The Israel Koschitzky
Virtual Beit MidrashThe Israel Koschitzky
Virtual Beit Midrash
Surf A Little Torah
Yeshivat
Har Etzion
PARASHAT TETZAVEH
By Rav David Silverberg
In the opening verse of Parashat Tetzaveh, God commands Moshe to solicit donations of pure olive oil for the purpose of le-ha'alot ner tamid "to kindle the eternal light" meaning, kindling the menora in the Mishkan.
The Gemara cites this verse in Masekhet Shabbat (21a), amidst its discussion of the wicks and oils that Halakha disqualifies for use with Shabbat candles. In this context the Gemara comments, "The wicks and oils with which the Sages said one may not kindle for Shabbat one may [also] not kindle with them in the Temple, because it says, 'to kindle the eternal light'." As Rashi explains, these oils and wicks do not independently produce a steady flame, and the Sages forbade using them for the Shabbat lights out of concern that a person might move the wick or the lamp to improve the flame (which would constitute a Torah violation). The Gemara here teaches that this reason applies to the lighting of the menora in the Mikdash, as well. Chazal understood the phrase le-ha'alot ner tamid to mean "she-tehei shelhevet ola mei-aleha" "that the flame must rise independently." The lamps in the menora must be self-sufficient, capable of burning on their own once they are kindled without any further human intervention. Hence, the wicks and oils which the Sages disqualified for use as the Shabbat candles are likewise unfit for use in the menora, since they do not produce a steady flame independently.
Several Acharonim, including Rabbi Akiva Eiger (in Gilyon Ha-shas) and the Penei Yehoshua, raised the obvious question of why the Gemara found it necessary to disqualify these oils for use in the menora. The Torah here explicitly requires using shemen zayit zakh katit, pure olive oil; it does not allow for using any other kind of oil for kindling the menora. Why, then, did the Gemara establish a rule that only the oils suitable for the Shabbat candles may be used in the menora, once the Torah itself specifically requires using pure olive oil? The Gemara in this context should have mentioned only the wicks of the menora regarding which we find no qualifications mentioned in the Torah but not the oil.
Indeed, Rav Menachem Kasher, in his Torah Sheleima (note 98), notes that in many earlier
editions of the Talmud (including the
In any event, Rav Moshe Rosen, in his work Ohel Moshe (published posthumously, New York, 1963), suggests an explanation for the prevalent text of this passage, namely, that the Gemara refers to a ta'arovet a mixture of pure olive oil and other oils. The laws of bittul ("nullification") dictate that so long as the olive oil constitutes the majority of the mixture, the minority of other oils becomes null and void, and the mixture is thus suitable for the kindling of the menora. The Gemara here instructs that this applies only if the olive oil was mixed with oils that Halakha allows using for Shabbat candles. With regard, however, to oils disqualified for use with the Shabbat candles, then the concept of bittul does not suffice to allow using this oil for the menora, even as the minority component of a mixture. Even though formally the other oils are rendered void, and it is the olive oil that determines the identity of the mixture, the presence of other oils nevertheless results in an unsteady flame. Hence, the requirement of le-ha'alot ner tamid, that the flame must burn self-sufficiently, disqualifies a mixture even if the olive oil constitutes the majority, if it contains oils that the Sages deemed unfit for use with the Shabbat candles.
******
As mentioned yesterday, the opening verse of Parashat Tetzaveh records God's command to Moshe to ensure a supply of pure olive oil for the kindling of the menora: "You shall command the Israelites that they should bring to you pure, crushed olive oil for lighting "
Rav Menachem Kasher, in his Torah Sheleima, cites from a text
entitled Midrash Ha-bi'ur the following comment on the words ve-yikchu eilekha ("they shall bring to you"): "
that your
stamp, or the stamp of the high priest, shall be upon it." (In his annotation, Rav Kasher cites
other rare Midrashic sources where this comment appears.) According to this Midrash, God
emphasized that the oil should be brought "to you" to Moshe or Aharon in
order to instruct that the oil be kept securely in the protected possession of
Moshe or Aharon. Once Moshe or
Aharon received the oil, he must put his stamp on the flask so that it is
unmistakably identified as oil donated for the purpose of the menora.
In his appendices to Torah Sheleima (Tetzaveh, 1), Rav Kasher notes that this comment sheds light on the famous passage in Masekhet Shabbat (21b) that describes the events surrounding the establishment of Chanukah. The Gemara tells that when the Jews defeated the Greeks and began purifying the Mikdash, "they searched and found only one jug of oil stamped with the stamp of the high priest." They thus had no choice but to use only this small quantity of oil, which miraculously lasted for eight full days. The underlying assumption, of course, is that the oil used for kindling the menora must bear the stamp of the kohen gadol, and the commentators wondered why this would be the case. As Rav Kasher notes, the aforementioned passage in the Midrash Ha-bi'ur provides a clear source for this requirement. According to this text, God's command that Benei Yisrael should "bring to you" olive oil for the menora indicates that it must be kept under the possession of the kohen gadol and sealed with his special stamp.
Amidst his discussion, Rav Kasher records a theory espoused in the work Kav Ha-yashar claiming that the Gemara refers to the flask of shemen ha-mishcha, the anointing oil used for consecrating the kohanim and the various articles of the Mishkan. The jug of shemen ha-mishcha, as we know, was stored in the kodesh ha-kodashim together with the aron, and, conceivably, it was marked with a special stamp identifying it as the jug of anointing oil. The Kav Ha-yashar thus speculates that it was perhaps this jug that the Chashmona'im discovered when they entered the Beit Ha-mikdash, and, having no other option, they decided to use this oil for the kindling of the menora.
Rav Kasher, however, dismisses this theory. For one thing, the Gemara states in
Masekhet Yoma (52b) that the jug of anointing oil was buried together with the
aron before the destruction of the
******
We read in Parashat Tetzaveh of the bigdei kehuna, the special
garments which the kohen gadol and other kohanim were to wear while performing the avoda (service) in the Mishkan.
The garments of the kohen
gadol included two sets of stones
upon which the names of the twelve tribes were engraved. One of these sets was affixed to the
shoulder straps of the efod (apron), and the kohen wore one stone on each shoulder, with the
names of six tribes engraved on each of the two stones. The other set of stones was placed upon
the choshen, the breastplate of the kohen gadol.
The choshen contained twelve stones, upon each of which
the name of one of the tribes was engraved.
The stones worn on the kohen gadol's chest are often seen
as symbolic of the need for the kohen gadol to be mindful of, and concern
himself with, the entire nation as he performs his service. As he ministers before the Almighty in
the Beit Ha-mikdash, he is to recall his duty as an emissary of all Am
Yisrael, that he represents not only himself, and not only his family or
even his tribe, but rather the entire nation. We might add that the names of the
tribes engraved on the choshen bring to mind the verse in Shir Hashirim
(8:6) that tells of the woman begging her lover, "Place me as a stamp upon your
heart." Wearing somebody's name on
one's chest symbolizes his commitment to be forever mindful of that person, to
think of that person at all times.
The kohen gadol therefore wears the names of the twelve
tribes upon his heart as an expression of his cognizance of his role as their
representative.
How might we explain the symbolism of the names engraved upon the
kohen gadol's shoulders?
Rav Yehuda Leib Ginsburg, in his Yalkut Yehuda, suggests that these stones symbolize the
kohen gadol's responsibility to "carry" or "lift" the
people. Just as a person
transporting a heavy burden carries it upon his shoulders, so is the kohen, the spiritual leader of Am Yisrael, enjoined to shoulder the responsibility
for the nation's religious growth.
Even if this may entail a degree of personal sacrifice and discomfort, he
bears the responsibility to lift the people and bring them to greater heights of
avodat Hashem.
Thus, while the stones on the choshen represent the focus of the kohen gadol's thoughts and feelings on the needs of the
people, the stones on the shoulders signify his responsibility to labor and toil
on behalf of the nation's spiritual growth, to work tirelessly to ensure that
the Jewish people continue to progress and move steadily towards greater
achievements in avodat
Hashem.
******
Rashi, in his commentary to Parashat Tetzaveh (28:15), cites
Chazal's comment that the choshen, the breastplate worn by
the kohen gadol, served to atone for the sin of ivut ha-mishpat
"distortion of justice." In its
narrowest since, this refers to judges who rule unfairly or imprudently. More broadly, however, darshanim have often viewed the choshen as serving to atone for general unethical
conduct in the marketplace, people who "distort" the rules of ethics through
deceit, dishonesty, or overly aggressive tactics.
One might wonder whether perhaps any connection exists between this
function of the choshen and the Gemara's comment in Masekhet
Shabbat (139a) regarding the privilege Aharon earned to wear this special
ornament. Back when God spoke to
Moshe at the burning bush, He foresaw that when Moshe would return to Egypt, his
brother Aharon would greet him, adding, "he will see you and rejoice in his
heart" (Shemot 4:14). Despite
seeing his younger brother achieving greater stature and prominence than he,
Aharon would nevertheless experience genuine joy and pride over Moshe's
designation for the role of national leader. The Gemara comments that in reward for
this level of joy that Aharon felt in his heart, he earned the privilege of
wearing the choshen upon his heart.
The choshen thus brings together two seemingly
unrelated themes: the disinterest in honor and notoriety, and ethical financial
conduct.
Possibly, this association conveys the message that many financial disputes and perhaps arguments generally are actually rooted not in the lust for money, but rather in people's pride and ego. People often resort to dishonest or unwarranted measures not necessarily to secure a livelihood or avoid financial ruin, but to repair the ego that has suffered a blow as a result of their competitor's success. The way to atone for the sins of ivut ha-mishpat, unethical or otherwise inappropriate conduct in the marketplace, is to follow Aharon's example of "he will see you and rejoice in his heart," of rejoicing in the success of others rather than resenting it. If we, like Aharon, take pride in and draw satisfaction from the success of our peers, rather than view it as a threat to our self-esteem, we are less likely to allow their success to lead to a "distortion of justice," to our justifying illegitimate means of competition.
******
In Parashat Tetzaveh (29:38-42), the Torah introduces the obligation of the korban ha-tamid, the daily sacrifice, which consisted of a sheep offering accompanied by a meal offering and libation, once in the morning and once in the afternoon. This obligation is repeated later in the Torah, in Parashat Pinchas (Bamidbar 28:1-8).
Ibn Ezra, in his commentary here in Parashat Tetzaveh (29:42; see also
Chizkuni), and, more elaborately, in his commentary to Sefer Amos (5:25),
advances the theory that Benei Yisrael were not required to offer the
daily tamid offering or any sacrifice, for that matter in the
wilderness. This practice was
observed only during the period of the nation's encampment at
In this manner Ibn Ezra explains the Torah's repetition of this command
in Sefer Bamidbar. That command was
issued shortly before Benei Yisrael's entry into the land, and God found
it necessary at this point to remind the people to observe this daily ritual
upon entering
Ibn Ezra determines that according to his theory, the tamid sacrifice was performed in the wilderness for only fifty days from the period of Rosh Chodesh Nissan, when the Mishkan was erected (Shemot 40:17), until the twentieth of Iyar, when Benei Yisrael disembarked from Sinai (Bamidbar 10:11). After their disembarkation, no sacrifices were offered with the exception of the Yom Kippur service, which was held on the first Yom Kippur after the nation's departure from Sinai. As Ibn Ezra cites, the Torah writes explicitly in Sefer Vayikra (16:34) that Aharon observed the commands concerning the Yom Kippur service, indicating that these rituals which of course included sacrificial offerings were performed.
Ibn Ezra draws proof to this theory from a verse in Sefer Amos (5:25): "Did you, the House of Israel, bring Me sacrifices and meal offerings for forty years in the wilderness?" Amos here decries the unfortunate phenomena of people overemphasizing sacrificial offerings at the expense of fealty to other Torah laws and values. He thus reminds the people that for the vast majority of Benei Yisrael's journey in the wilderness no sacrifices were offered, underscoring the fact that these rituals are less central to Torah life than general mitzva observance and personal integrity.
Ibn Ezra
further notes that from the time they left Sinai until their conquest of the
kingdoms of Sichon and Og, Benei
Yisrael lived in desolate,
uninhabited and uncultivated regions and did not have access to the large
quantities of cattle, oil and wine necessary for offering these
sacrifices.
Interestingly enough, the precise opposite perspective emerges from a
comment of Rav Saadia Gaon, cited in the Torah commentary of Rabbi Avraham ben
Ha-Rambam. According to Rav Saadia,
God found it necessary to repeat the command concerning the tamid in Sefer Bamidbar, in anticipation of
Benei Yisrael's entry into
According to Rav Saadia, then, in direct contradistinction to Ibn Ezra's
view, not only did this obligation apply in the wilderness, but there was
initially room to conclude that it applied only in the wilderness, and not upon the
nation's entry into
******
The Gemara in Masekhet Yoma (73b) comments that the choshen (breastplate) worn by the kohen gadol contained an engraving of several words in addition to the names of the twelve tribes as mentioned in the Torah's description (28:21). Namely, the names of the three patriarchs Avraham, Yitzchak and Yaakov appeared on the choshen, as did the words shivtei Yeshurun ("the tribes of Jeshurun").
The Maharsha raises the question of why specifically the name of Yeshurun was selected to appear on the choshen, as opposed to the more commonly used name of Yisrael. Benei Yisrael are, indeed, called Yeshurun later in the Torah (Devarim 32:15, 33:5), but the name Yisrael is clearly the nation's more familiar and common name. Why, then, did specifically the name Yeshurun appear on the choshen?
Rav Simcha Bunim Sofer, in his Shevet Sofer, suggests that an
association indeed exists between the implication of the name Yeshurun
and the symbolic function of the kohen gadol's breastplate. As we discussed earlier this week, the
choshen served to atone for instances of ivut ha-din, legal
distortions (see Rashi to 28:15), which has been taken more generally as
a reference to interpersonal crimes and unethical conduct. The engraving of all the tribes' names
on the choshen symbolizes the harmonious coexistence between the
different segments of the Jewish people, the ideal of peace and harmony among
all groups among Benei Yisrael.
Herein, the Shevet Sofer suggests, perhaps lies the particular
significance of the phrase shivtei Yeshurun. The name Yeshurun likely
signifies Jewish unity, as in the verse, "There was a king in Yeshurun
when the heads of the nation assembled the tribes of
We might add that the name Yeshurun is etymologically related to the Hebrew word yashar, "straight," which often denotes integrity and uprightness. Indeed, Malbim, in his commentary to Sefer Devarim (33:5), interprets Yeshurun as a reference to "the straightness of their intellect and their character traits." The Radak (Yeshayahu 44:2) similarly attributes this term to Am Yisrael's distinction as "the straightest among the nations." If we associate the name Yeshurun with integrity and refined character, then the relevance of this name to the choshen becomes even clearer and more meaningful. As mentioned, the choshen serves to atone for unethical conduct and practices that cause friction and discord among people. The way to eliminate the plague of ivut ha-din in all its manifestations from our midst is by recommitting ourselves to the values implied by the name Yeshurun honesty, integrity and goodwill in our relations with all people.
******
The Gemara in Masekhet Zevachim (88b) enumerates the various forms of wrongdoing for which the bigdei kehuna the priestly garments described in Parashat Tetzaveh provide atonement. We are told in this passage that the tzitz the frontlet worn on the kohen gadol's forehead atoned for the sin of azut metzach, irreverence and brazenness. As the term azut metzach (literally, "a daring forehead") implies, this quality of brazenness is commonly associated with the forehead, and thus the tzitz worn on the kohen gadol's forehead corresponds to this particular sinful quality.
The Chatam Sofer (cited in the compendium Likutei Batar Likutei, Masekhet Zevachim) commented that this
role of the tzitz likely relates to the inscription of Kodesh
le-Hashem ("sacred to the Lord") that appeared on this ornament. The Torah wishes to convey the message
that azut metzach is sanctioned only in the realm of kedusha, for
the purpose of maintaining proper standards of religious observance and
defending our religious principles.
In this area, there may be occasions when one is indeed justified in
acting brazenly to oppose adversaries who seek to undermine the authority of
authentic Torah tradition and who militate against mitzva observance.
We might suggest an additional possibility in explaining the relevance of
the kodesh le-Hashem inscription to the quality of azut metzach.
This inscription identified the kohen gadol as "sacred to the Lord," devoted entirely
to the service of the Almighty in the Beit Ha-mikdash.
The status of the kohen
gadol as kodesh le-Hashem establishes a model for all people to
follow, albeit in less intense fashion.
While obviously the rest of Benei Yisrael are not expected (and not allowed) to
function as the high priest in the Mikdash, we are certainly expected to see ourselves
as "sacred to the Lord" in a general sense. Even though the rest of the people,
unlike the kohen gadol, engage in worldly, professional pursuits,
they must nevertheless live and conduct their lives with an overarching sense of
kodesh le-Hashem, in the faithful and devoted service of
God.
The symbolism of the tzitz perhaps indicates that the antidote to
azut metzach, shameless and arrogant irreverence, is a
feeling of kodesh
le-Hashem, that one's life is
devoted to the Almighty. If a
person sees himself as a quasi kohen gadol, as a humble and loyal servant of God, he
is more likely to speak and act with dignity and respect. The "servant" status results in a
certain humility and intimidation that will, in most cases, prevent a person
from disrespectful conduct. It is
the constant awareness of kodesh
le-Hashem, our chosen status as
devoted servants of God, that helps ensure a respectful, good-mannered demeanor
towards other people, towards the Torah, and towards the world
generally.