PARSHAS TZAV | 12 NISSAN 5770 | 27 MARCH 2010

This action was fraught with danger as the lamb was more than an animal; it was the Egyptian god! In a courageous act of defiance, the Hebrews tied the lambs to their bedposts – oblivious to their incessant bleating. When the incredulous, outraged Egyptian masters demanded an explanation, they were told the truth: the lambs would soon be slaughtered and eaten.

After 210 years of immersion within Egyptian civilization, many Jews had also adopted the lamb as their god. When G-d commanded that a lamb be set aside and tied to the bedpost for four days, the Jewish people abandoned their idolatrous practice, and courageously fulfilled this mitzvah, demonstrating their complete trust and faith in G-d. Despite this daring act, the Egyptians miraculously did not utter a word or lift a hand. They watched helplessly as their god was being prepared for slaughter. This was indeed a great miracle (nes gadol) and gives this

Shabbat the name, Shabbat Hagadol – the great Shabbat.

The Passover Offering and the Thanksgiving Offering, discussed in this week’s Torah portion, have something in common.

The Thanksgiving Offering is an obligatory sacrifice brought by one who had recovered from a serious illness, survived a perilous journey, was liberated from captivity, or survived a desert expedition. Two unique aspects distinguish the Thanksgiving Offering from most other offerings – it is accompanied by forty loaves of bread, and must be consumed in a relatively short time-span. Likewise, the Passover Offering had its unique aspects. It too had to be consumed in a short time-span and had to be eaten as part of a group.

Rabbi Naftali Tzvi Yehudah Berlin, commonly known by the acronym Netziv (1816-1893, Russia/Poland), explains

that the purpose of this offering is to give thanks and publicly praise G-d for His salvation. Gratitude and joy are feelings that are intensified when shared with a large number of people (as in the common practice of making large-scale celebrations for weddings and bar mitzvahs). The Torah’s stipulation that the Thanksgiving Offering be offered with large amounts of bread and that it must all be consumed within a short-time span necessitates a large group of people. The large group intensifies the experience and thus brings greater honor to G-d.

Similar to the Thanksgiving Offering, the Passover offering was an expression of thanks and appreciation to G-d. Our condition in Egypt was far more perilous than a single person’s illness or incarceration; the Jews were facing genocide on both a physical and spiritual level. Therefore, when thanking G-d for taking us out of Egypt, we make sure to do it publicly.

Our obligation to give thanks to G-d is not limited to the miracles He performed many years ago. His involvement in our day-to-day lives generates numerous obligations and opportunities to offer thanks. As we sit at our seder, let us take a moment to quietly step back, look around and expression our appreciation to G-d, not only for delivering us from the Egyptians, but also for all the good He bestows upon each and every one of us, each and every day.

Rabbi Burnham can be reached at: rabbiburnham@partnersintorah.org

על חלת לחם חמץ יקריב קרבנו על זבח תודת שלמיו“With loaves of leavened bread shall he bring his offering, with his feast

thanksgiving peace-offering.“ (Leviticus 7:13)

T his Shabbat is referred to as Shabbat Hagadol- the great Shabbat. There are numerous reasons for this title, including the fact that Rabbis worldwide, deliver important, well-attended, pre-holiday

sermons. However, the primary reason for this title goes back to ancient Egypt – over 3,300 years ago. It was on this day that the Hebrews, as they were then known, selected sheep for their Passover offerings.

Parsha Perspectives RABBI LEIBY BURNHAM

T Z A V Talking Points RABBI ELAZAR MEISELS

1. WHAT TO WEAR “The Kohen shall dress in his linen garment, and he shall wear linen pants on his skin; and he shall separate the ash of what the fire consumed of the elevation-offering on the altar and place it next to the altar. He shall then remove his garments and dress in other garments, and he shall take out the ashes beyond the encampment, to an undefiled place.” 6:3-4

He shall remove his garments and dress in other garments - The garments worn to remove the ash remains were not the regular priestly garments because there was a possibility of soiling them. – Talmud, Tractate Yoma

He shall remove his garments and dress in other garments – This was not an obligation but rather a proper practice, because his garments will become soiled when he removes the ash from the camp, and it is not proper to use soiled clothes in regular service. Even these clothes however had to be priestly garments. They were distinguished only by the fact that they were of a lesser quality. – Rashi

To an undefiled place – Since the ash originated in a sacred place, it was proper to dispose of it in an undefiled location. The opposite is true for stones that were afflicted with leprosy about which the Torah instructs, “And they shall be discarded in an impure place.” Because unlike the ash, they represented impurity and therefore deserved to be cast in an impure place.

R’ Meir Premishlan zt”l explained that the dictum requiring the Kohen to don different clothes was a reminder of the day of one’s death. On that day, each person will be forced to don lesser garments [i.e. shrouds], and his earthly, lifeless remains will be taken outside the encampment to an undefiled place [i.e. the cemetery]. He will meet his Maker, and should it be necessary, G-d forbid, the words of the next verse will apply, “A continual fire shall be lit on the Altar - it will not go out” [i.e. his soul will require cleansing by the fires of fires of Hell to rid itself of the contaminating effect of its sins].

2. JUST ONE PEACE “This is the law for the burnt-offering, the meal-offering, the sin-offering and the guilt-offering; for the

installation-sacrifices and for the peace-offering that G-d commanded Moses on Mount Sinai.” 7:37

The burnt-offering…for the peace-offering – This verse begins with the burnt-offering and concludes with peace-offering, because the burnt-offering is the most prestigious of all offerings since all of it is dedicated to G-d, and peace is the foundation upon which the entire universe rests. – Rabbeinu Bachya

Peace is so desirable that our sages instituted that the final blessing of the daily Amidah [Shmoneh Esrei] be a request for peace. Similarly, King Solomon concluded Song of Songs with a verse praising peace.

Rabbeinu Bachya points out that the only Divine Name found in the entire section discussing the offerings is A-donay. The names E-l, E-lohim, E-lohechah etc. are not mentioned because those names imply “power” and are not exclusive to G-d. They can be used to describe all forms of power, including those mistakenly believed to be divine. These offerings could not be offered to any power other than the Almighty Himself, for an offering brought to any other deity constitutes idolatry and is forbidden.

3. RAISING FUNDS “He brought near the sin-offering bullock, and Aharon and his sons laid their hands upon the head of the sin-offering bullock. He slaughtered it, and Moses took the blood and smeared it atop the corners of the altar all around with his finger and he purified the altar. He poured the blood into the base of the altar and sanctified it, to atone upon it.” 8:15-16

He purified the altar – What sort of purification could this newly constructed altar possibly have required? Moses cleaned and purified it from any contact with a person or substance forbidden to touch it, so that it might enter into a state of holiness. – Rashi

He purified the altar – What sort of purification could this newly constructed altar possibly have required? When donations were sought to build the Tabernacle, there was great enthusiasm among the populace and donations poured forth from people eager to participate. Perhaps there were individuals who were not as motivated as the others, but who felt an external social

pressure to contribute and this would have constituted a mild form of theft. The altar had to be 100% pure of even the remotest form of theft, and it was this questionable sin that Moses sought to atone for with this blood-offering. – Toras Kohanim

Rabbi Aharon Kotler zt”l added that one who wishes to grow closer to the Almighty through Divine service must ensure that his motives are pure and that all the implements he will utilize to this end are equally pure. Even the altar which was fashioned with the purest of motives had to be rendered free of any taint of theft, even the most farfetched scenario, or it would not be effective. Similarly, if we donate to worthy causes with tainted funds, or subsidize our children’s Torah education with ill-begotten money, we should not expect stellar results. Those will only result from pure intent coupled with equally uncontaminated resources.

Rabbi Meisels can be reached at: rabbimeisels@partnersintorah.org

This page is dedicated to and written for the 6,500 Partners in Torah mentors. We welcome

you to join their ranks by calling 800-STUDY-4-2. Please send your comments, questions, and

suggestions to info@partnersintorah.org

Contact Info for Partners in Torah Mentor Advisors*:

Rabbi Elazar Meisels 732-917-6370

(Sunday & Tuesday 8:00—11:00 pm, and Thursday 10:00am—12:00 noon) rabbimeisels@partnersintorah.org

Rabbi Pinchos Jung 845-425-6533 (leave message)

*Kindly reserve use of our advisors

for mentor contact

Molly,

Thank you for your very insightful question, and if I may come between you and your husband, I would add that he is partially correct. You are indeed being “technical,” but in my humble opinion, not overly so, because your question is the subject of a great debate among the Rishonim [early commentators]. The entire question centers around how to understand the verse requiring us to count the Omer. The Torah states:

“You shall count for yourselves, from the day after the Day of Rest (i.e. the first day of Passover), from the day upon which you will bring the Omer wave-offering, seven complete weeks they shall be” (Leviticus 23:15).

Note that the Torah does not merely ask that we count forty-nine days or seven weeks, but insists that they be seven complete weeks. How are we to understand this requirement of completeness? There are two possibilities:

1. In order to count for seven complete weeks, one must begin counting not in the morning of the first day, but rather the previous evening, so that the counting begins as soon as the forty-nine day period commences. In this manner, he counts a full seven weeks because he began at the very first moment that the seven weeks commenced.

2. It can also be understood to refer not necessarily to the first night, but rather, it is telling us that in order to be a complete count, each day must be counted in complete fashion, which is achieved only when one counts at night, each and every single night.

If completeness is achieved merely by ensuring that one begins counting the first night, there is no reason to insist that he count at night on all of the remaining days. So long as he counts at some point during each twenty-four hour period, he has counted for seven complete weeks. If, however, the requirement to for the count to be complete

extends to each and every night, obviously he cannot count during the daytime in the event that he forgot to count at night. No longer will he fulfill the Scriptural obligation to count seven complete weeks.

If one analyzes these possibilities more deeply, it becomes apparent that there is a deeper issue at play here too. The question is not merely how to interpret the word “complete,” but rather, how to understand the fundamental requirement to count forty-nine days. Is the mitzvah to count the Omer one long mitzvah that takes forty-nine days to complete, or is each day a separate mitzvah to count, which one fulfills forty-nine times?

By way of example, there is a mitzvah to sit in the Sukkah for seven days, but each time one sits in the Sukkah, he has fulfilled a separate mitzvah. Seven days is only the number of days in which one can fulfill the mitzvah, but one need not do so on all seven days in order to fulfill the mitzvah. Logically, the mitzvah of counting the Omer should be no different. Since, however, the Torah insists that it be “seven complete weeks,” that may change the character of the mitzvah to one in which it requires forty-nine separate actions to fulfill one mitzvah.

As mentioned above, the Rishonim (the earlier Sages) are divided on this issue. The commentator Baal Halachos Gedolos [Baha”g] seems to hold that the obligation is one long mitzvah, which must begin on the first night so that all seven weeks are complete. On subsequent days, ideally he should count at night, but if he forgot, he may do so during the day as well. If, however, he forgot to count for an entire night and day, he no longer can fulfill the mitzvah and has forfeited his ability to count on subsequent nights since it is no longer possible to achieve seven complete weeks.

The commentators known as Tosafos, on the other hand, regard each day as a separate mitzvah. Thus, even if he forgot to count for an entire day, he may

count the next evening since it is a separate mitzvah. However, according to Tosafos, each time he counts, he must do so only at night, since each day must be complete. Failure to count at night renders him ineligible to count the next morning, but he may count the following night again.

In practice, we try to accommodate both opinions. Therefore, ideally we count each night, but if one forgot at night, we allow him to count the next day [in accordance with the view of Bahag, but without reciting a blessing, since it is questionable whether he is still obligated to do so, since the law may follow the view of Tosafos]. Conversely, if one forgot for an entire day, he may still count the next evening in accordance with the view of Tosafos that each day is a new mitzvah, but without reciting a blessing [in case the law follows the view of Bahag].

Regardless of whether it is one or forty-nine mitzvot, there is no question that the mitzvah to count the Omer and build our anticipation of the holiday of Shavuos, when we received the Torah, is an exceedingly precious and valuable mitzvah. Those who are meticulous to remember to count each day deserve much credit and praise since it is so easy to forget. Nowadays, there are numerous online services to which one can subscribe that will send a daily email or text message reminding one to count along with special calendars, and I strongly advise those who are prone to forgetting to make use of this wonderful bit of technology.

Wishing you all the best, Rabbi E. Meisels

Rabbi Meisels can be reached at: rabbimeisels@partnersintorah.org

UP FOR THE COUNT RABBI ELAZAR MEISELS

Dear Rabbi Meisels,

For the past three years, I’ve observed the mitzvah of counting the Omer for all 49 days (I haven’t missed once in three years!). I know that I should not be keeping track of how many mitzvot I perform, but I was wondering whether each night of the counting is a mitzvah, or if all 49 days are part of one long mitzvah? My husband says I’m being too technical, but I’m really curious to know the answer to this, if there is one.

Molly

LOOK WHO MADE PARTNER…

RECENT SAMPLING OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE JOINED AS PARTNERS:

DAVID WARANCH -- SILVER SPRING, MD

CARLY BECHER -- PASSAIC, NJ HELENE FRANCES -- ENCINO, CA STANLEY KATZ -- REGO PARK, NY

ELEANOR SUGARMAN -- SARASOTA, FL RIVKA ROSENBAUM -- SEABROOK, MD

DANIEL FAIN -- HAMDEN, CT LEAH ABRAMOV -- FLUSHING, NY

Making Partner has never been this easy!

And G-d spoke to Moses saying, Tzav (command)

Aaron and his sons, saying, “This is the law of the

burnt offering; on the flame, on the Altar, all night

until morning, and the fire of the Altar shall

constantly be kept aflame.” (Vayikra 6:1-2)

The word "tzav” (command) is the root of the word

“mitzvah” (commandment). Rashi notes that the

term tzav is used only when urging is necessary.

Rabbi Shimon adds that the term tzav is needed

when a mitzvah involves a financial loss, when an

extra measure of nudging may be necessary.

As a benefit of his service, the Kohen (priest)

generally receives a share of the ritually-slaughtered

animal. The burnt offering however was entirely

consumed, and the Kohen's sole reward was the

animal’s hides. This was considered a meager

compensation in comparison to other offerings. An extra measure of urging was thus necessary for the

Kohen to perform this service.

Why would a gift of any size be considered a (א

financial loss? While the Kohen did not

receive his normal more generous bonus, he

still received the hides!

Using special language to address the Kohen’s (ב

perception of a loss seems to be sending the

wrong message. Are we not supposed to

serve G-d without anticipation of a reward?

Other commandments seem to have a more (ג

tangible financial loss (take Passover for

example!). Why then don’t we find the word “tzav” in regard to every commandment that

involves a financial outlay?

Rabbi Lam can be reached at: rabbilam@partnersintorah.org

TABLE TALK FOR DISCUSSION AROUND THE SHABBAT TABLE

RABBI LABEL LAM

Parsha At-A-Glance In a continuation from last week's Torah portion, we are taught additional details about different kinds of sacrifices offered on the Temple’s altar.

Every morning, the kohanim removed the ashes from the altar, using a shovel, placing it in a specific location adjacent to the ramp. It was forbidden to extinguish the fire on the altar.

The meal-offering was a mixture of flour, oil, and spices. It was brought by the High Priest twice daily, and by every priest on the day he was first inducted into Temple service. This induction offering was burnt entirely, unlike other meal-offerings where only a handful was burnt and the rest portioned out to the kohanim.

The sin-offering is offered in the same place as the elevation-offering is offered (so as to protect the sinner's identity). The kohen who performed the offering ate part of it, in the Courtyard of the Ohel Moed (Tent of Meeting). The utensils, used to cook the sin-offering, absorbed some of the meat and therefore must be rendered kosher once again; the type of koshering dependent on their material.

This portion discusses the various gratuities that the priests were entitled to take from the different offerings, and which type of

offerings needed to be burned entirely.

One who offers a feast-offering for a vow or donation must eat it on the day he offers it; however, any leftovers may be eaten the following day. Following that, the remains must be burned. If a kohen intended to eat the sacrificial food on the third day, his mere thoughts invalidate it – rendering it unfit for consumption (called pigul).

Any sacrificial offering that touches something contaminated may not be eaten. Similarly, one who himself is contaminated may not eat from the peace-offering.

It is a severe transgression to eat blood – from fowl or from animals – or certain kinds of fat (chelev) from beef, sheep, and goats.

A week before the first day of Nissan, Moses began training Aharon and his sons, the kohanim, for the service in the Temple. He dressed them in the special priests’ clothing, and taught them every detail of the service. The entire nation assembled in the courtyard to watch the inauguration ceremony. Moses anointed the kohanim, and commanded them to remain at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting until the completion of the seven-day period.