|
Parasha
No. 29
Ahare Mot: “after
the death”
Vayikra (Leviticus)
16,1 - 18,30
|
| First
level
Plan
- Mitzvot and themes
- Function
- The Jewish method of study
- Death of Aharon’s son
- First approach
- Second approach
- Role of Aharon
- Positive interpretations
- Connecting the different approaches
- The lesson that ensues
- Limitless love
- A teaching for everyone
- Confronting failure with silence
- Conclusion
- Rules of caution
- Humility
Second level
The second level: “the
death of love” is treated in my poems
and derives from the Shla’s view
of death as an integral part of the process
of growth.
|
- Listen to the parasha
(Ort link)
- Teamim Ashkenazim
- Listen to the parasha
(Alliance link)
- teamim Sepaharadim
- Listen to the haftara
(Ort link)
- How to understand these
teachings
- Halakha: Jewish laws
on death
|
First level
Mitzvot and Themes
Mitzvot nos. 185 to 212 are found
in parasha Ahare Mot.
- They relate to the law forbidding
the High Priest, the Cohen Gadol, from entering
the Holy of Holies whenever he wishes.
The parasha is named “after
the death” because it describes the fate
of the children of Aharon who went towards Hashem
and perished.
Rashi demonstrates that these two
factors (death and entry into a specific place)
are connected (ma talmud lomar..ke derekh shemei
ploni, ze zerzo yoter min ha rishon, lekhakh beemar
ahare mot shenebene aharon, so that you will not
die in the way x died). We shall be studying the
connection between the two.
- The subsequent mitzvot describe
the sacrifices which must be made on Yom Kippur,
the place for the sacrifices of animals, the laws
governing their blood, the prohibition against
marriage between family members in order to avoid
incest, the prohibition against male homosexuality,
and prohibition against sexual relations between
women and animals.
Function
It is important to note that this
parasha connects all the aspects of the role of
the High Priest, which is to repair the harm caused
by Adam, with the commandments of holiness that
apply to every member of the Jewish people.
The Jewish method of study
This consists in asking questions
about anomalies in the text, for this is how important
meanings are discovered and passed on. Thus the
question here is: why are the mitzvot in this
parasha introduced with the story of the death
of Aharon’s sons?
The death of Aharon’s sons
There are three different commentaries
on this episode.
Rashi, in his commentary on parahsa
Tsav (7,1) and parasha Shemini (10,1) presented
various interpretations drawn from Middrash Rabba
and Torat Cohanim, which are as follows:
- some believe the text offers
moral lessons on human conduct, which act as warnings;
- others criticize Aharon;
- others praise the actions of Aharon’s sons.
It is important to connect these
different approaches in order to understand the
full meaning of the text. This is what Rashi does
when he presents various commentaries and states
“davar aher” – he is urging us
to seek to discover the overall meaning of a text
that has various meanings.
We shall see that this approach
will enable us to draw an important teaching,
which will be based on the commentaries of the
Shla Hakadosh.
First approach
The first approach of commentators
is to view the death of Nadab and Abihu (the sons
of Aharon) as the consequence of a sin on their
part.
They died for various reasons:
- because they each took a censer
and put fire and incense in them in an unauthorized
manner;
- because they offered a “strange fire”
(esh zara) unto Hashem;
- because they did this in a place (the Sanctuary)
and time which were inappropriate and without
having being commanded to do so (cf Vayikra ch.
10, in parasha Shemini);
- because they taught a rule of halakha (holy
law) in a place where they were not allowed to
do so (Tractate Eruvin 63);
- because they appropriated the role of their
father;
- only Moses was allowed to enter the Sanctuary
whenever he wished. Aharon could enter at certain
times, but not his sons who could not take the
place of their elders;
- because they entered the Sanctuary under the
influence of wine or liquor;
- the motive for their action was based on the
feminine midda (quality) of justice and not on
the desire to dedicate the sacrifice to Hashem’s
mercifulness.
Second approach
The second approach recognizes
the importance of these sins and that they constitute
a solemn warning, but maintains that they do not
explain the part played by Aharon himself, nor
the positive terms with which the Torah describes
his sons.
Analysis of Aharon’s role
The two sons who perish in this
tragic episode are not called by their names “Nadab
and Abihu” but are called the “sons
of Aharon.” This tells us that we should
seek meaning in the filial relationship. This
is probably an allusion (remez) to a father’s
responsibility in guiding his children, and is
similar to the teachings drawn from the episode
of the golden calf. Moshe states explicitly in
Devarim 9, 20: “uveAharon hiteanaf Hashem
meod le Hashemiso veetpallel gam baad Aharon,
and Hashem was very angry with Aharon to have
destroyed him; and I prayed for Aharon also the
same time.”
Rashi tells us that Moshe’s
prayer succeeded only in saving two of the four
sons. Aharon’s responsibility is based on
the second commandment in Shemot 20, 5: poked
avon avot al banim, I am a jealous God, visiting
the iniquity of the fathers upon the children..”
Tractate Yoma 87 a elaborates on this.
Positive interpretations
We shall now try to understand
the above, with the help of the Shla and his examination
of the different commentaries through the traditional
method of analyzing similar words which used in
different contexts.
The Shla stresses that the positive
term “sacrifice” is used in the Torah
in relation to the deaths of Nadab and Abihu.
In a similar vein, the end of parasha
Tsav (8,6) states that Moshe “approached”
or “sacrificed” Aharon and his sons
(vayakrev Moshe et Aharon vet banav) ; the sons
therefore act as a sacrifice, in the same way
as Yitzhak was offered as a sacrifice by Abraham.
These men thus ceased to be strangers (zarim)
to Hashem. Tradition says that they contributed
to the “reparation” (tikkun) of Adam
and humanity. Indeed, this connection is suggested
by the use of the same word at the beginning of
Vayikra (1,2) to describe Adam: “adam ki
yakriv mikem, when any man-adam of you bringeth
an offering..”
One should note too that
the text describes the episode of the two sons
in the same terms as when it describes the consummation
by fire of the sacrificed animals: it is a fire
which devours (10,2 vatetse esh milifne hashem
va tokhal otam), sacrifice (16,1: ahare mot shnei
bene Aharon bekorvatam lifne hashem vayamutu,
after the death of the two sons of Aharon, when
they drew near before Hashem and died).
It is clear from the text
that Aharon and his sons were both the ones making
the sacrifice and the victims.
We can conclude that Aharon’s
sons died in a relationship of “sacrifice.”
The use of the words “when they drew near
(sacrificed), bekorvatam lifnei Hashem” stresses
the fact that this was not only an act of sacrifice
but that it was a sacrifice of intense proximity
to Hashem or of too great proximity to Him.
Other facts reinforce this view:
- this episode introduces
the section on the Yom Kippur rite, the solemn
day when the people acknowledge their sins, sacrifice
themselves and place their sins on an animal which
is sacrificed (seir le azazel, the scapegoat).
- Moshe himself speaks of Nadab and Abihu with
praise when he recounts their death to Aharon;
- the Zohar (III, 58b) notes that they are not
described as “having perished from among
the assembly” as was said of Korah in Bemidbar
16, 33 (veyovedu mi tokh hakahal), deducing from
this that their bodies disappeared but not their
souls (neshama).
- Nadab and Abihu are also praised in words taken
from the Psalms: “the death of those who
love is precious in the eyes of Hashem.”
The Zohar also describes their story in a play
on words from the Song of Songs 1, 3: alamot ahevukha,
al-amot, the young girls love you, to the death.
Connecting the two approaches
It is important to take into
account both these approaches to the text (it
is a warning and a praise)
in order to discover the message which the Torah
wishes to convey before it teaches us the rites
we need to carry out in order to become kedoshim,
holy.
The Torah raises an important question:
if our connection to Hashem is one of life, and
the sons of Aharon carried out a sacrifice and
drew near to Hashem as required, did they perish
because they sinned or because of their over-zealousness?
On the surface ( nigla), they perished
because they taught a halakha in the Sanctuary
at an inappropriate time (Tractate Eruvin 63)
or because they did not respect all the laws regarding
holiness. However, the Zohar shows us that the
true meaning is not that they transgressed, but
that they committed an ierror of judgment,
for there are places and times when an action
must adhere strictly to the law, and there are
those when Rahamim (mercy) governs. There are
times when Hashem is near (Psalm 145,18) and times
when He is far (Yermiyahu, Jeremiah 31, 2) Nadab
and Abihu, unlike their father, did not fully
know the laws and secrets governing places and
time.
This is also an allusion (III 59b)
to the fact that they were two men, for only
male and female together can discover the presence
of Hashem, just like the keruvim (cherubs),
through whom the divine presence was revealed,
were male and female.
Aharon knew that he had to
wait for the movement of the keruvim and submit
himself to them. Only through the union of male
and female at its highest level could one approach
this holy place. The commentators stress the fact
that Nadab and Abihu had one masculine soul (neshama)
in two bodies and therefore could not approach
Hashem. They will only find this complementary
duality when they unite in the neshama of Pinhas
and his wife.
The teaching which ensues from
this
Thus, in some aspects,
Aharon’s sons did exactly what Hashem demanded
but, in other aspects, they were unable to carry
out their task. This tragic episode teaches us
the importance of the laws concerning divine holiness.
We can now more fully understand
the connection between the different teachings:
1. Nadab and Abihu are presented
as positive examples because of the intensity
of their desire and love for Hashem, who is the
kaddosh (the holy one), to whom we draw near when
we carry out His commandments and by being like
Him, since we are made in His image. At this level,
the two sons are exemplary models because Hashem
demands our hearts, our love, that we should love
Him with all our being, with all our hearts and
with all our possessions.
2. But we must not allow ourselves
to be governed by desire, however pure, for through
Moshe, Hashem taught us how to draw near to Him
without risking our bodies being burnt or destroyed
(for the soul remains whole) and Moshe passed
on this art to Aharon and Yehoshua.
This episode is therefore well
placed to teach us the practices that will make
us kedoshim (holy) for He is kaddosh (holy), and
that it is important to avoid
- executing religious duties in a mechanical manner;
- and juvenile over-zealousness which can cause
harm.
3. This is an important lesson
for it teaches us how difficult it is to combine
holiness and humankind without falling into
destructive modes such as:
- fleeing from holiness, as with those who believe
(justly) that the Torah presents very different
values to our worldly ones and who wish to dismiss
them in every possible way (but history and the
Creator always catch up with them);
- over-zealousness and believing one can do what
one likes with regard to holiness.
4. This episode teaches us to
what degree the spiritual/religious domain is
necessary but also dangerous, for it requires
simultaneously total enthusiasm and absolute caution
-- two contradictory qualities, which we nevertheless
have to maintain, just as two polarities, alef
and tav, are encompassed in the word at (you),
even though we can never really attain full comprehension
of another person. Hashem, who is alef, mem and
tav (emet) helps us in this.
Another positive interpretation
- limitless love
The human and loving qualities
of Nadab and Abihu are not put into question by
their death. On the contrary, they taught us what
is limitless love and they are praised for it.
They lacked experience and should have consulted
the wisdom of their father.
At the deepest level (nistar, hidden),
they perished because they entered the Sanctuary
under the influence of wine, which does not refer
to drink but to knowledge of the deeper aspects
of the Torah, for wine (yain) is linked to what
is secret (sod), the two words having the same
gematria (numerical value) of 70. It is of these
noble deaths amidst the divine secret that the
Psalmist writes: “yakar beine hashem hamavta
lahassidav, precious in the sight of Hashem is
the death of his saints.”
This notion is not just a poetic
image. Our Sages write of “death through
a divine kiss” (mitate neshika), as does
Rav Nahman bar Yitzhak in Berakhot 8a, when he
comments on Proverbs 8, 35 (“whoso findeth
me findeth life - motsi matsa - and shall obtain
favor - ratson - from Hashem, but he that sinneth
against me wrongeth his own soul: all they that
hate me love death”). He explains this through
Psalm 68 verse 21, which speaks of the “issues
of death” (totsaot, which has the same root
as the word ‘find’), of which there
are 903, which is the numerical value of this
word. Just as there are many ways of living, there
are 903 ways of dying and the kindest is the kiss:
death through a kiss is as sweet as the delicate
picking of a thread of hair from milk (neshika
domia kemish hal binita me helba). Zohar I 168a
elaborates on this theme and says when this happens
“a soul draws close to its essence”
(hi devijuta denafsha beikara).
The Talmud and the middrashim consider
that the fates of Nadab and Abihu are similar
to others who approached secret domains and
did not leave unscathed:
- Adam who failed in the Garden
of Eden and sinned,
- Noah who was not ready to face
the implications of kedusha and cautiously did
not expose himself to them, thus causing harm
to his generation,
- Avram who knew how go up out
of Egypt towards the south (vayaal…hanegva,
Bereshit 13, 1) in order to discover wisdom, as
is written in Tractate Baba Batra, page 25.
- Ribbi Akiva who entered the pardes and came
out unharmed, contrary to his three companions.
Among them, Ben Azzai met the same fate as the
sons of Aharon and perished from so great a happiness.
For this is not the usual type of death which
stems from our human condition and results from
sin. As Psalm 49, 13 says: “man being in
honor abideth not; he is like the beasts that
perish.”
- as for Moshe, he did not enter the pardes; he
was already in it. This is why it is written that
he “received” the Torah and “transmitted”
it to Yehoshua (see the beginning of the first
mishna in Pirkei Avot, the Ethics of the Fathers).
He received (kibel) the Torah because he was “in
it” and could approach Hashem when he wanted,
face to face - panim el panim.
- Yehoshua also lived in the tent
of kedusha but did not receive Hashem’s light
directly: it was reflected on him through Moshe,
like the moon receives the reflection of the sun.
He who is in light, like Moshe, does not always
know it and it does not seem to him to be a secret.
After him, the Torah was handed down to the elders,
and then to the people. But Yehoshua knew how
to balance the desire for love with reality and
this is why he was able to lead the people and
the people remained faithful to the Torah till
his death.
How does all this relate to Nadab
and Abihu, Aharon’s sons, and why is it important
to pass these teachings onto us, for we are ordinary
mortals?
Nadab and Abihu did not perish
because they transgressed but because their neshamot
(souls) drew too close to Hashem and there was
a split between the body and the soul, for
their bodies could not tolerate such proximity
(this is where the educative role of parents comes
in). Their neshamot remained in the heavens, says
the Shla, and this is what caused their death.
As is written: “bikrovai akadesh,
I will be sanctified in them that come nigh me”
(Vayikra 10, 3) and this is what is praised in
Psalm 116, 15.
Such proximity belongs to the world
to come.
A teaching for everyone
Because of these supreme heights
of love and union, the issue is not whether Aharon’s
sons were right or wrong. No one can claim to
be so great as to be able to judge them. We simply
need to draw from this episode a teaching which
is meaningful to us. The episode does not teach
us about the great, inevitable death; it teaches
us about death that happens at every little moment.
This has three forms:
- refusing to love Hashem and turning
towards contemporary golden calves;
- refusing to love Hashem and practising religion
without love and commitment;
- refusing to love Hashem with all one’s
heart and not carrying out the daily mitzvot with
love.
Silence in the face of failure
Issues such as these require great
knowledge, extensive training and, when there
are errors or excesses (for one cannot learn without
committing errors), silence.
This was Aharon’s reaction
when he learnt from Moshe of his sons’ deaths.
This is also the instruction God
asks of Job’s talkative friends at the time
of Job’s trial with the Creator.
This is also the rule of Rabbi
Shimon ben Rabban Gamliel as set out in chapter
one of Pirkei Avot: “I was brought up all
my life amongst the Sages and I have found naught
so essentially good as silence, not the study
of the Torah is of fundamental import but the
practice and whosoever is profuse of words occasions
sin.” Like Rabbi Akiva, Rabbi Shimon was
one of the 10 martyrs.
There are two ways of totally sanctifying
the body in daily life:
- the first is that of kiddush
Hashem in martyrdom (be keddoshim, Vayikra 11,45),
the second is the way of Nabab and Abihu, Hanoch
(Bereshit 5,24) and Elisha (II Kings 2, 11);
- the second is death due to the soul being too
close to Hashem, when the soul is as burnt and
the body can no longer be its envelope in this
world. The body remains intact but it is abandoned
by the soul. It would be nice to die because we
are too pure and holy.
The Shla notes that this could
be a moment of love, which explains Rabbi Akiva’s
joy (Berakhot 61) at the moment of death, despite
his great suffering.
Conclusion
The important teachings
of this parasha must be treated with caution.
- the main teaching is love; it
is important to remember the intense love Hashem
has for his people and how much we are asked to
love Him in return, as is written at the beginning
of the Shema. Who does not give all in love, gives
nothing.
- this must go as far as accepting kiddush Hashem.
This does not mean we should fantasize but we
must be ready to accept trials and suffering in
silence and consider them a blessing, as Aharon
teaches us (10, 3-10) in every tiny aspect of
daily life, when we must accept the will of the
Creator, who is the only one who knows His ways.
- it is important to study with avot (fathers)
who pass on their knowledge and experience, and
with great masters who are scholars of the Torah
and of everything that relates to human existence.
- these teachings should inspire us to examine
where we ourselves stand and to take the necessary
measures to ensure the optimal development
of love and of wisdom. As Moshe explains, we have
a duty to love and a duty to live, to distinguish
between the sacred and the profane, and to teach
the Torah to the children of Israel. We are asked
to do many contradictory things and this requires
deep self-examination in order to understand ourselves
and in order to learn how to discern, love, act
and be silent. Blessed are those who find friends,
companions, books, or teachers who are capable
of accompanying them on these noble paths.
Let us heed the rules of Rabbi
Shimon ben Gamliel, to which he added these
words, which ensure happiness in this world and
enable it to survive: “By three things is
the world sustained: by judgment, by truth and
by peace..execute the judgment of truth and peace
in your gates” (cf. Zachariah 8,16).
But we must not renounce the infinite
greatness of the Torah as in the words which are
pronounced before the kaddish: “Hashem is
well pleased for his righteousness’ sake;
he will magnify the Torah and make it honoroubly”
(Isaiah 42, 21).
Humility
If Hashem judged that it was good
to give us so much light, even though we are weak,
fragile and flawed, it is not up to us to decide
that we are unworthy of it and this is not our
way.
Hashem gave us His Torah and Moshe
as our teacher; therefore,
- we must accept it,
- we must dare to recite the holy kaddish and
say with the angels Barukh kevod-Hashem memekomo,
blessed is the glory of Hashem in His place,
- Hashem is the only one who can tie all these
contradictory issues together and this is why
we must acknowledge this even in the moment of
death, big or small, and we must bless Him, saying
that only He knows the truth which we cannot understand.
Barukh dayan haemet.
“Allah akbar, God is great”
say the Arabs. Our tradition says that He is up
high: adir bamarom Hashem.
Out of His goodness, he wished
to make us in His image and in His likeness, to
make us know His Name and His Torah, His people
and His land, and the secrets of life, death,
trials and suffering. He knows why. This is not
the fate of a few individuals; it is the fate
of all of us, so that we will live fuller lives
and in truth. We, in return, must be grateful,
unjudgmental, loving, trusting, and patient. We
must feel intensely, be prudent and know ourselves.
The concepts in this commentary
are complex and cannot be understood or absorbed
in just one session. They need to be studied over
and over again, meditated and reflected on. They
are not simple teachings, nor for the student,
or the teacher and many years of study were necessary
in order to find the precise sources for this
commentary.
Study the vocabulary in this commentary.
Preceding parasha Next parasha
|
Top
