From The Masters Of Kabbalah and Chumash (5 Books of
Moses)
13th century - "RambaN" - Rabbi Moshe ben
Nachman
14th century - "Bachya" - Rabbi Bachya ben
Asher
16th century - "Alsheich" - Rabbi Moshe
Alshech of Tsfat
17th century - "Shelah" - Rabbi Yeshaiya
Horowitz
18th century - "Ohr HaChayim" - Rabbi Chaim
Ben Attar
Ramban
"And the other lot for Azazel." [16:8]
This is the secret of the matter. They used to worship "other gods",
namely, the angels, bringing offerings of a sweet fragrance to them, similarly
to that which it says, "My bread also which I gave thee, fine flour,
and oil, and honey, wherewith I fed thee, thou didst even set it before
them for a sweet fragrance." Of course, the Torah has absolutely
forbidden to accept them as deities, or to worship them in any manner.
However, the Holy One, blessed be He, commanded us that on the Day of
Atonement we should let loose a goat in the wilderness, to that "prince"
[power] which rules over wastelands, and this [goat] is fitting for it
because he is its master, and destruction and waste emanate from that
power, which in turn is the cause of the stars and the sword, wars, quarrels,
wounds, plagues, division and destruction. In short, it is the spirit
of the sphere of Mars, and its portion among the nations is Esau [Rome],
the people that inherited the sword and the wars, and among the animals
[its portion consists of] the se'irim (demons) and the goats. Also
in its portion are the devils called "destroyers" in the language
of our Rabbis, and in the language of Scripture: se'irim (satyrs,
demons), for thus he [i.e., Esau] and his nation were called sa'ir.
Now the intention in our sending away the goat to the desert was not that
it should be an offering from us to it - Heaven forbid! Rather, our intention
should be to fulfill the wish of our Creator, Who commanded us to do so.
This may be compared to the case of someone who makes a feast, "Give
one portion to that servant of mine," in which case the host gives
nothing [of his own] to that servant, and it is not to show him honor
that he acts in that way to him, but everything is given to the master
and it is the master that gives a gift to his servant; the host only observes
his command and does in honor of the master whatever he commanded him
to do. The master, however, out of his own compassion for the host, wanted
all his servants to derive some enjoyment from it [the feast], in order
that they may all speak of his [the host's] praise and not of his shortcomings.
This then is the reason [for having someone] who casts the lots [on the
two goats]. It the priests were to dedicate them merely, by word of mouth
[without casting the lots], saying, "one for the Eternal" and
"one for Azazel," that would be like worshipping [Azazel]
or taking a vow in its name. Rather, the priest set the two goats before
the Eternal at the door of the tent of Meeting, for both of them were
a gift to G-d, and he gave to His servant that portion which came to him
from G-d. It is he [i.e., the priest] who cast the lots on them, but it
is His hand that apportioned them, something like that which says, The
lot is cast into his lap; but the whole disposing of it is of the Eternal.
Even after the casing of the lots, the priest placed the two goats before
the Eternal, thus proclaiming that both are His and that by sending one
away [to the desert] we intend merely to fulfill G-d's wish, just as it
said, And the goat, on which the lot fell for Azazel, shall be
set alive 'before the Eternal', to make atonement over him, to send him
away etc. That is the reason why we do not ourselves do any act of slaughtering
[of that goat, as this would imply that it is a proper offering which
requires slaughtering]. And Onkelos rendered the expression (one lot for
the Eternal, and one lot for Azazel) as: "one lot for 'the
Name of' the Eternal and one lot for Azazel;" [thus he was
careful not to translate "and one lot for the name of Azazel"],
because the one was "for the Name of the Eternal" and not for
him [Azazel]. And the second was "for Azazel"
but not "for the name of Azazel."
(credits)
Rabbeinu Bachya
"For on this day he (the High Priest) will provide atonement
for you to purify you." [16:30]
This verse is an assurance for Jews throughout the generations that the
Day of Atonement is a day set aside especially for forgiveness and pardon.
When the High Priest used to recite his confessional on Yom Kippur, he
would recite this verse in his prayer. The name of G-d referred to in
this verse is the one comprised of 42 letters. However, some of our sages
believe that Aaron mentioned the tetragramaton (and not the 42-lettered
name of G-d during his prayer). Rabbi Saadyah Gaon belongs to that group
of scholars.
We feel that the first opinion, that the 42-lettered name of G-d was used
by the High Priest, is likely the correct one. This is why in our liturgy
of Yom Kippur the wording is: "when the people outside the Temple
heard the High Priest utter the holy name of G-d etc., they would prostrate
themselves and proclaim G-d's majesty using the words we use daily after
the first line of the kriyat shma, i.e., "Blessed be the name
of His glorious Majesty forever and ever." When the composer of this
piece of liturgy wrote "in holiness and purity" he did not mean
that the people would pronounce the tetragramaton as the High Priest
had done. He meant that the thoughts of reverence filling the minds of
the people at that moment were holy and reverent but they had not heard
the tetragramaton pronounced.
This is also the meaning of the Kabbalists when they said that "the
names of G-d are not actually uttered in holiness but the person thinking
about them is filled with holy thoughts when he does so." The idea
seems to be that the very air into which such words would be exhaled when
someone utters them by mouth will contaminate the holiness of that name.
If that were to happen the Holy Name of the Lord would have been desecrated.
This is why even the High Priest when he started to form the letters of
the tetragramaton with his lips immediately "swallowed"
it, not allowing the fully formed word to escape into the air around him.
(credits)
Alsheich
"And he shall take from the congregation of ....Israel two kids
of the goats for a sin offering....." [16:5]
Q1) Why did the daily procedure of removing the ashes from the sacrifices
include one pan being placed on the east side of the altar in such a way
that it would be consumed at once, whereas the balance of the ashes was
piled up at the "tapuach," an apple-shaped mound in the
center of the altar? This latter pile was removed only after a period
of accumulation and taken outside the camp to a place reserved for burning
the final remains of animal sacrifices.
Q2) Why did the burning of the ashes in the pan require the wearing of
priestly garments, whereas the latter act or removing the ashes from the
mound could be performed only after the priest doing it had removed his
priestly garments?
A) We have frequently quoted the Zohar, who describes every sin committed
by man as creating an accusing angel, a negative, destructive force. On
the other hand performance of positive deeds create a sacred constructive
force. When a person places his hands on the animal he offers in atonement
for his sin, he transfers the negative force his sin had created onto
the head of the animal to be slaughtered. The reason that the slaughtering
has to occur immediately after the owner has placed his hands on the animal,
is to subdue this negative force, to neutralize it. This is why it has
to be burned on the holy altar. While the animal bears the weight of this
negative force, it is joined by the positive force created by performance
of the mitzvah of the owner's penitence, and confession (see 5:5).
These two opposing forces are present during the burning of the flesh
and the fat parts of the offering. The fire of the altar therefore accomplishes
2 tasks:
1) It disposes of the negative force created by sin, - totally.
2) It causes the positive forces created by penitence and confession to
ascend heavenwards, purified from all ulterior motives sometimes associated
with the performance of mitzvot.
The fire of the altar acts as the purifying agent because of the donor's
good intentions. This purity of intention is described as 'sweet smelling
odor to G-d'. When a person raises a sweet smelling flower to his nose
in order to inhale its fragrance, his is like absorbing the essence of
the flower. G-d, so to speak, absorbs the pure intention of the person
who has offered the sacrifice. It is the presence of this pure intention,
that enables the sacrifice and all it stands for to ascend heavenwards.
It is not in keeping with G-d's dignity, to destroy man made negative
forces by means of heavenly fire. Therefore, man has to contribute his
own fire to accomplish that part of the function of sacrifice. The heavenly
fire, however, consumes and raises heavenwards the positive forces created
by the donor's penitence and confession. We see therefore, why both heavenly
fire and man-made fire play a part in the burning of the sacrifice on
the altar. The ashes on the central heap on the altar are those which
had been burned by the heavenly fire representing the inner parts of the
animal. A panful of this had to be placed on the east side of the altar
the morning after the offering. The priest wears his priestly garments
when disposing of those, since this procedure is still part of yesterday's
ritual. The balance is considered the residue of the negative forces.
and its eventual removal form the altar to outside areas, does not require
priestly garments to be worn.
(credits)
Shelah
"…Aaron's two sons, who brought an [unauthorized] offering
before G-d and died." [16:1]
In this portion we find allusions to the sanctity of time and space,
notably the Holy of Holies, also known as the "inner of the inner".
This site is accessible only on Yom Kippur, and then only to the High
Priest. The report of the death of the two sons of Aaron when entering
this part of the Sanctuary is repeated here to stress that their very
death was the beginning of their life in the World to Come. Their entry
into this sacrosanct area was an expression of their closeness to G-d.
I have previously mentioned that the word "ashan" [spelled
ayin, shin, nun], the smoke of the incense offering, is an acronym for
the concepts Space, Time, and Soul - in Hebrew Olam, Shana, Nefesh. The
deeper reasons why sacrifices may not be offered outside the holy sites
of the Sanctuary, whereas on that day [Yom Kippur] an offering is made
to the Azazel [a specific manifestation of spiritual darkness], away from
the Sanctuary, are all closely intertwined. Once a year on Yom Kippur
we are children of the Lord our G-d, and our representative, the High
Priest, can enter His innermost sanctum. The mystical element of Yom Kippur
is intimately bound with the service performed in the Holy of Holies.
(credits)
Ohr HaChayim
"…Aaron's two sons, who brought an [unauthorized] offering
before G-d and died." [16:1]
Another approach to the word veyamutu focuses on the nature of
these sons' deaths rather than on the fact of their deaths. The Torah
writes 'who brought an offering,' [in Hebrew the word kiravtam
has the same roots as the word for proximity, nearness] to describe that
due to their love for G-d these people came too near the celestial source
of light which has a deadly effect on man.
This is the mystical dimension of what is commonly known as "death
by Divine kiss," the kind of death experienced by both Aaron and
Moses eventually. The deaths of Nadav and Avihu were similar to the death
of all other completely righteous men.
The only difference was that in the case of the deaths of people such
as Moses and Aaron G-d's "kiss of death" approaches them, whereas
in this case Nadav and Avihu approached "the kiss of death."
This is the meaning of the extra letter vav in veyamutu.
The Torah alludes to the fact that though these righteous people felt
that they were approaching an area which would result in this "kiss
of death," they did not flinch and kept getting closer.
They attained a state of religious intoxication. The desire of their
souls to fuse with the divine was so overpowering that they no longer
made decisions in which their powers of conscious perception were involved.
(credits)
Sources
Ramban
- credits
Adapted from the 13th century classic by the illustrious scholar, philosopher
and defender of the faith, Rabbi Moshe ben Nachman-known as 'RAMBAN' or
'Nachmanides', a master kabbalist in his own right and a major link in
the transmission of Jewish mysticism-based on the excellent annotated
English translation, Nachmanides on the Torah, by Rabbi Dr. Charles B.
Chavel
Bachya
- credits
Selected with permission from the seven-volume English edition of The
Torah Commentary of Rabbeinu Bachya, as translated and annotated by Eliyahu
Munk. Rabbi Bachya ben Asher [1255-1340] of Saragosa, Spain, was the outstanding
pupil of Rabbi Shlomo ben Aderet (the "Rashba"), a main disciple
of Rabbi Moshe ben Nachman (the "Ramban"). Several books have
been written about the Kabballah-based portions of R. Bachya's commentary.
Alsheich
- credits
Adapted from Torat Moshe - the 16th commentary of Rabbi Moshe Alshech,
the "Preacher of Zefat" on the Torah, as translated and condensed
in the English version of Eliyahu Munk)
Shelah
- credits
Rabbi Isaiah Horowitz was born in Prague around the year 1565. He served
as Rabbi of Cracow and other congregations before he was appointed as
the Rabbi of the community of Frankfurt on Main in the year 1610. In 1916,
Rabbi Horowitz moved to Prague where he became the Chief Rabbi of the
city. He moved to Eretz Yisrael about 1621. He was rabbi in Jerusalem
and in Tiberias, where he died in or about 1630. In addition to his magnus
opus, Shenei Luchot HaBrit, he also compiled an edition of the prayer-book
with a comprehensive commentary. Many of his innovations, including his
formulation of the Kol Nidrei prayer, have become part and parcel of the
Ashkenazi Siddur.
Ohr HaChayim
- credits
Selected with permission from the five-volume English edition of Ohr HaChaim:
the Torah Commentary of Rabbi Chaim Ben Attar, as translated and annotated
by Eliyahu Munk.
The holy Rabbi Chayim ben Moses Attar was born in Sale, Western Morocco,
on the Atlantic in 1696. His immortal commentary on the Five Books Of
Moses, Or Hachayim, was printed in Venice in 1741, while the author was
on his way to the Holy Land. He acquired a reputation as a miracle worker,
hence his title "the holy," although some apply this title only
to his Torah commentary.
|
