Parshas Tzav - Shabbos HaGadol
12 Nisan 5770 March 27, 2010
Daf Yomi: Sanhedrin 43
Guest Author:
Rabbi Dr. Chaim Wakslak
Young Israel of Long Beach, NY
www.yilb.org
The Shabbos preceding Pesach is called Shabbos HaGadol. The reason for this title is that a great miracle was performed on that day. Our lives were saved by HaShem from the hand of the Egyptians for the first time. We were vulnerable and could have been easily defeated. “We find that the tenth of Nissan was the Shabbos. Each Jew took a lamb for the paschal sacrifice, and tied it to his bedpost, and when the Egyptians asked why are you doing this, they replied that it was to be slaughtered as a paschal sacrifice as commanded to us by G-d. The Egyptians’ teeth were set on edge because their gods were being slaughtered, but they could say nothing. In recognition of that miracle, we call that day the Great Sabbath (Tur, OC 430).
Often times, Shabbos HaGadol coincides with the reading of Parshas Tzav, which reviews the different categories of karbonos:
1. Olah – elevation offering
2. Mincha – meal offering;
3. Shelamim -peace offering;
4. Chatas – Sin offering; and
5. Asham -guilt offering.
A question we might ask is: To which category does the Korbon Pesach belong?
To assist us in finding the proper classification, an understanding of what the sacrifice of the Korban Pesach was designed to accomplish is in order:
1. According to Maimonides, (Guide for the Perplexed, Book 3, Chapter 46) G-d commanded that the Israelites slaughter lambs specifically because the Egyptians worshipped them. The purpose of the Paschal lamb is to rid the Israelites of these idolatrous beliefs. The sacrifice and blood spread on the doorpost communicates a message to the Israelites. When the Israelites see blood on their gates, they realize the connection between their salvation and prior slaughter of the lamb, the Egyptian god. Only after rejecting idolatry do they merit being saved.
2. A different approach is advanced by the Chizkuni. Rather than a message to the Israelites, as suggested by Maimonides, the blood is intended to give a message to the Egyptians. His understanding behind the Paschal lamb emerges from an analysis of the laws regarding its slaughter and consumption. On Shemos 12:6, the Chizkuni explains that it was necessary to take the lamb a full four days before its actual sacrifice, "So that the Egyptians would see their gods tied shamefully and disgracefully in the homes of the Israelites and would hear the sheep squealing with no one to save them."
According to Chizkuni's interpretation, the purpose of the Paschal lamb in Egypt was primarily directed at the Egyptians, as part of G-d's war against Egyptian idolatry, "I will mete out punishments to all the gods of Egypt" (12:12). In contrast to Maimonides, it is not as much the Israelites as it is the Egyptians who must realize the uselessness of their gods and the absurdity of their beliefs.
3. Rashi advances a third approach to understanding the Paschal lamb in Egypt: "For what reason did G-d command that the lamb be taken four days prior to its slaughtering, a requirement which does not pertain to the Paschal lamb of future generations?” repeating the question of Chizkuni. He answers that “HaShem might have felt that ‘the time has come to fulfill the oath which I [G-d] swore to Abraham that I will redeem his children, but they were not engaged in any commandments for which they could merit being redeemed as is stated, 'and you were naked and bare' (Ezek. 16:7), therefore He gave them two commandments, the blood of the Paschal lamb and the blood of circumcision."
From this perspective, the purpose of the Paschal lamb is not to negate Egyptian idolatry; it is not aimed at rejecting heretical beliefs, but rather, at affirming religious convictions and strengthening the Israelites' bond with G-d. Disassociating ones self from idolatry, from the depraved culture of Egypt does not make one worthy of redemption. 'Sur mei-ra' - "shunning evil," must be followed by 'asei tov' - "doing good" (Psalms 34:15). Only after Israel begins performing G-d's commandments can they be redeemed. Torah is not satisfied with people abstaining from wrongdoing. It demands positive affirmative action.
In acknowledgement of three differing perspectives on the purpose of the Korban Pesach, the category of Korbon into which it falls may differ as well. According to the perspectives of the Rambam, Chizkuni, and Rashi, the Korban Pesach can alternatively be understood as an Olah, Shelamim or Mincha offering.
The Korbon Pesach shares a principle similarity with the Korbon Shelamim which is deemed beneficial to its owner, as evidenced by the fact that is consumed by the person who brings it, and its remains are prohibited. This Korbon Shelamim aspect of the Pesach offering fits the interpretation of the Rambam who sees the Korbon Pesach as an offering commanded primarily for the benefit of B’nai Yisroel, reinforcing the message that their salvation comes from HaShem.
The Pesach offering shares two similarities with the Olah (burnt offering). The Torah requires in both cases an unblemished male animal, either sheep or goat (Vayikra 1:10), and a complete roasting in fire – "Its head with its legs and with its innards" (Shemot 12:9). Further, the parallel of the Korbon Pesach and the Korbon Olah coincide with the interpretation of the Chizkuni who sees the message of the Korbon Pesach sharing the message of the Olah, exclusivity to Hashem (indicated by complete consumption on the altar), in that the Pesach was designed to convey to the Egyptians the exclusivity of Hashem.
Finally, the Korbon Pesach bears similarity to the Mincha (meal offering) which includes a prohibition of chametz, as commanded explicitly in Vayikra 2:11 – "Any mincha which you offer to G-d, you shall not make with chametz." The Korbon Pesach includes such a prohibition as indicated Shemot 12:19.
The Mincha, however, does not represent an independent sacrifice; rather, it is treated as a sub-section of the Olah. When the Kohanim eat the mincha, they eat it in the place where the offerings of the altar are consumed. The Torah accordingly emphasizes (6:9-10), "And the remains of it Aaron and his sons will eat, it shall be eaten as matzot in the holy place... It shall not be baked with chametz; I have given it to them as their portion of My offerings made by fire."
The element of similarity between the Korbon Pesach and the Mincha offering reflects the thought of Rashi, who views the Korbon Pesach as not only an annulment of the idolatrous beliefs of Egypt (as in the interpretation of Chizkuni, suggesting a parallel with Olah), but symbolizing positive action on the part of B’nai Yisroel in their service to HaShem. This is evidenced further in the role of the Kohanim, pre-eminent servants of HaShem, who take positive action towards their recognition of Him, by engaging in the concrete mitzvah of eating the offering.
Let us pray that we will once again be Zoche to bring the Korbon Pesach speedily in our time.
THE WEEKLY SIDRA- TZAV
Rabbi Moshe Greebel
As in all things, integrity is always the most valuable. While the world may certainly tempt us with an overabundance of desire for the wrong things, the truly noble individual will first take a moment, to think of all the possible consequences of his particular actions. It is not only the shame of being found out by others that deters one from doing wrong (although, it certainly helps)- it is that the action itself is reprehensible.
And so, if one were to summarize the proper attitude to Torah observance in twenty five words or less, he might utilize part of the following Passuk (verse) from D’varim 18:13:
“…..And you shall be innocent before HaShem…..”
Intrinsically, there is a certain noble aesthetic to one who is innocent, guiltless, pristine, and above any suspicion. Without T’mimus (innocence), all other accomplishments fade. In this week’s Sidra, we are given a most extraordinary paradigm of T’mimus, wherein Moshe made an announcement to the B’nai Yisroel, concerning the Y’mai Miluim, the days of initiation of Aharon and his sons in the Mishkan (Tabernacle), to serve as Kohanim:
“And Moshe said to the congregation, ‘This is the thing which HaShem commanded to be done.’” (Vayikra 8:5)
Regarding this Passuk, Rashi taught what Moshe was actually announcing to the B’nai Yisroel, in a very surprising way:
“The things that you see me do (the initiation of Aharon as Kohain Gadol, and his sons as Kohanim) before you, have been commanded by HaKadosh Baruch Hu to be done! Never say that I do these things for my honor, and the honor of my brother…..!”
In his text Da’as Torah, the Mashgiach of Mir (Poland), Rav Y’rucham HaLaivi Levovitz (1873-1936) of blessed memory, asked how was it even possible for the B’nai Yisroel to think that Moshe Rabbeinu had done anything without the express order of HaShem- especially when it came to the Mishkan?
In order to respond to this query, Rav Y’rucham cited the Mishna in Sh’kalim (3-2), which speaks of those who were entrusted to enter the chamber of Shekels in the Bais HaMikdash, and appropriate certain amounts of those Shekels for expenses:
“…..He who made the appropriation, did not enter the chamber wearing either a bordered cloak (in which Shekels could be hidden), or shoes, or sandals (in which the same suspicion rested), or T’fillin, or an amulet (same suspicion). Lest, if he become poor (after that), people might say that he became poor because of some iniquity committed in the chamber (an accusation). Or, lest he become wealthy, people might say that he became wealthy as a result of the appropriation (another accusation). For, it is a man’s duty to be free of blame before other men, and before HaShem, as it is stated, ‘And you shall be innocent before HaShem…..’”
Now, continued Rav Y’rucham, the prohibition to enter the Lishka (chamber) wearing T’fillin or a Kamiya (amulet), was rooted in keeping people from saying that he cut the seams, and hid Shekels therein. But in reality, this is unheard of. After all, what kind of man would actually cut the seams of his T’fillin to hide stolen Shekels from the Lishka therein? It is an implausible scenario. And yet, the Mishna forbids one to enter there, wearing his T’fillin. From here, we see how far the obligation of being innocent goes.
This Halacha (law) of the Mishna applies to everyone- even to Aharon and his sons, who were very prominent, and above any suspicions. All of this then, instructs that everything we do in this life, must be above board, and without the slightest modicum of mistrust. One who has not accomplished such an ethical level, cannot be included in the category of being innocent.
Continuing, Rav Y’rucham cited the following Passuk:
“A faithful man shall abound with blessings…..” (Mishlei 28:20)
On this Passuk, the Sh’mos Rabbah (51-1) instructs:
“…..’A faithful man’ refers to Moshe who was the confidant of HaKadosh Baruch Hu, as it says, ‘My servant Moshe is not so; he is trusted in all My house (Bamidbar 12:7)…..’ Because everything over which Moshe was appointed custodian was blessed, on account of his trustworthiness.”
Yet, Rav Y’rucham posed from the Mishna in Sh’kalim (5-2), which instructs:
“…..Nor may authority be exercised in matters of money, by less than two (officers)…..”
That is, whenever it came to monetary matters in the Bais HaMikdash, a minimum of two was needed, to insure T’mimus. How therefore, could Moshe have exercised money matters by himself?
Rav Y’rucham answered this question by saying that even though Moshe was charged by HaShem with being appointed custodian over money, Moshe nonetheless, summoned others on a constant basis to monitor and oversee all that he did. And that is why it is stated:
“This is the sum of the things of the Mishkan, of the Mishkan of Testimony, as it was counted, according to the commandment of Moshe, for the service of the L’vi’im, by the hand of Isamar, son to Aharon the Kohain.” (Sh’mos 38:21)
Rav Y’rucham concluded in the following manner. Had HaShem simply commanded Moshe to appoint a Kohain Gadol, without ever suggesting that it be Aharon, Moshe would not have been able to appoint his own brother Aharon, even though all the B’nai Yisroel knew that Aharon had no rival whatsoever, for the position of Kohain Gadol. Moshe might have been accused of nepotism, which would have been an attack on his personal T’mimus.
And, that is why Moshe stated, “This is the thing which HaShem commanded to be done.”
Let us also learn to live our lives in a state of T’mimus, where even the slightest scintilla of suspicion does not exist. Let us learn to accomplish the concept of the Mishna in Avos 3-10, in the words of Rabbi Chanina Ben Dosa:
“…..Anyone from whom the spirit of his fellow creatures derives satisfaction, the Spirit of the Omniscient One derives satisfaction (as well)……”
May we soon see the G’ulah Sh’laimah in its complete resplendency- and in our times. Good Shabbos.
* * * * *
* * * * *
To receive a free e-mail subscription to NCYI's weekly Torah Bulletin, send an email to:
NCYI Divrei Torah Sign Up
