other offerings of the festival of unleavened bread. The Torah abbreviated here by only mentioning the name of that offering as all its details had already been spelled out in chapter 12 of the Book of Exodus.

And on the fifteenth day of this month is a feast; seven days shall unleavened bread be eaten.

לחדש הזה, of this month, etc. The word "this" appears superfluous. Torat Kohanim Leviticus 23,6 explains that the word is used to teach us that on the Sukkot festival one need not eat matzah. Matzah needs to be eaten only on Passover. I have already explained this on Leviticus 14,7.

On the first day there shall be a holy convocation; you shall not perform any laborious work.

כל מלאכת עבדה [YE SHALL DO] NO SERVILE WORK — even work that is a necessity for you, as, for instance, a matter that may become lost (that cannot be postponed without irretrievable loss) and which is permissible on the intermediate days of Passover and Tabernacles (lit., the week days of the Festival) is forbidden on the Festival itself (see Rashi on Leviticus 23:8).

מקרא קדש, “a holy convocation.” Although the word מקרא appears with the letter א at the end, it is to be understood as if it had been spelled with the letter ה at the end meaning: ”a happening.” The Targum renders the verse as referring to a מערע, “a happy gathering involving food and drink, and fancy dress.” כל מלאכת עבודה, “any manner of servile work;” this type of work is prohibited to be carried out on such a day, whereas work involving the preparation of food and drink is permissible. This is the reason why the Torah here did not write as it did concerning Sabbath and on Yom Kippur: כל מלאכה לא תעשו, “you must not perform any manner of מלאכה, but on Yom Tov only forbade: “servile type of work.” כל מלאכת עבודה.

And you shall bring near an offering, a burnt offering before Hashem: two young bulls, one ram, and seven yearling male lambs — they shall be without blemish for you.

פרים BULLOCKS — in allusion to Abraham, as it is said, (Genesis 18:7) “And unto the herd (the bullock) Abraham ran”, אילים RAMS — in allusion to the ram of Isaac (Genesis 22:13). כבשים LAMBS — in allusion to Jacob, as it is said, (Genesis 30:40) “And the lambs did Jacob set aside”. I saw this in the work of R. Moses the Preacher (see Rashi on Numbers 7:21).

תמימים יהיו לכם, “they shall be free from blemish, for you.” If animals used as communal offerings on the Sabbaths or festivals should have a blemish disqualifying them as offerings, slaughtering such animals on the Sabbath or festival would be a grave sin. It would even be forbidden to remove the skins of such animals on either the Sabbath or the festival. This is why the prophet Ezekiel, Ezekiel 22,8 stated: קדשי בזית ואת שבתותי חללת, “you have despised My holy things, and you have profaned My Sabbaths.” This is also why no mention is made of the animals for the offerings on New Moon having to be free from blemish. It is clear that all animals for offerings must be free from blemishes on any day of the week, but if these animals are offered on a day when certain work must not be performed, if such an animal is nonetheless being offered, the person doing so has committed an additional sin, that of profaning the holiness of the day.

And their meal offering — fine flour mixed with oil: three-tenths for a bull and two-tenths for the ram you shall prepare.

THREE TENTH-PARTS SHALL YE OFFER FOR ‘A BULLOCK’ — that is, for each of the [two] bullocks, [mentioned in the preceding verse]. Similarly, three tenth-parts for ‘the one bullock’ means for each one of the [thirteen] bullocks [mentioned in the preceding verse]. And [the expression in the following Verse 21] for the one lamb shows us [the meaning of] this [phrase — for ‘a bullock,’ in Verse 20 before us], since it says [there in Verse 21], ‘isaron isaron’ [literally: ‘a tenth-part, a tenth-part’ shalt thou offer for ‘the one lamb’ — thus indicating clearly that this amount of the meal-offering is for each of the Iambs; and here too the amount stated is for each of the bullocks and rams]. Scripture further states explicitly [in Verse 21]: for every lamb of the seven lambs. So here too, for ‘a bullock’ means for [each of] the two bullocks. Scripture, however, sometimes speaks briefly in a matter which is self-understood, for it is obvious that there are not three tenth-parts [of an ephah offered up] for one bullock, whilst the second one has none [at all]. And [the reason why] He stated explicitly [in the following Verse 21] in connection with the lambs [that the meal-offering specified is for each one of the lambs], is because they are many [i.e., seven], and it follows all the more so in the [case of the] bullocks [mentioned here in Verse 20 that the meal-offering specified there is to be offered up for each of the two bullocks]. And in [speaking about the first day of] the Festival of Tabernacles, when the bullocks were more [than on any other festival], He explains three tenth-parts for the one bullock of the thirteen bullocks.

One-tenth, one-tenth, you shall prepare for each one lamb — so for the seven lambs.

And one he-goat as a sin offering, to make atonement for you.

"And a he-goat as a sin-offering" — meaning a he-goat [se'ir izzim], and this is an abbreviated expression. Note that it does not mention burnt-offerings for the seven days of Passover, just as it does not mention the wave-offering burnt-offering — and we require the received tradition for this, since the verse "on its Sabbath" was said with reference to the daily burnt-offering.

Apart from the morning burnt offering, which is the continual burnt offering, you shall perform these.

Like these you shall perform each day, for seven days, as the bread of an offering received with favor before Hashem — it shall be performed in addition to the continual burnt offering and its libation.

כאלו תעשו ליום LIKE THESE YE SHALL OFFER ON EACH DAY — Like these mentioned: this implies that they are not continuously to decrease in number on each day as do the bullocks brought on the Feast of Tabernacles (Numbers 29:12—34) (Sifrei Bamidbar 147:2).

כאלה תעשו ליום שבעת ימים, “After this manner you shall present offerings for seven consecutive days;” previously, when this festival had been discussed in Leviticus in the latter part of chapter 23, where not the offerings but the location of them in our own land are the central focus of the Torah, the blessings related to these festivals are highlighted, and therefore our gratitude for them. In this chapter the Torah highlights the details of the offerings to be presented on those occasions. ונסכו, and its drink offering;” the verse refers to the words: 'לחם אשה לה, at the beginning of our verse, i.e. “the food of the offering for G-d made by fire;” what is meant specifically are the drink offerings accompanying the animal offerings as gift offerings, מנחה, including the meal (baked flour) parts of such offerings.

And on the seventh day there shall be a holy convocation for you; you shall not perform any laborious work.

וביום השביעי, “and on the seventh day;” I have found that an identical verse is recited also on the seventh day of Passover in our mussaph prayers, i.e. 'ביום השביעי וגו.

And on the day of the first fruits, when you bring near a new meal offering before Hashem, at your appointed assembly — there shall be a holy convocation for you; you shall not perform any laborious work.

וביום הבכורים AND ON THE DAY OF THE FIRSTLINGS — The Feast of Weeks is called the firstlings of the wheat harvest (Exodus 34:22) because of the two loaves (Leviticus 23:17) which were the first of the wheat meal offerings which were brought from the new grain (Menachot 84b).

"When you bring a new grain-offering" — the wave-loaves are the essential element, accompanied by seven lambs, a young bull, two rams, and two lambs as peace-offerings. The burnt-offering mentioned in this portion is the obligation of the day. The proof for their [the Sages'] words is that [Scripture] did not spell out anything at all regarding Sabbath or the festivals, yet mentioned it for the Festival of Matzot, Sukkot, and the tenth day [of the seventh month]: "you shall bring a fire-offering to Hashem," without stating how many in number — and likewise for the Day of Trumpeting, where it did not mention the monthly burnt-offering or the daily burnt-offering. And its grain-offering — that is the first burnt-offering.

בשבועותיכם, on account of the weeks of cutting, harvesting. Compare Jeremiah 5,24 שבועות חקת קציר, “the weeks appointed for the harvest.” The reason for the apparently superfluous letter ב at the beginning of this word here is similar to the use by Scripture of the same letter in constructions such as בנפש יכפר in Leviticus 17,11, or בדם עשהאל in Samuel II 3,27, or בלחם נשכרו in Samuel I 2,5. It is a form of emphasis of the word it introduces.

בהקריבכם…בשבעתיכם, when you offer on your festival of weeks, etc. The plural indicates that this festival is not only meant for bringing the offering from the new wheat harvest, but that at the same time it also symbolises the completion of the count of the seven weeks commencing with the second day of Passover. This represents a major rehabilitation of our souls as explained by the Kabbalists. The Torah is careful to use the possessive suffix to indicate that the seven weeks represent the essential elements which distinguished the seven righteous people who between them form the spiritual foundation of the Jewish people. This is explained in detail in Tikkuney Hazohar chapter 21. Another reason why the Torah wrote בשבעתיכם is to disabuse the fools who thought that the words ממחרת השבת in Leviticus 23,25 refer to the Sabbath of Bereshit, i.e. the ordinary Sabbath, rather than the first day of Passover (compare Menachot 65). By saying "your weeks," the Torah makes it plain that the count started on a day which was subject to the terrestrial court to determine. The terrestrial court has no authority to change the date of the Sabbath, although it may postpone the day on which we observe new moons. We have a Baraitha in Menachot 72 where Rabbbi Yehudah also deduces the same ruling from the words in Deut. 16,9 תספר לך, "count for yourself." This excludes days over which our courts have no authority and which all mankind counts alike.

וביום הבכורים, “And on the day of offering the first fruits, etc,” The reason why this day is called: “the day of the first fruits,” is that commencing with that date the farmer can present such fruit from the current harvest in the Temple as his gift to G-d, i.e. the priests, His terrestrial representatives. The verse failed to mention the month, and from which day of that month this regulation applies. I have already explained the reason for this omission in my commentary on Leviticus23,21. בשבועותיכם, “on your feast of weeks;” the word is translated by the Targum as בעצרתיכון; since the Targum appeared, or in deference to its author, in the rabbinic literature the name of the festival has been changed to Atzeret. [Presumably, this is on account of the stoppage of counting the omer. Ed.] Previously, this festival had been known as Shavuot.

וביום הבכורים, “and on the day of the first-fruits;” the Shavuot festival is also known as בכורי קציר חטים, “the first fruit of the wheat harvest,” as on that day two loaves of the first ripe new wheat are presented as an offering (Rashi). We must try and understand why in connection with the mussaph offering on this festival the customary male goat as a sin-offering is not described by the word “sin-offering,” although the Torah does say that its function is לכפר, “to atone.” The simple reason is that on a day when the Jewish people commemorate receiving the Torah, an occasion when they were as innocent as new-born children and had no specific sins to atone for, it is appropriate to commemorate this fact at least by an allusion. A kabbalistic approach sees in the wording an allusion to the day in the future when the orbit of the earth as we know it will cease, עצרתו של העולם, and the evil urge will be destroyed at that time and the “stone” i.e. the heart of stone, described by Ezekiel 36,26 as our heart, will be destroyed in exchange for “a heart of flesh,” a heart open to Hashem and His instructions.

And you shall bring near a burnt offering to be received with favor before Hashem: two young bulls, one ram, seven yearling male lambs.

And their meal offering — fine flour mixed with oil: three-tenths for one bull, two-tenths for the one ram;

One-tenth, one-tenth, for each one lamb — for the seven lambs.

One he-goat to make atonement for you.

שעיר עזים אחד, “one male goat;” we have a statement recorded near the end of the Babylonian Talmud tractate Rosh Hashanah, that in the land of Israel the scholars quoting Rabbi Mesharshia in the name of Rabbi Acha, draws attention to the fact that whereas with all the other such sacrifices the term used is חטאת, “sinoffering,” whereas here the reference to sin is omitted. He explains by quoting the Lord saying to the Israelites: “seeing that this is the anniversary of the day on which you voluntarily accepted the yoke of My Torah, I consider this as if you had not committed any sins to be atoned for prior to this day.” (Jerusalem Talmud Rosh Hashanah chapter 4, halachah 10)

In connection with the festival of Sh’vuot, although the line: שעיר עזים אחד לכפר עליכם, “one male goat to atone for you,” appears, the customary word: לחטאת, “as a sin offering “ is absent. Presumably this is in honour of the Torah which had been given to the people on that date. This is also why the author of the liturgical poem recited in many congregations on that day, writes that: “sin is not mentioned on that day so that the Lord can enjoy a day of rest.” An alternate explanation. Seeing that on that day, at least, the entire congregation was free from sin, [when the Ten Commandments were given at Mount Sinai. Ed.] According to the Midrash, their status was like as if they had never sinned, as on that day they had unanimously accepted the yoke of the Torah. We find also the line: מלבד עולת התמיד, “apart from the daily burnt offering,” immediately following this verse and it is strange that these words do not appear in connection with the two wave-breads that were offered up only on that day of the year. This was the pattern of the Torah in chapter 29,6,as well as in chapter 29,11, in connection with the mussaph offerings on New Year’s Day as well as on the Day of Atonement. Perhaps we can answer this question by suggesting that this statement had already been included in the description of the mussaph offerings on that day commencing in verse 26 of our chapter. We also find that in connection with the details of the mussaph offerings on New Year’s Day, (29,2) it is written specifically: ועשיתם עולה, “you are to prepare a burnt offering, etc;” Why was this expression different in any way from the usual formula of והקרבתם עולה, “you are to sacrifice (bring to the altar) that the Torah employs everywhere else when discussing the burnt offering? We may understand that the reason is that that day is the day when all of mankind is being judged, and from the moment we enter the New Year, we are all considered as if we had only been created on that day. The author of the liturgical poems for that day probably had this in mind when he wrote: הבוראם בריאה חדשה, “Who had created them as a new creature.” According to the Midrash, these words in the liturgy for the Days of awe should be read only on the Day of Atonement. (based on the Midrash on Psalms 102,19 where the psalmist speaks of a new people having been created.) [There are several disagreements quoted by the Midrash as to who precisely the psalmist referred to, at any rate all are agreed that he referred to people not yet created at the time when the psalmist composed this hymn. I am therefore not continuing with this part of the author’s commentary. The reader interested can read the Midrash Tehillim Ed.] The reason why on Sukkot we recite the entire Hallel as opposed to the festival of Passover is that on each of the days of Sukkot, the composition of the offering is different from every other day, thereby giving each day a special significance. On Passover, the mussaph offering is exactly the same on all of the seven days. The reason why on the eighth day, sh’mini ha-atzeret, only a single bullock is part of the mussaph offering, is to show that it is not the Lord Who is in need of these offerings, but they are presented as a sign of honour by G–d to the Jewish people to the gentile nations. It would have been appropriate that this day occur on the 50th day after the end of the Sukkot festival, just as the festival of Sh’vuot occurs on the fiftieth day after the first day of Passover. It has been shifted as the climate at that time makes a pilgrimage to Jerusalem a hardship during the rainy season. (Tanchuma section 15 on this portion) Our author quotes another liturgical poem for these days referring to this point. [We, especially in the land of Israel, where these festivals are part of the everyday atmosphere on these days, do not recite most of these poems anymore, as we do not need them as a reminder of the significance of the days. Ed.]

Apart from the continual burnt offering and its meal offering, you shall perform them — they shall be without blemish for you — and their libations.

תמימים יהיו לכם ונסכיהם THEY SHALL BE TO YOU WITHOUT BLEMISH, AND THEIR DRINK OFFERINGS — i.e. the drink offerings, too, shall be without blemish. Our Rabbis learned from this that wine upon which mold shows itself is unfit for drink-offerings (Menachot 87a).

מלבד עולת התמיד, “beside the daily burnt offering;” if you were to ask why the Torah did not write: beside the two showbreads, etc. etc., which are all part of the offerings presented on Atzeret (as the Torah had done in connection with the New moon offerings, and the offerings on the Day of Atonement?) We would respond to this question by reminding the reader that earlier, in verse 26, these details had already been recorded so that there was no need to repeat them here again. Beside they referred to the gift offerings, not the principal offerings. ונסכיהם, “and their drink offerings.” This refers to the wine libations on the day of Shavuot and the meal offerings accompanying the principal offerings.

תמימים יהיו לכם ונסכיהם, “they shall be unblemished for you, together with their libations.” This means that the libations must also be unblemished. Our sages in Menachot 87 use this verse to legislate that if in the wine of the libation any kind of flour-like material floats to the surface the wine is unfit for the altar. The reason is that only the choicest product of its respective category of produce or animal is to be presented on the altar. Anything which does not fit these criteria is unwelcome, unfit for use on the altar a priori (Maimonides Hilchot Issurey Hamizbeach 7, 1-2). If, for instance, someone was obligated to present a burnt-offering on the altar he must not bring a weak or frail, undernourished animal. He must not say that seeing the weak animal is unblemished he has complied with the legislation of the Torah. Concerning such an attitude (saying that as long as it is not blemished it is acceptable) the prophet Malachi 1,14 said “cursed be the cheat” (Rashi). During the period of the Temple the Israelites would import rams from Moav, and sheep with wide backs they would bring from Chevron, and young turtle-doves from the mountain known as הר המלך. They would bring olive oil from Tekoah; all these places mentioned were known to produce the finest of that respective category of animal, bird, or oil. We already find that when the Torah mentions the first offering by man, i.e. Kayin and Hevel, that the gift by Hevel is described as consisting of the choicest of its kind (Genesis 4,4). As a result, G’d welcomed his offering while He spurned that of Kayin, who had contented himself with offering produce of an inferior quality (Genesis 4,5). We also have an explicit verse in Deut. 12,11 speaking of כל מבחר נדריכם, “and all the choicest of your vows,” i.e. the choicest animals which you present to G’d to discharge your vows.” It is also written in Numbers 18,32: “when you raise up its best from it.” Even the wood used for kindling on the altar had to be the finest of its kind, was not allowed to contain worms (Maimonides, Hilchot Issurey Hamizbeach 6,2). Timber from buildings which had been demolished was not allowed to be used as wood for the woodpile of the altar. Only “new” wood, i.e. wood not previously used for something else was admissible. Wood from all kinds of trees was permitted to be used except wood from olive trees or from vineyards (Maimonides ibid.) This was out of ecological considerations for the land of Israel. Similarly, the olive oil used for burning in the Menorah was of the choicest quality, only finely crushed pure olive oil being permitted; it had to be the kind which was free-flowing from the fruit after it was crushed. This is also why the sages disqualified oil into which a mouse had fallen as being unsuitable for lighting the candelabra in the Synagogue (Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deyah 104,2). In this connection the same source says that if the mouse had already disintegrated and there is a minimum of 60 times as much oil as residual animal tissue, such oil may be fit for eating, whereas if the remains of the mouse are identifiable one is to throw out the remains of the mouse and, provided there is 60 times as much oil left thereafter, the oil may be used without restriction. All the above is the practical expression of Malachi 1,8: ”would you dare offer a blemished beast to your governor, would he treat you with favor?”