SEDRAH SELECTIONS PARSHAS TZAV 5770 BS"D

This requires clarification. He just wrote that sacrifices do not offer atonement for intentional sins and then writes that the study of and recital of the sacrifice procedures bring atonement.

The Chasam Sofer writes that the verse teaches us the value of studying the laws of the oloh, that it provides us with atonement of an oloh, and that there is the actual offering of the oloh. The verse then goes on to say, "Hee ho'oloh al mokdoh," the study of the oloh is "al," above and greater than, "mokdoh," when it is actually placed on the pyre. "Kol halailoh," the study thereof can take place even when we experience "golus," compared to night. "Ad haboker," this replacement for the actual oloh will last until the light of the morning, the coming of Moshiach bb"o. Based on these words we see that the studying of the laws in some aspect is greater than the actual sacrifice. Extending this to atonement for intentional sin might also be included.

Another approach is also based on the Chasam Sofer on our parsha. He says that every unintentional sin has some aspect of intention or else the Torah would not require atonement for something that is done with no intention. Since the sacrifice brings forgiveness for the intentional component, albeit it is in the realm of thought only, the study thereof can also bring atonement even for a totally intentional sin.

Ch. 7, v. 13: "Al chalos lechem chomeitz" - Besides these the breads that are leavened - This is unique, that the breads are leavened, something that we do not find by other meal offerings. The Sforno explains that since we are discussing a "todoh' offering, which is brought by someone who has been saved from a life-threatening situation, it is obvious that he has fallen short in his behaviour in some way and has given in to the evil inclination, known as "s'ore sheb'isoh," the leavening agent in the dough.

Ch. 7, v. 15: "Uvsar zevach todas shlomov b'yom korbono yei'ocheil" - And the meat of the slaughtering of his thanksgiving "shlomim" on the day of its sacrifice it shall be consumed - Although a regular "shlomim" may be consumes on the day of its being offered, the following night, and the following day, the "thanksgiving shlomim" must be consumed on the day it is slaughtered and the following night. The commonly known reason for this is that this would force the owner to invite numerous others to eat along with him and he would be giving thanks for his being saved in public. The Imrei Emes offers another insight. It is unfathomable to give thanks on the following day for the kindness Hashem has bestowed upon him for the previous day. Every day there are so many things for which to thank Hashem that there is no room for yesterday's thanks today. Today requires a fresh new thanks.

Ch. 7, v. 15: "Lo yani'ach mi'menu ad boker" - He shall not leave it until the morning - This is a negative precept, and is repeated in Vayikra 22:30, "Lo sosiru mi'menu ad boker." Although a "todoh" offering is in essence a "shlomim," it differs in having a limited time span for consumption, which is also complicated by its added requirement of being accompanied by forty breads, which also have this limited time span for consumption. As just mentioned in the previous offering, this pushes the owner to have many people join him in the consumption, and in turn he will praise Hashem in public for taking him our of his dire straits. Oznayim laTorah says that this is further stressed by the Torah expressing the prohibition of leaving these items over beyond their allowable consumption time in a clear unambiguous negative statement, "lo yaniach" and "lo sosiru." By the regular "shlomim" there is likewise a prohibition to leave it over beyond the day, night, and next day, but it is expressed in a passive manner, "V'hanosor bayom hashlishi bo'aish tisrofu," and "V'hanosar mibsar ha'zovach bo'aish yiso'reif."

Ch. 7, v. 37: "Zose haTorah lo'oloh laminchoh v'lachatos " - This is the law for the elevated offering the meal offering and for the sin offering - The Tur O.Ch. says that it is proper to read daily the chapters of the offerings, the oloh and minchoh and shlomim and chatos and oshom. The Mogein Avrohom asks that this list is seemingly out of order, as the gemara says that if one brings and oloh and a chatos, the chatos should be offered first. (We might answer that the reading of all these various korbonos is not to be construed as a situation where one is responsible to offer them all, but rather, that if he is in need of any one of them then his reading should be a fulfillment of "Unshalmoh porim s'fo'seinu.") Machaneh Reuvein answers that the gemara Psochim 59b says that atonement is achieved when after the sacrifice is offered the Kohein eats the parts set aside for him, "Kohanim ochlim ubaalim miskaprim." Since we are only saying and not actually bringing these offerings the oloh is appropriately mentioned first. Even when the Beis Hamikdosh was extant, the Kohanim did not eat any of its meat, as its meat was totally consumed by the fire on the altar. This would also explain why in our verse the chatos is mentioned after the oloh, even though in practice the chatos is offered first. Our verse teaches that the study of these sacrifices accomplishes what the actual bringing does, and since there is no physical eating of the sacrifice, the study of the oloh comes first, as its atonement is complete without the Kohanim's consumption.

There seems to be a weak point in this insight, as when one studies the sacrifices' laws it includes the study of the laws of the Kohanim's consumption, and it should likewise be as if this took place. Taken literally, the statement of Chaza"l is that it is as if the offerings were brought, and there is no mention of their being eaten, so this might clarify this point.

Ch. 7, v. 37: "Zose haTorah lo'oloh laminchoh v'lachatos " - This is the law for the elevated offering the meal offering and for the sin offering - The gemara M'nochos 110a says that these words teach us that he who toils in the laws of these offerings is credited with having actually bringing them. Sova S'mochos notes that the numerical value of the first letters of all the words of this verse add up to 101. This is an allusion to the gemara's statement that one who studies and reviews 101 times is considered a true servant of Elokim, while one who does less isn't. It is only when one TOILS in these laws 101 times that it is as if he actually offered them.

Further along, the verse says, "v'lamilu'im." These were offerings that were brought during the eight days of dedication. All the other offerings mentioned in our verse have no limit, and learning their laws can be considered as if they were actually being brought. However, the days of the "milu'im" have long passed, and there is no further need for them. How can we consider it as if "milu'im' were brought? Vayichi Yoseif explains that the aspect of dedication is being stressed by "milu'im," which were brought specifically during the time of the dedication of the Mishkon. The lesson is that it is not enough to just study these laws, but to also be energized by the feeling of "b'chol yom yi'h'yu b'ei'necho kachadoshim."

Ch. 8, v. 3: "V'es kol ho'eidoh hakheil el pesach ohel mo'eid" - And all the congregation assemble at the opening to the tent of appointment - Rashi says that this is one of the places that a limited area (miraculously) contained the many. However, the Ibn Ezra says that "kol ho'eidoh" only means the tribal heads and the elders.

A GUTTEN SHABBOS KODESH. FEEL FREE TO DISTRIBUTE BY COPY OR ELECTRONICALLY.

FEEDBACK IS APPRECIATED. TO SUBSCRIBE, KINDLY SEND REQUEST TO: SHOLOM613@ROGERS.COM

See also Oroh V'Simchoh - Meshech Chochmoh on the Weekly Parsha, Chasidic Insights and Chamisha Mi Yodei'a