Parshas Tetsaveh
10 Adar I 5768
March 6, 2008
Daf Yomi: Nedarim 57
Guest Author:
Rabbi Dr. Chaim Wakslak
Young Israel
of Long Beach, NY
The Ba’al Haturim points out that Parshas Tetzaveh has the distinction of being the only Parsha in the Chumash that does not contain Moshe’s name (except those Parshios that discuss events before his birth and those that Moshe narrates in the Book of Devarim). He reminds us that when Hashem considered annihilating the Jewish people for sinning with the golden calf, Moshe interceded and said, “Mecheini na misifrecha asher katavta” – “Erase me now from Your book that You have written” (Shemos 32:32). HaShem then replied, “Whoever has sinned against Me I shall erase from My book.”
Since Moshe had not sinned, there was no reason for Moshe’s name to be erased. Nonetheless, because a tzaddik must be extremely cautious with every word that he utters (Brachos 56a), the fact that Moshe’s name is not present in Parshas Tetzaveh appears to be a consequence of Moshe’s statement to Hashem in Parshas Ki Tissa. How did this come about?
According to some commentators Parshas Tetzaveh was selected for the omission of Moshe’s name because Hashem was reluctant to actually omit Moshe’s name. This reluctance is evident in the fact that although Moshe made the statement of “mecheini na misifrecha” in Parshas Ki Tissa, Hashem specifically waited until Parshas Tetzaveh to omit his name. Hashem apparently sought an occasion throughout the entire cycle of Torah portions in which to omit Moshe’s name and only in Parshas Tetzaveh, which represents the last opportunity, as it immediately precedes Parshas Ki Tissa, did Hashem exclude Moshe’s name.
Another viewpoint holds that Moshe’s name was omitted in Tetzaveh because when Moshe mentioned the concept of being erased from Hashem’s book he used the extra word, “asher katavta” when “shekatavta” would have been sufficient. His name was therefore erased from Parshas Tetzaveh because the words “asher” (alef, shin, reish) and “tetzaveh” (taf, zadik, vav, hey) each have the same numerical value of 501 (Mishkenosecha Yisroel).
Alternatively, Parshas Tetzaveh was chosen for the omission of Moshe’s name, because when the Jews sinned with the golden calf (eigel), Hashem considered no longer accompanying the B’nei Yisroel and said to Moshe: “hinei malachi yeileich lefanecha” – “My angel will go before you” (Shemos 32:34). Hashem wanted the angel Michael to lead the Jewish people together with Moshe (the words “My angel”- malachi (mem, lamid, alef, kaf, yud) can be rearranged to read Michael). Moshe refused to accept the angel Michael and insisted that Hashem Himself accompany the Jewish people (Rashi 33:15). In Parshas Tetzaveh there are 101 pesukim and the mnemonic to remember this word is Michael (mem, yud, kaf, alef, lamid), which has the numerical values of 101. Therefore the Parsha in which there is a hint for Michael does not mention the name of Moshe because Moshe refused to go together with Michael (Chanukas HaTorah).
Furthermore, the entire Parsha of Tetzaveh deals with Aaron and his four sons, who are to be sanctified for their responsibilities in the Mishkan by being clothed in the special garments of the kehuna (priesthood) -- four garments for ordinary kohanim and the same set with an additional four garments for Aaron, the Kohen Gadol. The Torah describes each item of the priestly clothing, followed by the ceremony of investiture, detailing the celebration during which many sacrifices were offered including the two daily tamid offerings. Instructions are given for the golden alter on which incense was offered each morning at the time the Kohen Gadol cleaned the Menorah.
Thus, the overall narrative in the Parsha, when considered in conjunction with the absence of any mention of Moshe’s name, suggests that the principal focus of Parshas Tetzaveh is the personage of Aaron HaKohen. An appreciation of the qualities and character of Aaron Hakohen will allow us to answer several questions related to the parsha:
1. The Kohen Gadol, the model spiritual persona, serving in the Beit Hamikdash, the model spiritual abode, wearing bigdei kehuna, the model spiritual clothing, is mandated to wear wool and linen - sha’atnez during his service. Interestingly, we find according to Rebbi (Yoma 12b), that a kohen hedyot (ordinary Kohen) is also mandated to wear sha’atnez during his service as well. How are we to understand this incongruity of the sha’atnez wearing kohen?
2. The Choshen (Breastplate) and the Efhod (apron) were two of the eight garments worn by the Kohen Gadol which were connected to each other by two braided chains. The Torah instructs, “And the Choshen will not be loosened from upon the Ephod.” Why the imperative to keep the Choshen and Ephod connected?
3. At the very end of the Parsha the Torah instructs, “You should make an alter on which to burn the incense” (Shemos 30:1). Why isn’t this golden alter discussed in Parshas Terumah together with all the other vessels of the Mishkan?
We can understand these apparent inconsistencies by noting that Aaron’s quintessential characteristic is to bring peace by melding diverse elements and teaching them to coexist in a
functional and symbiotic manner.
In the case of sha’atnez, Linen and Wool represent the collision of values. Linen is a representative of the plant kingdom which is focused on its sustenance and reproduction and for which there is nothing beyond self preservation and perpetuation of the species. As such, Linen is representative of the physical world. In contrast, Wool serves as a representative of the animal world, which, even as it reproduces and sustains itself, also possesses a neshama. The Talmud (Eruvin100b) declares that in the absence of Torah many noble traits can be discerned by observing animal behavior.
It is precisely because Aaron Hakohen and his descendants possess the ability to make peace between divergent elements that they must wear sha’atnez to indicate the ideal expression of our mandate to harmonize the dissonance of both worlds by infusing kedusah (sanctity) into the mundane elements of our physical existence.
The Zohar in Parshas VaYakhel (230:2) describes the Choshen as the aspaklaria hameira (translucent glass) and the Ephod as the aspaklaria sheyna hameira (opaque glass). In Chassidus, the Choshen is symbolic of the righteous, as it is worn on the front and top half of the Kohen Gadol’s body (panim). The Choshen’s representation of righteousness is further reflected in the words of the Arizal who notes that the order of the words Choshen (chet, shin, nun) combats the influence of the Nachash – the serpent (nun, chet, shin) which shares the same letters but is representative of the evil inclination. Furthermore, the word Choshen (chet, shin, nun) is numerically equivalent to 358 which is identical to the numerical value of the word Moshiach (mem, shin, yud, chet) - a spiritually elevated individual.
In contrast, the Ephod is associated with the transgressor of mitzvoth, for it is worn on the lower and rear portion of the Kohen’s body. It now becomes evident as to why we should never separate the Choshen from the Ephod. Consistent with the “ohev shalom v’rodef shalom” of Aaron HaKohen, we must insure that there is a connection between the “choshen yid” and the “ephod yid” in a manner where they may coexist and ultimately permit the former to influence the latter.
Rav Schorr ZT”L writes in his sefer, Ohr Gedalyahu, that the word ketores comes from the word ‘kesher” – connection. This is because it connects man with his Creator. When one is connected with his Creator, no evil force can control him. That is why the mizbeach haketores can stop a plague. Similarly, we find that the number ten appears many times in regard to kedusha. The ketoras, on the other hand, consisted of eleven “ingredients”, one of them being chalvana, which had a bad smell. This bad smelling spice represents evildoers. The point of this is to show that the ketoras could take someone who does evil and incorporate them into holiness.
This explains why the Parsha of mizbeach haketores is included in Parshas Tetzaveh - the Parsha of Aaron Hakohen. As the Sefas Emes explains, while Moshe Rabbeinu could bring that which was in Shomayim down to us, Aaron Hakohen could take that which is down in this world and lift it up to Shomayim, thus making peace between all elements of the Jewish people and between man and G-d.
Shabbat Shalom.
