When a person presents an offering of meal to the lord,

His offering shall be of choice flour. (Vayikrah 2:1)

 

When a person presents an offering - The term 'soul' [The Hebrew nefesh means both 'person' and 'soul'- Trans.] in respect to a voluntary offering is used only in conjunction with the flour offering. Who customarily brings a flour offering? A pauper. Said the Holy One, Blessed Be He: His offering is accepted as if he had offered his soul.

(Rashi: ibid. ibid.)

 

When a person brings a flour offering - All flour offerings are the holiest of the holy, and an outsider may not partake with them, and because it is the indigents' norm to bring flour offerings, the Holy One loves them He makes them holy of holies to show God's humility; He is a great king yet he loves the poor.

(Rav Yosef Behor Shor, ibid.ibid.)

 

And the flour offering of Judah and Yerushalayim shall be sweet to the Lord - In the future, an abundance of daat (wisdom) will spread and invest even in animals. "In all of My sacred mount nothing evil or vile shall be done, for the land shall be filled with daat (devotion - the Hebrew daat means - among other things - wisdom and intimacy) to the Lord" and offerings to be presented then - grain offerings, from the vegetable world - shall be sweet unto the Lord as in the days of yore and in the years of old.

(Olat Reiyah, p. 292)

                                                                                                                                               

 

Should a person bring forward

Amos Yisrael-Fleishauer

Approximately half of the Book of Vayikra deals with the offering of animals as a way of coming close to God (the word Korban- offering, derives from the word kirva - closeness.) The sacrificial ritual is not practiced today; for us it seems strange and distant. It was practiced in the Temple that no longer exists. Hope for the reconstruction of the Bet HaMikdash is woven throughout traditional prayers and Israeli political realities. I should like to develop a possibility for dialogue on this complex issue, while exercising close reading of the text.

Our point of departure is deep study of the plain meaning of the Biblical ext. The second verse of Parashat Vayikra is, at first glance, quite uncomplicated; it is, however, quite complex:

And He called to Moses and the Lord spoke to him from the Tent of Meeting, saying,

Speak to the Israelites and say to them, 'Should any person from you bring forward to the Lord an offering...'¹

Verse 2 is not at all simple. According to the course of events in Vayikra, this verse is God's first speech to Moshe from within the Tent of Appointment (end of Shemot). It opens the gates to the laws of the sacrifices.

Is this only a technical opening to the commandments regarding voluntary sacrifices?

Rabbi Shimshon Rafael Hirsch² points out the contrast between the "Children of Israel" whom Moshe addresses, and the "person" (adam-man) who offers the sacrifice. The choice of the word "adam" is not fortuitous. In other locations in Vayikra, other designations are used, such as "[male] man" or "man or woman". Rav Hirsch, in light of the Talmudic reading, concludes:

In the beginning of the Rules of Sacrifices, he [the text, or scripture, or God] opens the gate for all men, whoever they are, not only for a member of Israel. Every man has the right to offer sacrifices in the Temple.

Rav Hirsch emphasizes that universalism is not a relatively recent development in Judaism³. It is at the very heart of the Torat Kohanim, the Priestly Codex (which is also of ancient vintage and is sacrifice-centered).

Actually the opening of the second verse is superfluous. The verse could well have begun with "Should any person offer" or "Should you offer to the Lord". The addition of the phrase "to the Children of Israel" highlights the later use of the term "adam". Rav Hirsch elaborates on the artistry employed in this particular choice of words:

With a single word Scripture articulates Isaiah's vision regarding the alien nations: 'I will bring them to My sacred mount let them rejoice in My house of prayer. Their sacrifices shall be welcome on My altar. For My House shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples." (Isaiah 56)

Rav Hirsch probes the passage in depth. Even the word 'mikem" ("from you") is superfluous. The word can be deleted without affecting the passage "Should a person offer". Use of the word constitutes a narrowing down of those eligible to approach the Temple service. The Talmud relates to this reduction:

From [in the sense of 'some of'] you, but not all of you - to exclude the apostate". (Hulin 5)

An apostate may not offer sacrifices. Not only may a Jewish sinner offer sacrifices - he is actually called upon to do so; the mumar (one who has changed his religion), and one who has cut himself off from Jewish society may not. A fascinating contrast is created. The Talmud quotes the Torah as saying "I make this distinction only for you, not for the nations". Every non-Jew, without exception, has the right to come and sacrifice. Regarding the Jews, however, there is a distinction: "The mumar is excluded, for he has already cut off his entire being from Judaism". How to explain this strange rule - every non-Jew may sacrifice, but a Jewish mumar may not?

It should be remembered that the midrash (homiletic exegesis of the Bible) is not the only source for explanation of this odd structure of the passage under discussion. From a number of exegetical possibilities the Talmud chose this particular one. The Sages' particular choice cries out for explication.

Rav Hirsch explains that the Temple is a national endeavor with a universal goal. It follows that one who impairs the national effort, one who cuts himself off from the nation, cannot participate in it. There is no reason, however, for proscribing the gentile, whom we wish to bring closer.

According to the Talmud, the definition of a mumar is a religious one - changing faith, idolatry, violation of the Shabbat. But in the light of our above explanation, it can said that the definition is period-dependant - religion was indeed the defining component of the national identity. If the issue is ideological partnership in the universal vision and in the national endeavor for its realization, it is possible to suggest an alternative definition of the mumar:

One who withdraws from the community and does not share in its sorrow and does not participate in its fast, even though he has accumulated mitzvoth and good deeds, he has no portion in the world to come. (Tractate Taanit 11a)

A mumar, then, is one who separates himself (in various ways) from the community.

The focal point of the ritual, its goal, is universal. I will not deal here with the question of what is ritual, how does the sacrificial bring us closer to God, how does it serve the universal objective? I will say only that the prophet Isaiah changes the center of gravity of the future Temple from an institution of sacrifices to a house of prayer (in which sacrifices will still be offered):

In My house of prayer - Their sacrifices shall be welcome on My altar. For My House shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples."                                          

The Temple is called "A House of Prayer". I would like to suggest an additional step, one which will can become a national/universal project of the Temple, one with which it will be (more) easy to identify.

One of our era's most creative analysts of the Temple ritual was Rabbi Hayyim Hirschenson.⁴ He believed that in the future sacrifices will not be of animals.⁵

But his vision of the Temple is much wider and more basic. First of all he emphasizes the connection of all nations to the Temple, and the making the Temple suitable for becoming the center for all nations. He notes that the Temple can become a House of Pray for all the nations only if there if there will be "no image or symbol. which is particular to one nation alone." There are to be no specifically Jewish characteristics in the Temple. The Tablets of the Covenant inside the Holy of Holies are the basis of universal justice, the cultural foundation of all humanity.⁶

Rav Hirschenson sees the Temple also as the seat of international justice ... the center of justice between nations, and justice for the individual against the state. In his eyes this is the central goal of Zionism. In his view, this concept is spelled out by the prophet Isaiah:

In the days to come, the Mount of the Lord's House shall stand firm above the mountains ... And all the nations shall flow to it. And the many peoples shall go           and say come let us go up to the Mount of the Lord, to the House of the God of             Jacob that He may instruct us in His ways . . for instruction shall come forth from Zion, the word of the Lord from Yerushalayim, and He will judge among the nations, and arbitrate for the many peoples ... and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks, nations shall not take up sword against nation, they shall never again know war. (Isaiah 2)

At the time Rav Hirschenson was writing these words, the nations of the world were establishing the League of Nations, the international organization which preceded the United Nations. A few years earlier the International Court for Justice was established. Why did Rav Hirschenson prefer the Temple over these bodies?

The Beit Hamikdash is to be the place which will provide the answer to all injustice. The vision of peace and justice will be realized before the Lord and through His ritual. Rav Hirschenson criticizes the League of Nations, for at its center are the nations and not the people. At the center of the Temple, however, will stand man - not the state - and individuals will even be able to bring suit against nations. This world peace, in which man is free, is a pre-condition for Temple service. At that time, the Temple service will be perceived as facilitating and necessitating the application of justice.⁷

This is a lofty vision for all mankind, one begins with the word "man" in this week's Torah portion. It is totally dependant upon our ability not to be mumarim to the humanism in our Judaism. We must enlist in the effort on behalf of every person, for all mankind. So will we approach one another, and we shall bring man closer to the center of the (religious) Jewish effort.

·        What are the implications of this for us? Regarding our prayers? Regarding the national identity and the political positions?

·        Why must we consider the physical, corporeal ritual, to be the proper way for achieving such exalted goals?

·        Perhaps is would be more proper to learn the U.N. Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and... Isaiah??

·        And perhaps "Instead of bulls we will pay [the offering] of our lips." Prayer is that which should advance universalism and "man".

May it be His will that our holy site be a uniting, encompassing, and receptive factor, and not a source of contention.

May it be His will, that the material components of our ritual - prayers, offerings, the cult of consumerism, culture and honor - motivate us to repair of the world from within and through the means of that materialism. May the material serve man and not man the material. Then will the offering be a means for bringing close.

1. In order to avoid printing the Lord's name, I have quoted only segments of verses. This saves the reader the bother of burying these pages.

2. Shimshon Rafael Hirsch, 1808-1888, Frankfurt, Germany, leader of Orthodox Jewry (and the separatist community) and father of the "Torah and Derech Eretz ideology"

3. This is in contrast to the position to be found in research of Judaism which claims that in early times Judaism included primitive and tribal ritual; with time Judaism developed in to more 'highly developed' religion with a universal outlook.

4. Hayyim Hirschenson, 1857-1935, Safed, Israel-Hoboken, New Jersey.

5. Regarding his controversy with Rabbi Kook, see his response "Malki BaKodesh, letters in part 4; comp. with Rabbi Kook, "The Vision of Vegetarianism and Peace". It is a subject worthy of additional and deep discussion

6. (Hirschenson: Malki BaKodesh 11-12 (1919). To the best of my knowledge, these selections have not been studied in the context which I propose here. Therefore, I quote the entire text with notes: "And from there all the sages of Israel shall teach the nation justice, law, and righteousness. And there shall stand chairs of justice of the Great Bet Din in Yerushalayim. From there shall come forth Torah and light to all the world, and this House shall be a House of Prayer for all nations. For there will not be present any image or symbol particular to a single nation in which another cannot believe. Inside the ark will be only the two Tablets of the Covenant which are the pillar of civilization for all the nations, and all the nations shall flow there and many peoples shall go and say 'Come let s go up to the Mount of Lord to the House of the God of Jacob that He may instruct us in His ways and that we may walk in His Paths, for instruction shall come forth from Zion, the word of Lord from Jerusalem'. This is the form that this house must take when we arrange there our government's organization" Further on: "It is not far-fetched to think that this is the period of which Isaiah prophesied: The Mount of Lord's House shall stand firm above the mountains and tower above the hills and to it shall flow the many peoples etc and he made no mention of burnt offerings, meal offerings or animal sacrifice..."

7. "Before we will be informed the location of the altar and we have a functioning High Priest, the Mount of the House of God will be standing atop the mountains... and will judge between the nations and will arbitrate for the many peoples... and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks, nations shall not take up sword against nation, they shall never again know war", the simple meaning of which is that "He will judge between he nations" is connected to 'The Mount of the House of the Lord", meaning that Mount of the House of Lord will be the place where God will judge between the nations, etc. The inevitable conclusion is that the Hall of Peace will be located in this House, it will not be the Hall of Peace as in the Hague in which the delegates of peace bowed in awe before those who instill fear in the Land of the Living, and the slightest accusation of injustice leveled at one of the kings of the earth is considered rebellion. It will also be more than the League of Nations proposed by "the Father of National Morality", the Wilson Program ( the basis for the Versailles Treaty and the establishment of the League of Nations., A.Y.); ...it will house the Court of Nations which will judge nations with righteousness and the peoples with justice, and wickedness will no longer rule the world, and the idea that nationalism justifies wickedness and injustice will be voided and there will be equality before the law for every nation, very man will the right to develop according to his nature without impairing the rights of his fellow man, and man will not rule over man nor nation over nation, nor nation over man nor man over nation to their detriment, nation shall not lift up sword against nation and they shall no longer learn war".

Amos Yisrael-Flieshauer raises four children in Yerushalyim. He is a volunteer in the Center for Victims of Sexual Abuse and is writing a doctorate on relations between the Halacha and international law.

I thank my wife Esther for her helpful advice. I will be happy to receive readers' thoughts on the article. aisrael@idc.ac.il

 

 

 

All contributions to either the NIF or PEF should be marked as donor-advised to Oz ve'Shalom, the Shabbat Shalom project. For Donations to NIF, please mention that Oz veShalom is registered as no. 5708.

If you wish to subscribe to the email English editions of Shabbat Shalom, to print copies of it for distribution in your synagogue, to inquire regarding the dedication of an edition in someone's honor or memory, to find out how to make tax-exempt donations, or to suggest additional helpful ideas, please call +972-52-3920206 or at ozshalomns@gmail.com

If you enjoy Shabbat Shalom, please consider contributing towards its publication and distribution.

• Hebrew edition distributed in Israel $700
• English edition distributed via email $ 100

Issues may be dedicated in honor of an event, person, simcha, etc. Requests must be made 3-4 weeks in advance to appear in the Hebrew, 10 days in advance to appear in the English email.

 

About us

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom is a movement dedicated to the advancement of a civil society in Israel. It is committed to promoting the ideals of tolerance, pluralism, and justice, concepts that have always been central to Jewish tradition and law.

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom shares a deep attachment to the land of Israel and it no less views peace as a central religious value. It believes that Jews have both the religious and the national obligation to support the pursuit of peace. It maintains that Jewish law clearly requires us to create a fair and just society, and that co-existence between Jews and Arabs is not an option but an imperative.

4,500 copies of a 4-page peace oriented commentary on the weekly Torah reading are written and published by Oz VeShalom/Netivot Shalom and they are distributed to over 350 synagogues in Israel and are sent overseas via email. Our web site is www.netivot-shalom.org.il.

Shabbat Shalom is available on our website: www.netivot-shalom.org.il