Parshas Tzav-Shabbos Hagodol

PARSHAS TZAV-SHABBOS HAGODOL

Minchas Kohen is a type of Korbon that has two meanings. Of course, being a Korbon Mincha, this offering comes from flour, not from animals or fowl. A Korbon Mincha is not unique in and of itself-since we already learned about the five varieties in Parshas Vayikro, with some additions this week.

What makes the Minchas Kohen unique is that it serves both as an inaugural offering for every Kohen and a twice-daily offering for the Kohen Godol.

The Torah describes this offering as follows. “Zeh korban Aharon u’vo’nov a’sher yakrivu laShem b’yom hi’mo’shach o’so ‘a’si’ris ho’ei’foh so’les mincho to’mid ma’cha’tzi’soh ba’bo’ker u’ma’cha’tzi’so bo’o’rev “ (Vayikro Perek 6/Posuk 13). This is the korbon of Aharon and his sons that they are to offer to Hashem on the day of their consecration, a tenth of an Eiphoh of finely ground flour to be an everlasting Minchoh offering, half in the morning and half in the evening.

We learn that it is the inaugural Korbon of the Kohanim, (i.e. the Kohen Godol and the Kohen Hedyot non-Kohen Godol) from the words b’yom hi’mo’shach.

That is the Korbon that the Kohen Godol brought on a daily basis-in the morning and towards evening, is inherent in the word “tomid” and in those of a later verse. “V’ha’kohen ha’moshiach tach’tov mi’bo’nov ya’a’seh o’soh chok ‘o’lom laShem ko’lil tok’tor” (Posuk 15). The anointed Kohen (i.e. Kohen Godol) who will be in his place [i.e. in place of Aharon] will do this [offering] as an law forever to Hashem, [the Minchah] will be totally consumed [on the altar].

What can we learn from the Torah’s choice of a Mincha offering, not an animal or fowl one for the Kohen? What can we learn from the fact that although a Kohen Hedyot is obligated to bring such a korbon only once in his life, the Kohen Godol must bring this offering day in and day out, morning and night.

Abarbanel provides us with insights regarding these questions that insight will lend themselves to many applications in areas that he did not directly address and these insights all point to one central theme.

First, the Kohen Godol is the representative of ‘Am Yisroel. Together with his fellow Kohanim, and leading them, he is responsible for bringing the offerings which will lead to atonement. Since the Kohen Godol is a person, with those weaknesses that are endemic to all people, there would be a concern that he, and the other Kohanim, would not be fit to affect the desired kaporah. How could a person with imperfections transform the imperfections of others? Thus, the Torah requires that every Kohen brings an inaugural Korban Mincha and the Kohen Godol brings such a korbon twice daily.

Since the role of the Kohen Hedyot is not nearly as ubiquitous as that of the Kohen Godol, a smaller action is required on his part. The Kohen Hedyot served only two weeks a year in the Bais HaMikdosh (Masseches Taanis 27 a) and even in the period of his service, he would not be involved on a daily basis. If there were many Kohanim during the week of the service, the various aspects of their Avoda would be determined by casting lots (Masseches Yoma 22 a).

On the other hand, the role of the Kohen Godol is always active. “Kohen Godol makriv b’rosh.” A Kohen Godol may take part in the offering of any of the Korbonos whenever he wishes. He has no fixed time or fixed days. Just like a King can go where he wishes, because the kingdom is his, so can the Kohen Godol participate whenever he wishes.

Thus, because of his ever-present role, in order to feel that this unique representative can act for them, he is required to bring a daily offering.

And this requirement creates a “two-way street”, Abarbanel explains. The Kohen Godol is held in admiration by the people. If they see that he feels a need to receive expiation from Hashem, they will follow his lead. The Kohen Godol sets a pattern that makes emulation respectable and appreciated.

This last point, explains Abarbanel, is why the Minchas Kohen that is offered daily by the Kohen Godol is a fraction of the size of other Korbonos Mincha. By making the amount to be brought relatively small -Asiris Ho’eifo-the volume of about 4 ½ eggs - those who want to bring a small Korbon will not be embarrassed by their inability to bring one that is more impressive and prestigious.

This last point-making sure that there is a sense that a Jew who wishes to bring a Korbon will not be deterred by its great cost – is the explanation offered by Rav Aharon Bakst HY”D, one of the great Baalei Mussar in pre-World War II Europe.

The Torah says that the Minchas Kohen is “tu’fi’nei min’chas pi’tim” (Perek 6/Posuk 14). The Korbon Mincha is broken into pieces (pi’tim) and then those pieces are baked and re-baked (“tu’fi’nei”-bakings). Thus, each piece of the Minchas Kohen is small, another encouragement for the impoverished individual to bring his own offering and not be ashamed of his lack of means.

An analysis of the message of the Minchas Kohen, as interpreted by Abarbanel, teaches us a very delicate way in which we are to see our leaders. On the one hand, we are bound to follow their dictates, displaying sincere respect and esteem for them. That respect and esteem becomes far more than a “feeling” when our actions follow the lead given to us by our leaders.

On the other hand, we are to see them as fallible. They are imperfect. They have the failings that others have as well and our perception of those failings may make it more difficult for us to adhere to their directives and to follow their decisions.

This duality of view of leaders finds expression elsewhere in our Parsha as well.

Moshe Rabbenu was, of course, the greatest leader of ‘Am Yisroel. He was the Shliach to receive the Torah on Sinai. He was a king (D’vorim Perek 33/Posuk 5). He was the first Kohen Godol as is told at the end of our Parsha when for the seven days prior to the First of Nissan following the Exodus he brought all of the Korbonos. Aharon and his sons began their service following that week.

Thus, though the true superiority of Moshe Rabbenu was related to his receiving the Torah, the totality of roles that he played made him unequalled in other roles as well.

Thus, when we read the preparation that was required of Aharon and his sons prior to assuming the roles of Kohen Godol and Kohanim, respectively and see the role that Moshe Rabbenu played, we are taken aback.

“Va’yak’rev Moshe es Aharon v’es bo’nov va’yir’chatz o’som ba’mo’yim. Va’yi’ten ‘o’lov es ha’ku’to’nes va’yach’gor o’so bo’av’net va’yal’beish o’so es ha’m’il…” (Perek 8/P’sukim 6-9).

Moshe brought Aharon and his sons close [to their service] and he washed them in water and he placed on him the shirt and he tied him with his belt and he dressed him with his coat, etc.

Moshe personally washed and dressed Aharon and then washed and dressed Aharon’s four sons. Doesn’t that sound demeaning? Wouldn’t such a subservient role counter the respect that Moshe was to receive? Particularly for the future role of King, such activity would be forbidden because a King is always to personify dignity and separation.

Why then was such a task imposed upon Moshe Rabbenu ‘Alav HaShalom?

The answer is, I believe, that in order to be a leader of Klal Yisroel once must be able to follow instructions too. In order to be a leader in a community where Torah is premier, it is davka the leaders who have to demonstrate that by showing their subservience to G-d. A Torah leader cannot aspire to such a position if he cannot be led.

This is the central idea of the Mishnah in Masseches Sanhedrin (18 a) that teaches that “Melech lo don v’lo do’nim o’so”. A King does not sit as a judge on a Bais Din nor is he judged. Noting that the Torah writes about Shevet Yehuda-from which the Kings stem-“lo yo’sur she’vet mi’y’hu’do u’m’cho’kek mi’bein rag’lov” (B’reishis Perek 49/Posuk 10), the Gemara is perplexed. If Yaakov Ovinu told Shevet Yehuda that the ruling scepter will never turn from your hand, we have a very clear idea that the King sits in judgment. Chazal explain that the restriction is upon Malchei Yisroel, in contrast to Malchei Yehuda.

Malchei Yisroel refused to submit to the judgment of the Bais Din in a particular event. Since one is always required to be in consonance with the verse in Tzefania (Perek 2 /Posuk 1), “His’ko’sh’shu v’ko’shu”-literally meaning one should gather himself together before trying to help someone else gather himself. Thus, if one cannot be judged (because he refused to submit himself to judgment) he is ineligible to be a judge.

One cannot put himself in position of power and authority if he is not willing to accede to that authority when it is applied to this erstwhile judge.

According to Minhag, Ashkenazim recite the preliminary part of the Haggadah this Shabbos HaGodol. As Shulchan Aruch writes (Siman 430), “Shabbos she’lif’nei haPesach ko’rin o’so Shabbos HaGodol mi’p’nei ha’nes she’ei’ra’ bo”. The Shabbos prior to Pesach is called “Shabbos HaGodol” because of the miracle that occurred on it.

Mishna Brurah (s’if ko’ton 1) explains that in the year of the Exodus, our ancestors took sheep, upon G-d’s command. Since the temporal setting of the Jewish People in Egypt was that tenth of occurred on Shabbos, so the Shabbos prior to Pesach was the tenth of the month and our ancestors experienced a great miracle to the end that the Egyptians did not at all penalize them and did not forbid them to be take sheep for the sacrifice, though the Egyptians treated those animals as deities.

The recitation of the first part of Maggid (from “Avodim ho’yi’nu” until “Rabban Gamliel”) is noted by Ramoh as the appropriate practice by which we commemorate the miracle that occurred on that day. Since the selection read is not the indispensable part of Maggid (which begins with “Rabban Gamliel”) it does not conflict with the commemoration of the Exodus on Pesach night itself. [It should be noted that the Gra decided the Halacha not like the Ramoh and said not to read the Haggadah on Shabbos HaGodol.]

As we read Maggid on Pesach, as well as Shabbos HaGodol, one of the passages interprets the words of Hashem as He Yisborach informs Moshe Rabbenu of what will occur to the Egyptians on that final night in Egypt-the night of Makkas B’choros-the killing of the first-born of Egypt.

“V’o’var’ti bEretz Mitzrayim ba’lai’lo ha’hu v’hi’kei’si chol b’chor bEretz Mitzrayim…e’e’seh sh’fotim…v’ro’i’si es ha’dom u’fo’sach’ti …b’ha’ko’si…”(Perek 12/P’sukim 12-13). I Hashem will pass over Egypt …and I Hashem will smite the first born…and I Hashem will wreak punishment and I Hashem will see the blood on the doorposts and I Hashem will have mercy on Israel when I Hashem will smite Egypt.

The constant use of the “first-person” verb form is puzzling to the Haggadah (this passage is a Braiso). Usually Hashem describes His actions in the “third-person”. We have no other instance where the “I”-Hashem is repeated so many times.

The Haggadah explains that it is “A’ni v’lo mal’och Ani v’lo so’rof Ani Hashem Ani v’lo a’cher”. It is I Hashem. It is I Hashem and not an angel; it is I Hashem and not a seraph; it is I Hashem and no other.

What does this passage wish to exclude by this emphasis on the fact that the actions were clearly those of HaKodosh Boruch Hu? Certainly, one is not to think that some types of idols were involved. But there is more to it than that. One is also not allowed to attribute the events to Moshe Rabbenu. Truly, Moshe Rabbenu was there. Truly, Moshe Rabbenu was a central figure-as the Torah tells us so clearly.

However, when we come to analyze what truly occurred-there was only Hashem. Moshe was G-d’s instrument in having the Exodus occur-until it came to that final night in Egypt. On that final night in Egypt Moshe was in his dwelling like everyone else. Moshe was confined, not allowed out of the doors until Par’o sent his guards to hunt for him and Aharon and to urgently call them and banish them from Egypt immediately (P’sukim 31-32).

At the time of Exodus itself, the role played by Moshe Rabbenu had no significance-except for being the one through whom Par’o communicated.

That is why the name of Moshe does not appear in the Haggadah. He is forgotten on Pesach night.

Moshe Rabbenu is the epitome of leadership. “Torah tzi’vo lo’nu Moshe mo’ro’sho kehilas Yaakov” (D’vorim Perek 33/Posuk 4). Those are the very first words we teach a child who is beginning to talk. We teach those words prior to the words of Shema because they form the basis of our Masorah.

When it comes to the Seder, though, Moshe has to take a back seat. It is, as it were, that is role was so insignificant that it does not even deem mentioning.

What a lesson that teaches us. The greatest of people must know that before G-d they are humble. Dovid HaMelech, who signifies the Malchus of the Jewish People said about himself before G-d, “a’ni av’d’cho ben a’mo’se’cho” (Tehillim Perek 116/Posuk 16). I am your servant, Hashem, I am your servant, the son of your maidservant. This means that Dovid saw himself before G-d not as a King. He not only saw himself subservient before G-d but note that such subservience was utter and complete since it was passed on from generation to generation.

When the greatest of people humble themselves before G-d, a Torah Jew will not lose respect for them. The contrary will be true-their esteem will be even greater and their ability to influence others will increase geometrically. If a person who has total authority and control is able to be submissive before G-d, the rest of us can do the same as well.

“Chayov o’dom li’r’os es ‘atz’mo k’i’lu hu yo’tzo miMitzrayim” (Haggadah Shel Pesach). A person must see himself as if he (personally) left Egypt. Inherent in that obligation is to know how to relate to that which Hashem has done for us and will continue to do for us. Inherent in that obligation is to have a sense of our relationship to Him. Inherent in that obligation is to develop a perspective that will give us a framework for life, not just at the Seder but all year around, year after year.