CHAMISHOH MI YODEI'A - FIVE QUESTIONS ON THE WEEKLY SEDRAH - PARSHAS SHMINI 5766 - BS"D

2) Ch. 9, v. 7: "Krav el hamizbei'ach" - Rashi says that Aharon was embarrassed and afraid to come to the altar and officiate. Moshe responded, "Why are you embarrassed? 'L'KACH nivcharto,' - For THIS you were chosen." What is the antecedent of FOR THIS?

3) Ch. 10, v. 1,2: "Asher lo tzivoh osom, va'yomusu" - List all the different explanations of the sin of Nodov and Avihu based on Chaza"l that you know.

4) Ch. 11, v. 3: "Kole mafreses parsoh v'shosaas shesa prosos maalas geiroh bab'heimoh osoh tocheilu" - Which species both chews its cud and has totally split hooves, and is still forbidden to eat? It is a "b'feirishe" verse in the Torah.

5) Ch. 11, v.16: "Bas ha'yaanoh" - Why is the "BAS" mentioned?

Answer to questions on parshas Tzav:

1) Ch. 6, v. 2: "Tzav es Aharon" - Throughout parshas Vayikra the commands were directed to the CHILDREN of Aharon and not to Aharon himself. This is the first place where the commands were directed to Aharon. Why not earlier?

1) The Baal Haturim on 1:5 says that Aharon was being spurned in parshas Vayikroh because of his involvement in the sin of the golden calf. He prayed to Hashem for forgiveness and the priestly mitzvos of this parshas were directed to him. The Toras Kohanim (7:1) says that Moshe prayed for Aharon's forgiveness, saying that it was improper for one to love the water of the wellspring (one's progeny) and hate the wellspring itself (the parent). As well You have given honour to the tree by the virtue of its fruit. Since oil and wine are used as libations on the altar, You have prohibited using olive trees and grapevines as fuel for the altar fire.

2) Although addressing a different point, the words of the Ramban seem to offer an answer as well. He asks why the command in Vayikra is to the bnei Yisroel (1:2), and in our parsha to Aharon. He answers that parshas Vayikra is targeting the people who bring their sacrifices, and incidentally tells us what the Kohanim will do with the sacrifices. Our parsha tells the Kohanim what to do with the sacrifices. Hence Aharon is mentioned as soon as there is a command to the Kohanim.

3) Rabbi Yonoson Eibeschitz in Divrei Y'honoson answers with the words of the M.R. Bmidbar 9:5. It is of the opinion that the bnei Yisroel only sacrificed the daily Korban Tomid offerings (communal offerings) in the desert. This is supported by the verse in Omos 5:25, "Hazvochim u'minchoh higashtem Li bamidbor," - have you then sacrificed for Me slaughterings and meal offerings in the desert?

Parshas Vayikra discusses the Olas Minchoh, Olas N'dovoh, Shlomim, Chatos, and Oshom offerings. None of these were brought in the desert. Aharon would not enter Eretz Yisroel. His descendants, however, would. They could process the sacrificial offerings mentioned in parshas Vayikra, so the command was to the "bnei Aharon." Our parsha begins with the laws of the daily Olas Tomid, which was sacrificed even in the desert. Hence the command was also to Aharon.

2) Ch. 6, v. 2: "Tzav es Aharon" - Rashi (Toras Kohanim 6:1) says in the name of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai that the word TZAV is used here to indicate alacrity. Great zeal is required where there is "chisorone kis," financial loss. Why is there more "chisorone kis" by an "oloh" than any other offering?

1) If the "oloh" offering is not processed properly it will amount to a total loss and a new sacrifice will have to be brought, causing the donour a financial loss. (Chizkuni)

2) Since almost the complete body of the "oloh" is burned on the altar, it involves Kohanim being awake all night to see that it is properly burned. They were therefore not able to function well by day and this caused them financial loss. (Paa'nei'ach Rozo)

3) Although there were no wages given for the actual service in the Mikdosh, for staying up at night to process the burning of the "oloh" wages were paid, hence "chisorone kis." (Rabbi Yitzchok Katz, son-in-law of the Mahara"l of Prague)

4) The Ramban says that our verse refers to the sacrifice of "minchas chavitin," the daily flour offering of the Kohein Godol that is mentioned later in verse 13, "Zose minchas Aharon uvonov." There is a large financial cost to offer daily flour offerings for every day of the year. One might question that there is no real out of pocket cost for the Kohein Godol, as he receives grain from the bnei Yisroel in different forms of tithing. However, our verse is telling Moshe to tell Aharon about his requirement to bring this offering. In the desert the bnei Yisroel were not agriculturalists. Grain and oil had to be bought from people who braved the elements of the desert to sell to the bnei Yisroel. No doubt, the price for these items in the desolate desert was quite high, hence the great out of pocket expense. (Ksav Sofer in the name of his father the Chasam Sofer)

5) In the M.R. 7:3 Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai himself says that the "oloh" sacrifice atones for thoughts of sinning. The organs of the body that serve as portals to allow for matters to enter the body have covers. For example, ears allow sound to enter the body. The gemara K'subos 5a-b says that Hashem created ear lobes as a guard to allow one to plug his ears to stop loshon hora from entering. Similarly, the eyes have lids, the nostrils can be pinched close, and the mouth even has two guards, the teeth and the lips. However, the mind has no protective cover. Rabbi Shimon is telling us that greater care must be taken regarding that which the "oloh" atones, improper thoughts, as the mind has a "chisorone kis," it lacks a protective cover. (Chidushei hoRI"M)

6) Very holy acts require a "cover-up" to make them seem less holy so that the evil forces will not exert great efforts to thwart them. (This is mentioned in the Holy Zohar parshas P'ku'dei page 237 regarding the mitzvoh of tefillin.) Other sacrifices have parts eaten by either the Kohanim or the owners, or both. This physical eating is their "cover-up." However, an "oloh"sacrifice is totally consumed on the altar and has no "cover-up." This is a "chisorone kis" and therefore requires having it processed with great care. (Chidushei hoRI"M)

7) Rashi actually predicates the statement of Rabbi Shimon by saying that TZAV indicates something that applies immediately and for generations. The gemara M'nochos 110a says that we derive from the words "toras ho'oloh" that one who studies the laws of the "oloh" is considered as if he has brought an "oloh" sacrifice. This has a very practical application when the Beis Hamikdosh is no longer existent, as sacrifices cannot be offered. However, even when the Beis Hamikdosh stood, one who was so destitute that he could not even afford a meal offering could study its laws and it would be considered as if he had brought it, since he could not afford to bring it. This is the intention of the verse in Psalms 119:92, "Lu'lei soro'cho shaashu'oy oz ovadti v'on'yi," if not for the possibility to learn the laws of your Torah regarding sacrifices, then I would have been lost in my destitution, when I was very poor.

This is the intention of Rashi when he says "immediately and for all generations." The learning of the laws of sacrifices applies immediately for a person who is destitute, even when the Beis Hamikdosh exists, as Rabbi Shimon said, "Extra alacrity is required when there is a lack of funds, 'chisorone kis,'" and for all later generations, for all people when there is no Beis Hamikdosh. (Ir Dovid)

8) As mentioned earlier the gemara M'nochos 110a says that we derive from the words "toras ho'oloh" that one who studies the laws of the "oloh" is considered as if he has brought an "oloh" sacrifice. Thus we see that our verse refers to the study of Torah. The gemara N'dorim 81a says "Be careful with the children of poor people, because from these children Torah will emerge." The Ra"N explains that this is so because they have no other activity besides the study of Torah, and because they are from poor families they are humble. This is the intention of Rabbi Shimon. Be very careful regarding "toras ho'oloh," the study of Torah, where there is a lack of funds - "chisorone kis," by the children of poor people, because from them the Torah will emerge. (The Holy Admor of Satmar)

9) The gemara Kidushin 31a says that one who is commanded and fulfills is greater than one who does so voluntarily. Tosfos d.h. "godol" explains that once a person is COMMANDED to do, his evil inclination pushes him to not fulfill the mitzvoh. Thus where there is TZAV, a command to do, there is need for greater care. (Kiflayim L'soshioh)

3) Ch. 6, v. 3: "V'lovash haKohein mido vad" - The gemara P'sochim 65b and Z'vochim 35a derives from the word "mido" that the priestly vestments must be "k'midoso," a custom fit for the Kohein. Why is this pointed out here, and not earlier in parshas T'za'veh by the creation of the garments?

Horav Betzalel haKohein of Vilna answers that in parshas T'za'veh the verses discuss the vestments which include the avneit (sash). If the Kohein's eifode or m'il were too long, this could be adjusted by having them lifted and kept in place with the avneit. The gemara Z'vochim 18b says that the avneit holding the other garments in place at their appropriate size is considered as if the avneit has cut off the excess, "meigiz gei'iz." So even if some of the garments aren't a true custom fit, there is a way to compensate. Therefore the Torah does not mention the rule of "k'midoso" in parshas T'za'veh. Our verse discusses the Kohein wearing his garments for the service of removal of ash from the altar, "haromas hadeshen." During this service the Kohein only wore two garments, and did not wear the avneit (gemara Yoma 23b). Therefore it is absolutely necessary for him to wear these garments "k'midoso," exactly his size, as there is no way to compensate for a garment that is too long. That is why it is mentioned here.

4) Ch. 6, v. 10: "Kodesh kodoshim hee kachatos v'cho'oshom - Why do all "minchoh" offerings including voluntary donations have the status of "kodshei kodoshim," while "shlomim" offerings, which are also voluntary only have the status of "kodoshim kalim," a lower level of sacrificial sanctity?

The Abarbanel answers that this is due to the fact that "minchoh" offerings are given by a poor person. Even a voluntary offering that is given by a person for whom it is financially difficult is very dear to Hashem and therefore has the elevated status of "kodesh kodoshim."

He adds that the reason all sacrifices brought to bring about atonements also enjoy the status of "kodshei kodoshim" is because the one who offers the sacrifice is involved in an act of repentance. This is also very dear to Hashem and the sacrifice offered by such a person is given an elevated status.

5) Ch. 7, v. 11: "V'zose toras zevach haShlomim ASHER YAKRIV LASHEM" - Earlier by the "chatos" offering (6:18) the words ASHER YAKRIV LASHEM do not appear. Why?

1) The Nachal K'dumim, Ponim Yofos, and Kli Yokor explain that when one brings a "chatos" offering to atonement for his sin, he must realize that Hashem is angry with him for sinning, even unintentionally. The offering is sent through an intermediary, the Kohein. Thus the words ASHER YAKRIV do not appear, as one must be conscious of the go-between that distances him from Hashem.

A "shlomim" sacrifice is offered voluntarily, as a present. The donour may feel as if he is giving to Hashem directly. This is further pointed out by the words "Yodov t'vi'enoh" (7:30), the donour lends his hands in the "t'nufoh" procedure. 2) Perhaps we can say that since the donour himself receives the majority of the meat of the "shlomim" the Torah wants to remind him to have in mind that the animal is sanctified to Hashem, ASHER YAKRIV LA'SHEM. (Nirreh li)

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

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

See also Sedrah Selections, Oroh V'Simchoh - Meshech Chochmoh on the Weekly Parsha and Chasidic Insights