Midreshet Lindenbaum - Parshat Shemini

Rav Menachem Leibtag

1. QUESTIONS FOR PREPARATION
2. SHIUR ON PARASHAT SHEMINI
3. QUESTIONS FOR FURTHER IYUN

1. QUESTIONS FOR PREPARATION

Part I - Questions for the 'Shabbat Table' Chet Nadav & Avihu (and a little 'methodology')
1. The most 'popular' topic in this week's Parsha is the sin of Nadav and Avihu. If you are really discussing this at the 'shabbos table', ask anyone who is listening (or at least yourself): to the best of your recollection - what did Nadav and Avihu do wrong? [Most likely you will hear several different answers. If so, before you continue, try to explain why everyone has heard so many different answers.]

2. Now, ask a different question. In your opinion, to what degree was their 'sin' intentional, i.e.
a) Did they knew they were doing something wrong, but they did it anyhow (what we call "mayzid").
b) Did they unintentionally do something wrong, but they should have been more careful in their behavior (what we call "shogeg").
c) Did they have good intentions (i.e. they intended to do something that they thought was good - sort of like Aharon's original intentions at "chet ha'egel"), but unfortunately it was something that they did not realize was forbidden (what we call a 'tragedy').
Relate these three possibilities to all of the various answers that were raised in the first part of your discussion.
Considering their punishment, which possibility seems to be most logical?
Consider the 'setting', i.e. that their sin takes place during the dedication ceremony of the Mishkan - before the eyes of the entire nation. Use this point to explain a possible reason for the severity of their punishment - even had their intentions been good!

3. Before we discuss the various opinions of the commentators, let's review from 9:23-10:20 (i.e. the sugya of Nadav & Avihu's sin and its aftermath). Based on these psukim alone, attempt to determine on your own what was Nadav and Avihu's sin. How do we know for sure that they sinned?

[In your answer, relate to 10:3, as well as to the 'inserted' "parshia" from 10:8-11.]
Do the psukim tells us precisely what it was that they did wrong? Do they at least 'hint' to what was done incorrectly?
See also Vayikra 16:2 and Bamidbar 3:4 & 26:21. Do these psukim add any information that we were not aware of in Parshat Shmini? Do they shed any light on the your answers to the above questions?

4. See Rashi on 10:2, noting how he quotes the two opinions found in Eiruvin 63a [disrespect to their elders, or entering the Mishkan in a state of drunkenness]. What is the 'textual basis' for each of these two opinions?
In your opinion, are these two opinions based on thematic considerations supported by a textual 'nuance', or visa versa? Explain! How do these answers relate to question #2 above (regarding their 'intentions')?
[See Chizkuni on 10:1-3. Note how he himself explains these psukim, and how he uses his own interpretation to explain the two opinions of Chazal (quoted by Rashi).]

5. Next, see Ibn Ezra, noting how he explains explicitly that Nadav and Avihu had good intentions. Nonetheless, they were punished. Does he explain why? [Again, relate to question #2 above.] Relate this to Ibn Ezra's explanation of Aharon's behavior at "chet ha'egel" and the phrase "asher lo tziva Hashem" in 10:1 (and some twenty times in Parshat Pekudei).
Can you explain why Ibn Ezra does not quote Rashi (i.e. either opinion of Chazal)?

6. Next, see Ramban on 10:1. Note how his interpretation is based primarily on his textual analysis of 10:1 itself (and the obvious parallel to the laws of the Mizbach Ktoret in Shmot 30:9). Note as well how Ramban focusses on the 'fire' aspect, in both 10:1 and 10:2, and less so on the "ktoret" itself.
How would Ramban answer question #2 above (re: their intentions)? Can you explain why?
In your opinion, why do you think that Ramban does not quote Rashi (either to agree or disagree with the two opinions in Chazal - or even Ibn Ezra) before he offers his own interpretation? [What can we infer from this in regard to his own methodology of study?] Now, see Ramban on 10:3, noting how he quotes Chazal on a different issue, and Ibn Ezra; and explains why he disagrees. Use this Ramban to answer the above question.
[See footnotes on Ramban 10:1 in either Torat Chaim or Chavell editions, noting how they explain that Ramban is alluding to concepts in "kabbala" in this interpretation.]

7. See Seforno on 10:1. Note how he bases his interpretation on the juxtaposition of the laws of the daily Olah (see Shmot 29:38- 42) and the laws of the Mizbach ha'Ktoret (see Shmot 30:1-10). Note as well how Seforno claims that not only did Nadav and Avihu have good intentions, they even based their actions on their own understanding of this juxtaposition of psukim!
First of all, relate this to question #2 above!
In what manner is Seforno similar to Ramban, and in what manner is his interpretation different?
Recall our TSC shiur on Parshat Tezaveh, in relation to the location of the laws of Mizbach ha'Ktoret (in Shmot 30:1-9) after the completion of the "shchina" unit (chapters 25 thru 29). Relate the conclusions of that shiur to Seforno's interpretation!
Finally, note how Seforno concludes his interpretation, claiming that this action is precisely what Chazal refer to (i.e. R' Eliezer's opinion) that 'they taught a "halacha" without consulting Moshe' (quoted in Rashi on 10:2). However, the Gemara in Eiruvin appears to provide a different explanation (i.e. the though that 'even though fire comes from heaven, it is a mitzvah to bring our own fire as well'). In your opinion, would Seforno agree with that interpretation as well, or is he offering a different explanation of R' Eliezer's opinion?

8. In regard to these various opinions, can you explain why the various commentators search for additional or different reasons for Nadav and Avihu's sin, even though there are already two answers provided by Chazal? [Note how some of the "parshanim" attempt to connect their own explanation to that of Chazal's (e.g. Chizkuni and Seforno) in an attempt to add insight to what Chazal said; while others will offer a completely different interpretation, as long as it based on thorough analysis of the psukim (Ibn Ezra and Ramban). As you study these commentators, keep this in mind; see if this pattern continues!]

9. For "afikomen", see Rashbam on 10:1. Note how he provides a very clear and concise explanation for what Nadav and Avihu did wrong (even though they may have had good intentions). Also note how and why he explains that 10:1 should be understood as 'past perfect' (i.e. 10:1 took place before 9:24), as the fire in 9:24 and 10:2 is the same!
Then, see Rashbam on 10:2-3 where he explains this in greater detail, and note how he beautifully explains 10:3, even though this pasuk (at first glance) appears to be rather cryptic.
Note how Rashbam bases his interpretation on the laws of Vayikra 21:10-12 (assuming that Aharon was already aware of those laws -as they were given at an earlier time). What major assumption does Rashbam make in regard to these psukim (that is not written)? What does he gain by making this assumption?
Would you agree that Rashbam's interpretation is the simple "pshat" of these difficult psukim? Explain why yes, or why not!

The Ohel Moed - Old & New
10. Recall from Parshat Ki-tisa that in the aftermath of chet ha'egel, Moshe moved his tent outside the camp [read Shmot 33:7 carefully in its context in 33:1-12]. In that pasuk, how does the Torah refer to Moshe's tent? Can you explain why the Torah chose this specfic name?
Does Moshe's tent ever return to the 'inside' of the camp?
If so, when? [Relate to Shmot 25:8.]
How does this name "ohel moed" (n 33:7) relate to the fact that later on the Mishkan is also referred to as an "ohel moed"? [Note the translation of Unkelos for "ohel moed" in Shmot 33:7 and then in Shmot 40:1,34,35, etc. Is it the same or different? Can you explain why?]
What is the "shoresh" of the word "moed". Relate to the Hebrew word "vaad" or "va'adah" (a committee - in modern Hebrew). Relate also to Shmot 25:22 and 29:42-43!
(Who is 'meeting' whom? How does "moed" later come to mean 'yom-tov'? Relate to Vayikra 23:1-4 and Shmot 23:17!)
Based on this discussion, how would you explain the word "moadim" in "v'hayu l'otot u'l'moadim..." in Breishit 1:14; i.e. are these 'meetings' or 'holidays'?

Kashrut or Kedusha?
11. How would you title the laws that are recorded at the end of Parshat Shmini (i.e. in chapter 11)?
Relate to the summary psukim in 11:43-47. If these laws are more than just "kashrut", then explain what the more general title should be, and why this section does includes certain laws pertaining to what we refer to as "kashrut".
Compare these psukim to Devarim 14:3-21. Do those psukim deal only with "kashrut" or is there a more general topic as well. How are these psukim different than those in Vayikra? Relate your answer to the primary themes of Vayikra and Devarim respectively.

Part II - Questions for Preparation (for weekly shiur)

1. On Yom Ha'Shmini, the day of the Mishkan's dedication, we find in chapter 9 a set of korbanot (see 9:1-4,7-21) which lead to a certain climax. What is this climax (relate to 9:5-6,22-24), and how do these korbanot relate to it?
In what manner are these events similar to the events that took place at Har Sinai? Be sure to relate to Shmot 24:1-17, especially to 24:5-6 and 24:15-16. How and why is this parallel significant?
[As usual, relate your answer to the first Ramban on Parshat Terumah (Shmot 25:1)]
. In what manner to these korbanot relate to the events of "chet ha'egel" as well?

2. At this time (if you have ample time), answer the first two questions in the Parshanut section below.

3. Review 9:1-4 once again, and make a chart of all of the special korbanot which were to be offered on Yom HaShmini. Organize your chart according to the groupings of:

a) Korban of Aharon, korban of the people
b) Korbanot Olah, Chatat, Shlamim.
Then, using that chart as a base, compare these korbanot to the korbanot that were offered:
a) During the 7 days of miluim ceremony (see Vayikra 8:1-36);
b) At "brit na'aseh v'nishma" at Har Sinai (Shmot 24:4-6);
c) Yearly on Yom Kippur (based on Vayikra 16:1-5);
d) Yearly on Shavuot (Vayikra 23:17-19)
While doing so, consider:
Who must bring each korban (Aharon or the people);
What categories of korbanot are offered;
What specific and (species of) animal is offered for the korban.
Note that an "egel" is a baby "par," and a "keves" is a baby "ayil."

4. Using this table, and relating to 9:4-6 & 9:23-24, attempt to explain the parallel between the korbanot of Yom ha'Shmini and their purpose, the korbanot on Yom Kippur and their purpose, and the events that took place at Ma'amad Har Sinai?
Relate to Shmot 24:9-11, 24:15-17 and 40:34-38.
In what manner does this day (i.e. Yom HaShmini) coincide the day of "hakamat ha'Mishkan" described in Shmot 40:1-2,38? [For further iyun, see Parshanut section - question #3.]
In your opinion, which of the korbanot offered on Yom ha'Shimini relate directly to the events of Ma'amad Har Sinai, and which korbanot relate to the events at "chet ha'egel".
Which of these aspects to we find in the korbanot offered on Yom Kippur, and which of these aspects to we find in the special korbanot offered on Shavuot (in Vayikra 23:17-21)?

5. What event at Ma'amad Har Sinai is parallel to Vayikra 9:23?
Based on that parallel, why are Nadav and Avihu punished?
Relate to Shmot 19:20-24!
[See Chizkuni on Vayikra 10:3!]
Based on the shiur on Parshat Tezaveh, why do you think that Nadav and Avihu thought that it was necessary to offer k'toret? In what manner is their sin similar to Aharon's sin at chet ha'egel, relate to last phrase in Vayikra 10:1.

2. SHIUR ON PARASHAT SHEMINI

For some reason, the dedication of the Mishkan required two consecutive ceremonies:
1) The seven day "miluim" service (see Vayikra 8:1-36); &
2) The special korbanot offered on "Yom Ha'Shmini" (9:1-24).

In this week's shiur, we explain the necessity for each of these ceremonies, as well as their relevance not only to Sefer Vayikra, but also to our understanding of how we celebrate Yom Kippur and Shavuot.

INTRODUCTION

Even though Sefer Vayikra is primarily a book of laws, Parshat Shmini is an exception as it contains a 'story' (i.e. a narrative). Therefore, in our shiur, we must explain not only what this narrative is about, we must also explain why it is recorded at this point in Chumash. To do so, we begin our shiur with a quick review of the first half of the Sefer Vayikra, to identify the precise point where this story is told.

WHAT 'BELONGS' IN SEFER VAYIKRA

Vayikra began with the laws of korbanot that the individual can or must bring (chapters 1->5), and continued with the laws for how the kohanim should offer these korbanot (chapters 6->7).
At this point (towards the end of Parshat Tzav /see 8:1), this continuous presentation of mitzvot is 'interrupted' by a set of stories in chapters 8 thru 10:
� Chapter 8 describes the seven day "miluim" inauguration ceremony of the kohanim and the mizbayach,
� Chapter 9 describes the Mishkan's inaugural ceremony on "Yom ha'Shmini" [the 'EIGHTH day'] when God's glory 'returns',
� Chapter 10 describes the story of the tragic death of Nadav and Avihu on that day.

Then, in chapter 11, Sefer Vayikra returns once again to its presentation of various laws pertaining primarily to the Mishkan. [This presentation of LAWS continues till the end of the Sefer!]
[Parshat Shmini concludes with the laws of "tumat ochlin" (see 11:1-47); then Tazria/Metzora continues with other laws relating to "tumah".]

This peculiarity becomes more acute when we consider that this entire narrative (i.e. in Vayikra chapters 8->10) may actually 'belong' in Sefer Shmot. Recall how Sefer Shmot concluded with the story of Mishkan's assembly and its dedication. [In case you forgot, review chapter 40, especially 40:12-14!]
Furthermore, the story of the seven-day "miluim" most definitely 'belongs' in Sefer Shmot. Recall that its original commandment was first recorded in Parshat Tezaveh (see Shmot chapter 29, compare with Vayikra chapter 8). Considering that Parshiot Vayakhel/Pkudei record the fulfillment of every other commandment recorded in Parshiot Trumah/Tzaveh, there is no apparent reason why the seven-day "miluim" ceremony should be the only exception!

In summary, we have shown that stories (in general) don't belong in Sefer Vayikra, while this specific one DOES belong in Sefer Shmot. Hence, our shiur must explain why the Torah prefers placing this story in Vayikra in what appears to be an 'interruption' to its presentation of the mitzvot.
To do so, we must first explain the difference between the details of the Mishkan found in Sefer Shmot in contrast to those found in Vayikra. Then will discuss what is special about each of the two dedication ceremonies to explain why they are recorded specifically in Sefer Vayikra (and not in Shmot).

BETWEEN SHMOT AND VAYIKRA

There is a very simple distinction that explains why we find the laws concerning the Mishkan in two different books. Sefer Shmot describes the details of its construction, while Sefer Vayikra explains how to use it. For example, recall how Shmot chapters 25-31 (Parshiot Terumah/Tezaveh) constituted a distinct unit describing the commandment to BUILD the Mishkan, while chapters 35-40 (Parshiot Vayakhel/Pekudei) detailed how it was actually built. In contrast, the first seven chapters of Sefer Vayikra explain the various korbanot the individual can (or must) bring and how the Kohanim are to offer them. However, for some reason the details of the seven-day miluim ceremony are recorded in both Shmot and Vayikra! Parshat Tezaveh details its commandment, while Parshat Tzav tells the story of how it took place. To understand why, we must consider the purpose of this ceremony, and relate it to the above distinction.

THE SEVEN DAY "MILUIM" CEREMONY

Let's review the primary elements of this ceremony:
1) First, Moshe must annoint the Mishkan, its vessels, the kohanim, and the "bigdei kehuna", using the "shemen ha'mishcha" oil (see 8:5-13).
2) Then, on each day three korbanot are offered:
� A CHATAT - one "par" (bull)- the blood is sprinkled on the upper section of the MIZBAYACH
� An OLAH - one "ayil" (ram)- the blood is sprinkled on the bottom of the MIZBAYACH
� The MILUIM offering (like a SHLAMIM) - one "ayil" (ram) - the blood is sprinkled on the KOHANIM.
(see Shmot 29:1-37 & Vayikra 8:14-24)

This anointing ceremony can easily be understood as the final stage of the Mishkan's construction. So too the korbanot, for the sprinkling of their blood also appears to be a type of anointing. From this perspective, this ceremony should be included in Sefer Shmot, at the conclusion of the set of laws to build the Mishkan. [And that is exactly where we find it (see Shmot chapter 29 and the TSC shiur on Parshat Tezaveh).]

On the other hand, the ceremony is also the FIRST time that korbanot are actually offered. Hence, it also serves as the first FUNCTION of the Mishkan, for this is the first time that it is being 'used'. Hence, the details of the ceremony are also recorded in Sefer Vayikra, together with the other laws how to use the Mishkan.
[The deeper meaning of this is discussed in Part Two.]

With this in mind, let's discuss the purpose of the additional ceremony that takes place on the 'eighth day'.

YOM HA'SHMINI

On "Yom Ha'shmini", the day following the completion of the seven day 'miluim', the Mishkan becomes fully functional. Furthermore, on this day, Aharon and his sons will officiate for the first time. Thus, a special inaugural ceremony is necessary (see 9:1-24), which will be quite different than the seven day 'miluim'.
On this day, we find a commandment to offer a special set of korbanot whose purpose is stated explicitly: "This is what Hashem has commanded you to do IN ORDER THAT the PRESENCE of God ('kvod Hashem') may APPEAR to you" (9:6) [see also 9:5]

Recall that due to the sins of "chet ha'egel" God had taken away His "shchinah" from the camp of Bnei Yisrael, the very same "shchinah" that Bnei Yisrael had witnessed at Ma'amad Har Sinai:
"Moshe took the tent and pitched it OUTSIDE the camp, FAR AWAY from the camp and called it the OHEL MOED. Anyone who sought God would have to go the Ohel Moed located OUTSIDE the camp." (See Shmot 33:7 and its context)

When Moshe ascended Har Sinai to receive the second luchot, God promised him that His "shchinah" would indeed return to the camp (see 34:8-10), however it was first necessary for Bnei Yisrael to build the Mishkan to facilitate its return. [Note Shmot 25:8 -"v'asu li mikdash v'shachanti B'TOCHAM" - in contrast to 33:7.]
Once the construction of the Mishkan was complete, the special korbanot of Yom ha'Shmini mark its climax - for they will facilitate the RETURN of the SHCHINA:
"For today God's glory (kvod Hashem) will appear to you" (9:5) [See also 9:23-24, compare with Shmot 24:16-18.]

Therefore, the special korbanot offered during this ceremony serve a double purpose, reflecting this background:
(1) They must atone for the sins of "chet ha'egel". (2) They must recreate the experience of Ma'amad Har Sinai.

This is precisely what we find:
(1) Due to CHET HA'EGEL:
Aharon must bring a chatat and olah:

"He said to Aharon: Take an 'EGEL' for a CHATAT..." (9:2)
Bnei Yisrael must also bring a chatat and olah:
"Speak to Bnei Yisrael saying: Take a 'seir' for a chatat and a an 'EGEL' and a 'keves' for an olah..." (9:3)

(2) To 'recreate' MA'AMAD HAR SINAI:
Bnei Yisrael must also offer a Korban Shlamim together with their olot, just as they had offered when God appeared onto them during Ma'amad Har Sinai (see Shmot 24:4-11, read carefully!).
"[to Bnei Yisrael, cont'd.,...] and a 'shor' and 'ayil' for a SHLAMIM to offer before God, and a mincha, FOR TODAY GOD WILL APPEAR TO YOU." (9:4)
[This parallel emphasizes, once again, the purpose of the Mishkan as a perpetuation of Har Sinai.]

YOM HA'SHMINI / YOM KIPPUR AND SHAVUOT

Although the special korbanot of Yom ha'Shmini were a 'one-time event', we find a very similar set of korbanot that are offered every year on Yom Kippur which reflect this very same purpose.

YOM KIPPUR

Recall from Vayikra chapter 16 that on Yom Kippur a special Chatat and Olah are offered by the Kohen Gadol and another set are offered by Bnei Yisrael. Recall as well that these korbanot are offered on the very same day that Bnei Yisrael received atonement for chet ha'egel!
The following table highlights this parallel:

YOM HA'SHMINI YOM KIPPUR (in Acharei Mot)
AHARON
Chatat: EGEL    PAR (an adult egel)
Olah:   AYIL    AYIL
BNEI YISRAEL
Chatat:   SE'IR    SE'IR
Olah:    KEVES   AYIL (an adult keves)
EGEL - - (+ korbanot in Pinchas i.e. par ayil & k'vasim)

[The basic structure of korbanot is the same. The minute differences can be explained due to the special nature of Yom Ha'Shmini. See Further Iyun Section.]

Hence, Yom Kippur can be understood as an annual rededication of the Mishkan, especially from the perspective of its purpose as a site where Bnei Yisrael can receive atonement for their sins.

SHAVUOT

Even though the primary parallel to Yom ha'Shmini is clearly Yom Kippur, there was an additional korban SHLAMIM offered on Yom ha'Shmini that doesn't find a parallel on Yom Kippur. [This only stands to reason, as a korban Shlamim is eaten, and on Yom Kippur we are not allowed to eat.] However, we do find a parallel to this korban on Shavuot, which just so happens to be the only holiday when Bnei Yisrael offer a 'collective' Korban Shlamim:

"And with the 'shtei ha'lechem' you shall offer an olah... a chatat... and two lambs for a ZEVACH SHLAMIM" (Vyk 23:19)

Recall as well that the first time Bnei Yisrael offered a shlamim was at Ma'amad Har Sinai (see Shmot 24:5). As the Mishkan was to perpetuate that experience, we find a korban Shlamim offered at the inaugural ceremony of the Mishkan on Yom ha'Shmini. To remember that event, we offer a special korban Shlamim (shel tzibur) every year on Shavuot, commemorating Ma'amad Har Sinai. It is not by chance that this korban, like the korbanot of Yom ha'Shmini, is offered at the completion of seven cycles of seven days.

NADAV AND AVIHU

At the conclusion of this ceremony, Nadav and Avihu are punished by death for offering "aish zara" which God had NOT COMMANDED (see 10:1-2). Again we find a parallel to Har Sinai and chet ha'egel. At Har Sinai, Bnei Yisrael AND the Kohanim were forewarned:

"And God told Moshe: Go down and WARN the people that they must not break through [the barrier surrounding] Har Sinai, lest they gaze at Hashem and perish. The KOHANIM also, who COME NEAR HASHEM, must sanctify themselves ("yitkadashu" - compare "b'krovei akadesh"/10:3), lest God punish them." (Shmot 19:21)

[See also Chizkuni on Vayikra 10:3-4.]
As this inaugural ceremony parallels the events of Har Sinai, the warning concerning approaching Har Sinai also applies to the Mishkan. Extra caution was necessary.
Similarly, just as Aharon, despite his good intentions, had sinned at Chet ha'Egel, in suggesting an action which GOD HAD NOT COMMANDED, so too his children Nadav and Avihu. Despite their good intention when offering this "aish zarah", God DID NOT COMMAND them to do so! [Recall the repetition of "ka'asher tzivah Hashem et Moshe in Parshiot Vayakhel/Pekudei.]
Because of these events, i.e. the improper entry of Nadav and Avihu into the Mishkan, Sefer Vayikra continues at this point with a discussion of the laws of "tumah v'tahara", which regulate who is permitted and who is forbidden to enter the Mishkan (chaps 11-16).

WHY IN SEFER VAYIKRA?

Now that we have explained the purpose of these two dedication ceremonies, we must explain why this lone lengthy narrative of Sefer Vayikra is recorded in this sefer instead of in Sefer Shmot.
One could suggest that this narrative, even though it may technically 'belong' in Sefer Shmot, is recorded specifically in Sefer Vayikra because of the special connection between this narrative and the laws of korbanot in Sefer Vayikra:
The special "ayil" offered during the 'seven day miluim' ceremony, we explained, serves as the 'prototype' for the korban SHLAMIM for it included the separation of the "chazeh v'shok" for the kohen offering the korban. Therefore, this narrative is recorded immediately after the laws of the korban SHLAMIM in Parshat Tzav (see 7:35-37 & last week's shiur).
Similarly, the special korbanot offered on Yom ha'Shmini can be understood as the 'prototype' for the yearly korbanot offered yearly on Yom Kippur as detailed later in chapter 16, and the special korban Shlamim offered on Shavuot as explained later in chapter 23. Finally, the narrative describing Nadav & Avihu's forbidden entry in the Kodesh serves as the introduction to an entire set of laws concerning who CAN and who CANNOT enter the Mikdash, beginning in chapter 11 and continuing thru chapter 16. Accordingly, we can continue to understand Sefer Vayikra as a 'book of laws' - "torat kohanim". However, it includes this narrative describing the dedication of the Mikdash for that story serves as the basis for various types of korbanot that are offered in the Mishkan.

In the shiurim to follow, we will continue to discuss this theme.

3. FOR FURTHER IYUN

A. During the seven day miluim, the "shemen ha'mishcha" oil was used to dedicate the Mishkan and its vessels. Relate this to the story of Yaakov's neder in Bet-tel as described in Breishit 28:18-22 and 35:9-14!).

B. In contrast to the korbanot of 'seven day miluim', the commandment to offer the special korbanot of "Yom ha'Shmini" are never mentioned beforehand, not even in Trumah/Tzaveh!
1. Relate this to their function as atonement for Chet ha'Egel.
2. Relate this to the machloket Rashi/Ramban concerning when Trumah/Tzaveh was given (before or after Chet haEgel)?
3. How does Aharon's korban on the seven day miluim relate to his korban on Yom Shmini?
See Rashi on 9:1-2, noting that he states that Aharon's "egel" on Yom ha'Shmini was to INFORM us that God had forgiven Aharon for chet ha'egel, in contrast to Ramban who explains the the "egel" itself was because Aharon still needed kapara for chet ha'egel. Explain this Rashi based on Rashi on Shmot 29:1-2 and his machloket with Ramban concerning WHEN the commandment to build the Mishkan was given.

C. The korbanot of the seven day miluim ceremony can be seen as the symbol of all korbanot which will be offered on the mizbayach.
The category of chatat could include the subcategory of asham ("k'chatat k'asham"...).
The category of olah could include all korbanot n'dava which are kodsehi kodshim, including mincha. The category of ayil ha'miluim includes all korbanot n'dava which are kodshim kalim.

1. Note the similarities between the ayl ha'miluim and the standard korban shlamim, especially in regard to the chazeh and shok. 8:25,29. See also 8:31. Relate this to 7:28-37, especially to the fact that in 7:37 miluim precedes zevach ha'shlamim!
2. Note that in Parshat Tzaveh, the laws of korban Tamid follow the commandment of the miluim (see Shmot 29:38-41). Use this to explain the significance of the korban Tamid, and its function as the continuation of Har Sinai. Relate to Bamidbar 28:6!
Relate this to the other "avodot tamid" in the Mishkan.
3. Note also that during the seven day miluim ceremony, the "dam chatat" is sprinkled on the four corners on TOP of the mizbayach, while the "dam olah" is sprinkled on the BOTTOM. Explain the meaning of these two sections of the mizbayach.

D. The pattern of seven days followed by the 'eighth day' is also found in "brit milah", succot and shmini atzeret, shavuot after seven weeks, yovel after seven shmitot, korbanot machshirin of metzora and zav. [Find other examples.] Based on the above shiur, explain why.

E. To better understand the punishment of Nadav and Avihu, review Shmot 19:20-25, 24:1 & 8-9, and compare to Vayikra 10:1-3. F. The parallel korbanot brought on Yom ha'Shmini and at Ma'amad Har Sinai are far from identical. Although both events include "korbanot olot & shlamim", there are several differences on 'Yom ha'Shmini'. The following table compares the korbanot of both events and notes the differences with a '*' followed by a letter:

HAR SINAI YOM HA'SHMINI
AM YISRAEL:
*A* Chatat - 'seir' (goat)
Olah - par (bull) *B* Olah -'egel' & keves
Shlamim - par (bull) Shlamim -'shor' & 'ayil'

AHARON: *C* Chatat - 'egel'
(no korban) Olah - 'ayil'

*A) On 'Yom ha'Shmini' the Nation adds a korban 'chatat'.
*B) On 'Yom ha'Shmini' an 'egel' is offered instead of a 'par'.)
*C) On 'Yom ha'Shmini' Aharon is required to bring an extra korban.

These differences can be understood in light of "chet ha'egel". We will now explain each letter.
A) As the Nation had sinned, they must now offer a 'chatat'.
B) This minor change from 'par' to an 'egel' reflects their sin.
C) As Aharon had sinned, he must bring a 'chatat & olah'.

The significance of this "egel l'chatat" is accented by comparing this korban to the 'chatat & olah' of the 'miluim':

'7 day miluim' - "PAR l'chatat v'ayil l'olah"
'Yom ha'Shmini' - "EGEL l'chatat v'ayil l'olah"
There is only one minor change - the 'egel' (a calf - baby bull) replaces the 'par' (adult bull). Whenever the kohen gadol is required to bring a chatat, it is always a 'par' (see 4:3). On this special day his standard korban is changed to an 'egel', reflecting his atonement for Chet ha'egel.

The nation was also commanded to bring a 'chatat'. If indeed this 'chatat' was in atonement for chet ha'egel, it too should have been an 'egel'. Why was this korban a 'seir'?

The reason is actually quite simple. Whenever the NATION brings a 'chatat' it can only be a 'seir' - a goat. (See parshat ha'musafim bamidbar chps.28->29/ each korban musaf is always a "seir izim l'chatat"). Therefore, the Nation must bring a chatat because of Chet ha'egel, however the animal must be a 'seir'.
The case of Aharon is different. The standard korban chatat of the Kohen Gadol is a 'par' (vayikra 4:3). Therefore, the change from a 'par' to an 'egel' is permitted, as an 'egel' is simply a baby 'par'.
A very similar change from 'par' to 'egel' does take place in the Nation's korban 'olah'. At Har Sinai the nation brought a 'par' as an 'olah'. Now, on 'Yom ha'Shmini' they bring an 'egel' instead of the standard 'par'. Recall that an olah can also be offered in atonement for a sin when one is not obligated to bring a chatat.
The second animal of the Nation's korban 'olah' is a lamb. It is the standard 'olah' of every "korban tzibur" offered in the Mishkan.
The korban 'shlamim' is a 'shor & ayil'. At Har Sinai, the shlamim were also 'parim'. ('par' and 'shor' are two names for the same animal - a bull). Due to the nature of the korban shlamim (a peace offering), it would not be proper to offer a 'reminder' of chet ha'egel. This korban relates only to the 'hitgalut' aspect of this ceremony.
The second animal of the korban shlamim is an 'ayil' (ram). One could suggest that this korban is a reminder of 'akeidat yitchak', a cornerstone in the development of our covenantal relationship with Hashem.

For more articles by Rav Menachem Leibtag, visit his web site, www.tanach.org

Missed a Parsha? Visit our Parsha Archives

For more articles by Rav Menachem Leibtag, visit his web site, www.tanach.org

Missed a Parsha? Visit our Parsha Archives