Save
Copy
Add to Collection
Export to Google Docs
Share- (Niphal) to be brought near, to bring, present.
- (Qal) to approach, draw near
- to come near, approach, enter into, draw near
Sacrificial laws will take up the entirety of this parsha:
God calls to Moses from the Tent of Meeting and tells him the laws of the animal and meal offerings (korbanot) brought in the Sanctuary.
There are various offerings:
• Olah (ascending) that is wholly burned by the fire on top of the altar. Represents giving everything, having entire commitment. (voluntary)
• Minchah (meal offering), of which there are 5 kinds prepared with fine flour, olive oil and frankincense put on top just before the offering is brought to the altar. (voluntary though 2:13-16 might refer to obligatory as well).
• Shelamim (complete, means wholeness) known as the offering of well-being, whose meat was eaten by the one bringing the offering {after parts are burned on the altar}, parts of which are also given to the kohanim (priests). (voluntary)
• Chatat (sin offering) brought to atone for transgressions committed unintentionally by the Kohein Gadol (High Priest) or the entire community, or an ordinary person. However 5:1, 5 says that included is withholding legal testimony (would be deliberate). Some is offered up, some eaten by Kohanim, none by people. (mandatory). Offerings may be a bull, sheep, goat, fowl or meal offering.
• Asham (guilt offering) brought a person guilty of a wrongdoing, brought chiefly by one who has misappropriated property*. the person must restore what was taken plus 20% indemnity. (* or does not report a wrong, or knowingly commits a sin, or by swearing falsely to defraud another person, or deals dishonestly). Sacrifice occurs after restoration is made. (mandatory). A ram is mandatory.
(א) וַיִּקְרָ֖א אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֑ה וַיְדַבֵּ֤ר יהוה אֵלָ֔יו מֵאֹ֥הֶל מוֹעֵ֖ד לֵאמֹֽר׃
(1) יהוה called to Moses and spoke to him from the Tent of Meeting, saying:
~From the talks of the sixth Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak Schneerson
״וַיִּקְרָא אֶל מֹשֶׁה וַיְדַבֵּר״, לָמָּה הִקְדִּים קְרִיאָה לְדִיבּוּר? לִימְּדָה תּוֹרָה דֶּרֶךְ אֶרֶץ, שֶׁלֹּא יֹאמַר אָדָם דָּבָר לַחֲבֵירוֹ אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן קוֹרֵהוּ. מְסַיַּיע לֵיהּ לְרַבִּי חֲנִינָא. דְּאָמַר רַבִּי חֲנִינָא: לֹא יֹאמַר אָדָם דָּבָר לַחֲבֵירוֹ אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן קוֹרֵהוּ. ״לֵאמֹר״, אָמַר רַבִּי (מוּסְיָא בַּר בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי מַסְיָא מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי מוּסְיָא) רַבָּה: מִנַּיִין לָאוֹמֵר דָּבָר לַחֲבֵירוֹ שֶׁהוּא בְּבַל יֹאמַר עַד שֶׁיֹּאמַר לוֹ: לֵךְ אֱמוֹר — שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וַיְדַבֵּר יהוה אֵלָיו מֵאֹהֶל מוֹעֵד לֵאמֹר״.
The verse says: “And He called unto Moses, and the Lord spoke unto him from within the Tent of Meeting, saying” (Leviticus 1:1). Why does the verse mention calling before speaking, and God did not speak to him at the outset? The Torah is teaching etiquette: A person should not say anything to another unless he calls him first. This supports the opinion of Rabbi Ḥanina, as Rabbi Ḥanina said: A person should not say anything to another unless he calls him first. With regard to the term concluding the verse: “Saying,” Rabbi Musya, grandson of Rabbi Masya, said in the name of Rabbi Musya the Great: From where is it derived with regard to one who tells another some matter, that it is incumbent upon the latter not to say it to others until the former explicitly says to him: Go and tell others? As it is stated: “And the Lord spoke to him from within the Tent of Meeting, saying [lemor].”Lemor is a contraction of lo emor, meaning: Do not say. One must be given permission before transmitting information.
- Word for Mashiach משיח is the same letters as the word for Mesiach משיח ….one who converses
- Moshiach’s chief concern will be teaching people how to speak to HaShem. ~ Rabbi Shalom Arush, translated by Rabbi Lazer Brody
(ב) דַּבֵּ֞ר אֶל־בְּנֵ֤י יִשְׂרָאֵל֙ וְאָמַרְתָּ֣ אֲלֵהֶ֔ם אָדָ֗ם כִּֽי־יַקְרִ֥יב מִכֶּ֛ם קׇרְבָּ֖ן לַֽיהוה מִן־הַבְּהֵמָ֗ה מִן־הַבָּקָר֙ וּמִן־הַצֹּ֔אן תַּקְרִ֖יבוּ אֶת־קׇרְבַּנְכֶֽם׃
(2) Speak to the Israelite people, and say to them: When any of you presents an offering of cattle to יהוה: You shall choose your offering from the herd or from the flock.
The essence of sacrifice, said Rabbi Shneur Zalman, is that we offer ourselves. We bring to God our faculties, our energies, our thoughts and emotions. The physical form of sacrifice – an animal offered on the altar – is only an external manifestation of an inner act. The real sacrifice is mikem, “of you.” We give God something of ourselves.
(ד) וְסָמַ֣ךְ יָד֔וֹ עַ֖ל רֹ֣אשׁ הָעֹלָ֑ה וְנִרְצָ֥ה ל֖וֹ לְכַפֵּ֥ר עָלָֽיו׃
(4)You shall lay a hand upon the head of the burnt offering, that it may be acceptable in your behalf, in expiation for you.
(א)וְנֶ֗פֶשׁ כִּֽי־תַקְרִ֞יב קׇרְבַּ֤ן מִנְחָה֙ לַֽיהוה סֹ֖לֶת יִהְיֶ֣ה קׇרְבָּנ֑וֹ וְיָצַ֤ק עָלֶ֙יהָ֙ שֶׁ֔מֶן וְנָתַ֥ן עָלֶ֖יהָ לְבֹנָֽה׃
(1) When a person presents an offering of meal to יהוה: The offering shall be of choice flour; the offerer shall pour oil upon it, lay frankincense on it,
Why is the meal offering distinguished in that the expression “soul” is used? Because G‑d says: “Who is it that usually brings a meal offering? It is the poor man. I account it as though he had offered his own soul to Me.”
Why is the meal offering distinguished in that five kinds of oil dishes are stated in connection with it? This can be likened to the case of a human king for whom his friend had prepared a feast. The king knew that his friend was poor [and had only one food to offer him], so he said to him: “Prepare it for me in five kinds of dishes, so that I will derive pleasure from you.” ~Talmud, Menachot 104b
וְאִ֨ם כָּל־עֲדַ֤ת יִשְׂרָאֵל֙ יִשְׁגּ֔וּ וְנֶעְלַ֣ם דָּבָ֔ר מֵעֵינֵ֖י הַקָּהָ֑ל וְ֠עָשׂוּ אַחַ֨ת מִכָּל־מִצְוֺ֧ת יהוה אֲשֶׁ֥ר לֹא־תֵעָשֶׂ֖ינָה וְאָשֵֽׁמוּ׃
If it is the whole community of Israel that has erred and the matter escapes the notice of the congregation, so that they do any of the things which by the LORD’s commandments ought not to be done, and they realize their guilt—
(כב)אֲשֶׁ֥ר נָשִׂ֖יא יֶֽחֱטָ֑א וְעָשָׂ֡ה אַחַ֣ת מִכׇּל־מִצְוֺת֩ יהוה אֱלֹהָ֜יו אֲשֶׁ֧ר לֹא־תֵעָשֶׂ֛ינָה בִּשְׁגָגָ֖ה וְאָשֵֽׁם׃
(22)In case it is a chieftain who incurs guilt by doing unwittingly any of the things which by the commandment of his God יהוה ought not to be done, and he realizes guilt—
וְנֶ֣פֶשׁ כִּֽי־תֶחֱטָ֗א וְשָֽׁמְעָה֙ ק֣וֹל אָלָ֔ה וְה֣וּא עֵ֔ד א֥וֹ רָאָ֖ה א֣וֹ יָדָ֑ע אִם־ל֥וֹא יַגִּ֖יד וְנָשָׂ֥א עֲוֺנֽוֹ׃ א֣וֹ נֶ֗פֶשׁ אֲשֶׁ֣ר תִּגַּע֮ בְּכָל־דָּבָ֣ר טָמֵא֒ אוֹ֩ בְנִבְלַ֨ת חַיָּ֜ה טְמֵאָ֗ה א֤וֹ בְּנִבְלַת֙ בְּהֵמָ֣ה טְמֵאָ֔ה א֕וֹ בְּנִבְלַ֖ת שֶׁ֣רֶץ טָמֵ֑א וְנֶעְלַ֣ם מִמֶּ֔נּוּ וְה֥וּא טָמֵ֖א וְאָשֵֽׁם׃ א֣וֹ כִ֤י יִגַּע֙ בְּטֻמְאַ֣ת אָדָ֔ם לְכֹל֙ טֻמְאָת֔וֹ אֲשֶׁ֥ר יִטְמָ֖א בָּ֑הּ וְנֶעְלַ֣ם מִמֶּ֔נּוּ וְה֥וּא יָדַ֖ע וְאָשֵֽׁם׃ א֣וֹ נֶ֡פֶשׁ כִּ֣י תִשָּׁבַע֩ לְבַטֵּ֨א בִשְׂפָתַ֜יִם לְהָרַ֣ע ׀ א֣וֹ לְהֵיטִ֗יב לְ֠כֹל אֲשֶׁ֨ר יְבַטֵּ֧א הָאָדָ֛ם בִּשְׁבֻעָ֖ה וְנֶעְלַ֣ם מִמֶּ֑נּוּ וְהוּא־יָדַ֥ע וְאָשֵׁ֖ם לְאַחַ֥ת מֵאֵֽלֶּה׃ וְהָיָ֥ה כִֽי־יֶאְשַׁ֖ם לְאַחַ֣ת מֵאֵ֑לֶּה וְהִ֨תְוַדָּ֔ה אֲשֶׁ֥ר חָטָ֖א עָלֶֽיהָ׃
If a person incurs guilt— When he has heard a public imprecation and—although able to testify as one who has either seen or learned of the matter—he does not give information, so that he is subject to punishment; Or when a person touches any unclean thing—be it the carcass of an unclean beast or the carcass of unclean cattle or the carcass of an unclean creeping thing—and the fact has escaped him, and then, being unclean, he realizes his guilt; Or when he touches human uncleanness—any such uncleanness whereby one becomes unclean—and, though he has known it, the fact has escaped him, but later he realizes his guilt; Or when a person utters an oath to bad or good purpose—whatever a man may utter in an oath—and, though he has known it, the fact has escaped him, but later he realizes his guilt in any of these matters— when he realizes his guilt in any of these matters, he shall confess that wherein he has sinned.
"Well which do you think is more moral? Doing a sacred ritual and dealing with God every time you kill an animal for its meat, or anonymously shoving millions of animals into crowded pens and cages so that they’re growing up in their own feces on factory farms, and filling the animals up with drugs . . . and then cutting up their body parts, shrink wrapping them in plastic and lining the walls of grocery store refrigerator cases with a horror show of dead animal parts from factory farms while you and your parents stand there talking about soccer?"
Maurice D. Harris, Leviticus: You Have No Idea, p.36 [as quoted in S. Tamar Kamionkowski: Leviticus]
וְאִם־לֹ֨א תַגִּ֣יע יָדוֹ֮ דֵּ֣י שֶׂה֒ וְהֵבִ֨יא אֶת־אֲשָׁמ֜וֹ אֲשֶׁ֣ר חָטָ֗א שְׁתֵּ֥י תֹרִ֛ים אֽוֹ־שְׁנֵ֥י בְנֵֽי־יוֹנָ֖ה לַֽיהוה אֶחָ֥ד לְחַטָּ֖את וְאֶחָ֥ד לְעֹלָֽה׃
But if his means do not suffice for a sheep, he shall bring to the LORD, as his penalty for that of which he is guilty, two turtledoves or two pigeons, one for a sin offering and the other for a burnt offering.
וְאִם־לֹא֩ תַשִּׂ֨יג יָד֜וֹ לִשְׁתֵּ֣י תֹרִ֗ים אוֹ֮ לִשְׁנֵ֣י בְנֵי־יוֹנָה֒ וְהֵבִ֨יא אֶת־קָרְבָּנ֜וֹ אֲשֶׁ֣ר חָטָ֗א עֲשִׂירִ֧ת הָאֵפָ֛ה סֹ֖לֶת לְחַטָּ֑את לֹא־יָשִׂ֨ים עָלֶ֜יהָ שֶׁ֗מֶן וְלֹא־יִתֵּ֤ן עָלֶ֙יהָ֙ לְבֹנָ֔ה כִּ֥י חַטָּ֖את הִֽיא׃
And if his means do not suffice for two turtledoves or two pigeons, he shall bring as his offering for that of which he is guilty a tenth of an ephah of choice flour for a sin offering; he shall not add oil to it or lay frankincense on it, for it is a sin offering.
וְכִפֶּ֨ר עָלָ֧יו הַכֹּהֵ֛ן לִפְנֵ֥י יהוה וְנִסְלַ֣ח ל֑וֹ עַל־אַחַ֛ת מִכֹּ֥ל אֲשֶֽׁר־יַעֲשֶׂ֖ה לְאַשְׁמָ֥ה בָֽהּ׃ (פ)
The priest shall make expiation on his behalf before the LORD, and he shall be forgiven for whatever he may have done to draw blame thereby.
§ The Gemara cites similar interpretations of verses: Reish Lakish said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “This is the law [torah] of the burnt offering, of the meal offering, and of the sin offering, and of the guilt offering, and of the consecration offering, and of the sacrifice of peace offerings” (Leviticus 7:37)? This teaches that anyone who engages in Torah study is considered as though he sacrificed a burnt offering, a meal offering, a sin offering, and a guilt offering.Rava said an objection to this interpretation: This verse states: “Of the burnt offering, of the meal offering.” If the interpretation of Reish Lakish is correct, the verse should have written: “Burnt offering and meal offering.” Rather, Rava says that the correct interpretation of this verse is: Anyone who engages in Torah study need not bring a burnt offering, nor a sin offering, nor a meal offering, nor a guilt offering.
Furthermore, it is said of a large ox, ‘An offering made by fire of a sweet savour’; of a small bird, ‘An offering made by fire of a sweet savour’; and of a meal-offering, ‘An offering made by fire of a sweet savour’: to teach you that it is the same whether one offers much or little, so long as he directs his heart to heaven. And lest you say, God needs it for food, the text therefore states (Psalms 50:12), If I were hungry, I would not tell you; for the world is Mine and the fullness thereof. And it also says (Psalms 50:10), For every beast of the forest is Mine, and the cattle upon a thousand hills. I know all the fowls of the mountains; and the wild beasts of the field are mine. Do I eat the flesh of bulls, or drink the blood of goats? I did not tell you to sacrifice so that you should say, I will do God's will that God will do my will. You do not sacrifice for My sake, but for your own sakes, as it is written (Lev. 19:5), At your will shall you sacrifice it.
Another interpretation is: ‘At your will shall you sacrifice it.’: sacrifice it of your own free will, sacrifice it with the proper intention.
גמ׳ אמר ר' זירא מאי קראה (קהלת ה, יא) מתוקה שנת העובד אם מעט ואם הרבה יאכל
The repetitive language employed concerning all of these different offerings is to say to you that one who brings a substantial offering and one who brings a meager offering have equal merit, provided that he directs his heart toward Heaven.
רב אדא בר אהבה אמר מהכא (קהלת ה, י) ברבות הטובה רבו אוכליה ומה כשרון לבעליו:
One who brings a substantial offering, who thereby increases the number of priests who partake of it, does not have more merit than one who brings a meager offering. Rather, the offering that God desires is one where He recognizes, i.e., “seeing them with His eyes,” that its owner has the proper intent.
ושמא תאמר לאכילה הוא צריך תלמוד לאמר (תהלים נ, יב) אם ארעב לא אומר לך כי לי תבל ומלואה ונאמר (תהלים נ, י) כי לי כל חיתו יער בהמות בהררי אלף ידעתי כל עוף הרים וזיז שדי עמדי האוכל בשר אבירים ודם עתודים אשתה לא אמרתי אליכם זבחו כדי שתאמר אעשה רצונו ויעשה רצוני לא לרצוני אתם זובחים אלא לרצונכם אתם זובחים שנאמר (ויקרא יט, ה) לרצונכם תזבחהו דבר אחר לרצונכם תזבחהו לרצונכם זבחו לדעתכם זבחו כדבעא מיניה שמואל מרב הונא מנין למתעסק בקדשים שהוא פסול שנאמר ושחט את בן הבקר שתהא שחיטה לשם בן בקר
And lest you say that God needs these offerings for consumption, in which case a larger offering would be preferable to a smaller one, the verse states: “If I were hungry, I would not tell you; for the world is Mine, and everything within it” (Psalms 50:12). And it is stated: “For every beast of the forest is Mine, and the cattle upon a thousand hills. I know all the fowls of the mountains; and the wild beasts of the field are Mine” (Psalms 50:10–11). Similarly, it is stated in the following verse: “Do I eat the flesh of bulls, or drink the blood of goats?” (Psalms 50:13). I did not say to you: Sacrifice offerings to me, so that you will say: I will do His will, i.e., fulfill His needs, and He will do my will. You are not sacrificing to fulfill My will, i.e., My needs, but you are sacrificing to fulfill your will, i.e., your needs, in order to achieve atonement for your sins by observing My mitzvot, as it is stated: “And when you sacrifice an offering of peace offerings to the Lord, you shall sacrifice it so that you may be accepted” (Leviticus 19:5). Alternatively, the verse: “And when you sacrifice an offering of peace offerings to the Lord, you shall sacrifice it so that you may be accepted [lirtzonkhem]” (Leviticus 19:5), can be interpreted differently: Sacrifice willingly [lirtzonkhem]; sacrifice intentionally, in the form of purposeful action.
(ט) לומר ואנחנו לא נדע - לפי שהתפללנו בכל ענין שיוכל אדם להתפלל בישיבה ובעמידה ובנפילת אפים כמו שעשה משה רבינו ע"ה שנא' ואשב בהר וגו' ואנכי עמדתי בהר וגו' ואתנפל לפני יהוה וגו' ומאחר שאין בנו כח להתפלל בע"א אנו אומרים ואנחנו לא נדע מה נעשה וכו' וראוי לומר ואנחנו לא נדע בישיבה מה נעשה בעמידה (של"ה ואחרונים):
Since we prayed in every way that a person can pray - by sitting, standing, and falling onto our faces - just like Moses our Teacher (of blessed memory) did, as the Torah says: "I sat on the mountain for 40 days" (Deut. 9:9) and "I stood on the mountain as I did the first time" (Deut. 10:10) and "I threw myself down before the Lord" (Deut. 9:18)...
השלישית, להראות אסירת חושיו ובטול הרגשותיו, והוא כי הנופל על פניו מכסה עיניו וסותם פיו והוא מסכים במחשבתו שאינו רואה נזקו ותועלתו ואינו יודע דרכו ועניניו ואין בידו להפיק רצונו אם אין הקב"ה מסכים על ידו וכענין שכתוב (ירמיה י) כי לא לאדם דרכו, וכאלו הרגשותיו בטלות ואסורות ממצוא חפצו, ועיניו ושפתיו מסותמין לא יוכל לראות ולדבר כי אם בהפקת רצון הש"י, וזה דוגמת מה שמסכים עם לבו בכוון רגליו בתפלה כאלו רגליו כבולים, אין חפצו תלוי בעצמו.
והנה האומות מראים הכונה הזאת בכוון הידים בבקשת תחנונים, והן עצמן אינן יודעין למה הורגלו בכך. והטעם בזה הוא להראות בטול כח עצמו כאלו ידיו אסורות והוא מוסר אותו למי שמתחנן אליו, ולפי שתנועת הרגלים גדולה מתנועת הידים לקרב תועלתו ולדחות נזקו, לכך נהגנו בכוון הרגליים ולא הידים.
The third element in “falling on one’s face” during prayers of entreaties is the utter denial of self, surrendering oneself to the mercy of G’d at the expense of what we usually call one’s own personality, one’s ego. A person becomes so engrossed in his prayer that he closes his eyes, is blind to his surroundings and totally oblivious of any danger that might face him while he was so indifferent to his physical surroundings. Such a person acknowledges at such a time that he is completely unable to chart a course unless he receives guidance from G’d. This is described in Jeremiah 10,23 as כי לא לאדם דרכו, “I know, O Lord it is not up to man to choose his road, that man as he walks cannot direct his own steps.”......****
