[Par-lite] Parshat Vayikra - shiur

Wed Mar 9 11:24:44 EST 2011

**********************************************************
***

     THE TANACH STUDY CENTER [http://www.tanach.org]

          In Memory of Rabbi Abraham Leibtag

     Shiurim in Chumash & Navi by Menachem Leibtag

**********************************************************
***

             PARSHAT  VAYIKRA

     Does God need our "korbanot"?

     Or, would it be more correct to say that we 'need' to
bring

them, even though He doesn't need them?

     In an attempt to answer this 'philosophical'
question,

this week's shiur undertakes an analysis of Parshat
Vayikra to

show how its specific topic of "korbanot" [sacrificial

offerings] relates to one of the primary themes of the
Bible.

INTRODUCTION

    The Mishkan certainly emerges as a primary topic in
both

the books of Shmot and Vayikra, and hence, it would only
be

logical to assume that its underlying purpose must be

thematically important.  To appreciate that purpose, we
must

first note a very simple distinction that explains which

details are found in each book.

    In Sefer Shmot, the Torah explains how to build the
mishkan,

and hence Shmot concludes (in Parshat Pekudei) with the
story

of its assembly.  In contrast, Sefer Vayikra explains how
to

use the mishkan, and hence Parshat Vayikra begins with the

laws of the korbanot - i.e. instructions regarding the

sacrifices that will be offered there.

    Even though this distinction explains why Sefer
Vayikra

discusses korbanot in general, it does not explain why the

Sefer begins specifically with the laws of korban ola [the

burnt offering]; nor does it explain the logic of the

progression from one type of korban to the next.  In our

shiur, we begin with a technical analysis of its internal

progression - but those conclusions will help us arrive at
a

deeper understanding of the purpose of korbanot in
general.

AN OUTLINE for PARSHAT VAYIKRA

    In our study questions, we suggested that you prepare
an

outline of chapters one thru five, by identifying the
primary

topic of each individual 'parshia'.  The following table

summarizes our conclusions.  Before you continue, study it

carefully (with a Chumash at hand), noting how the section

titles provide an explanation of the progression of its

topics.

  [Note how each 'parshia' corresponds to one line in our

  chart.  Note also that each asterisk ('*') in the
outline

  marks the beginning of a new 'dibra', i.e. a short

  introduction for a new instruction from God to Moshe
[e.g.

  "va-yedaber Hashem el Moshe..."].       Note as well how
the

  outline suggests a short one-line summary for each
parshia,

  as well as a title for each section.  See if you agree
with

  those titles.]

          PARSHAT VAYIKRA - THE KORBAN YACHID

          ===================================

I.  KORBAN NEDAVA - Voluntary offerings (chaps. 1-3)

     A.  Ola  (the entire korban is burnt on the
mizbeiach)

          1. 'bakar' - from cattle

          2. 'tzon' - from sheep

          3. 'of' - from fowl

     B.  Mincha (a flour offering)

          1. 'solet' - plain flour mixed with oil and
'levona'

          2. 'ma'afeh tanur' - baked in the oven

          3. 'al machvat' - on a griddle

          4. 'marcheshet' - on a pan (+ misc. general
laws)

          5. 'bikkurim' - from wheat of the early harvest

     C.  Shlamim (a peace offering, part is eaten by the
owners)

          1. bakar - from cattle

          2. tzon - from sheep

          3. 'ez' - from goats

    [Note the key phrase repeated many times in this unit:

               "isheh reiach nichoach l-Hashem."]

II.  KORBAN CHOVA - MANDATORY OFFERINGS

     A. * CHATAT  (4:1-5:13)

     1.  for a general transgression

                    [laws organized according to violator]

          a.  'par kohen mashiach' (High Priest) - a bull

          b.  'par he'elem davar' (bet din) - a bull

          c.  'se'ir nassi' (a king) - a male goat

          d.  'nefesh' (layman)  a female goat or female
lamb

     2.  for specific transgressions ('oleh ve-yored')

          a.  a rich person - a female goat or lamb

          b.  a poor person - two birds

          c.  a very poor person - a plain flour offering

  B. * ASHAM (5:14-5:26) - animal is always an 'ayil'
(ram)

          1. 'asham me'ilot' - taking from Temple property

          2. 'asham talui' - unsure if he sinned

           [Note the new dibbur at this point /see Further
iyun.]

          3. * 'asham gezeilot' - stealing from another

     [Note the key phrase repeated numerous times in this
unit:

           "ve-chiper alav... ve-nislach lo."]

               ========================

     Let's explain why we have chosen these titles.

TWO GROUPS: NEDAVA & CHOVA

     First and foremost, note how our outline divides
Parshat

Vayikra into two distinct sections: 'korbanot nedava' =

voluntary offerings and 'korbanot chova' - mandatory

offerings.

     The first section is titled "nedava", for if an

individual wishes to voluntarily offer a korban to God, he
has

three categories to choose from:

  1) An OLA - a burnt offering [chapter one];

  2) A MINCHA - a flour offering [chapter two]; or

  3) A SHLAMIM - a peace offering [chapter three]

  Note how these three groups are all included in the
first

"dibbur" - and comprise the "nedava" [voluntary] section.

     In contrast, there are instances when a person may

transgress, thus obligating him to offer a sin offering -
be

it a "chatat" or an "asham" (depending upon what he did

wrong).

     The two categories (chapters 4 and 5) comprise the
second

section, which we titled "chova" [obligatory].

     The Chumash itself stresses a distinction between
these

two sections not only the start of a new dibbur in 4:1,
but

also the repetition of two key phrases that appear in just

about every closing verse in the parshiot of both
sections,

stressing the primary purpose of each respective section:

     In the nedava section: "isheh reiach nichoach
l-Hashem"

          ["an offering of fire, a pleasing odor to the
Lord"

               See 1:9,13,17; 2:2; 3:5,11,16];

     In the chova section: "ve-chiper a'lav ha-kohen... "

          [the kohen shall make expiation on his
behalf..." -

               See 4:26,31,35; 5:6,10,13,16,19,26]

     With this background in mind, we will now discuss the

logic behind the internal structure of each section, to
show

how (and why) the nedava section is arranged by category
of

offering and the type of animal, while the chova section
is

arranged by type of transgression committed, and who

transgressed.

NEDAVA - take your pick

     If an individual wishes to offer a korban nedava, he
must

first choose the category that reflects his personal

preference.  First of all, should he prefer to offer the

entire animal to God, he can choose the ola category; but

should he prefer (for either financial or ideological
reasons)

to offer flour instead, then he can choose the mincha

category.  Finally, should he prefer not only the animal

option, but would also like to later partake in eating
from

this korban - then he can choose the shlamim category.

     Once the individual has made this general choice of

either an ola, mincha, or shlamim - next, he can pick the
sub-

category of his choice.

     For example, should one choose to offer an ola -
which is

totally consumed on the mizbeiach - then he must choose

between cattle, sheep, or fowl.

  The Torah explains these three options (in the first
three

parshiot of chapter 1), including precise instructions

concerning how to offer each of these animals.

     Should the individual choose a mincha - a flour
offering

- instead, then he must select from one of the five
different

options for how to bake the flour, corresponding to the
five

short parshiot in chapter two.  In other words, he can
present

his offering as either flour (mixed with oil), or baked in
an

oven ("ma'afe tanur), or fried on a skillet ("al
machvat"), or

deep fried ("marcheshet").  Should the flour offering be
from

the wheat of the early harvest ("minchat bikkurim"), it
must

first be roasted and ground in a special manner (see Ibn
Ezra

2:14).

     Finally, should he choose the shlamim option- a peace

offering - then he must select between: cattle ("bakar");

sheep ("kvasim"); or goats ("izim") - corresponding to the

three individual parshiot in chapter three.

     It should be noted as well that the laws included in
this

korban nedava section also discuss certain procedural

instructions.  For example, before offering an ola or
shlamim,

the owner must perform the act of 'smicha' (see 1:4,

3:2,8,13).  By doing "smicha" - i.e. resting all his
weight on

the animal - the owner symbolically transfers his identity
to

the animal.  That is to say, he offers the animal instead
of

himself (see Ramban).

     One could suggest that the act of smicha reflects an

understanding that the korban serves as a 'replacement'
for

the owner.  This idea may be reflective of the korban ola
that

Avraham Avinu offered at the akeida - when he offered a
ram in

place of his son - "ola tachat bno"  (see Breishit 22:13).

CHOVA - if you've done something wrong

     As we explained earlier, the second category of
Parshat

Vayikra discusses the "korban chova" (chapters 4 & 5) - an

obligatory offering that must be brought by a person
should he

transgress against one of God's laws.  Therefore, this
section

is organized by event, for the type of sin committed will

determine which offering is required.

     The first 'event' is an unintentional transgression
of

'any of God's mitzvot' (see 4:2 and the header of each

consecutive parshia in chapter 4).  Chazal explain that
this

refers to the unintentional violation ('shogeg') of any

prohibition of the Torah - that had the person
transgressed

intentionally ("meizid"), his punishment would have been

'karet' (cut off from the Jewish nation).

  [This offering is usually referred to as a 'chatat
kavu'a'

  (the fixed chatat).]

     Should this transgression occur ("b'shogeg"), then
the

actual animal that must be brought depends upon who the
sinner

is.  If the kohen gadol (high priest) sins, he must brings
a

bull ("par").  If it is the political leader ("nasi"), he
must

bring a male goat ("se'ir").  If it was simply a commoner,
he

must bring either a she-goat or lamb ("se'ira" or
"kisba").

  [There is also a special case of a mistaken halachic
ruling

  by the 'elders' [i.e. the 'sanhedrin' - the supreme
halachic

  court], which results in the entire nation inadvertently

  sinning.  In this case, the members of the sanhedrin
must

  bring a special chatat offering - known as the "par
he'elem

  davar shel tzibur".  See 4:13-21.]

     In chapter five we find several instances of specific

transgressions that require either a "chatat" or an
"asham".

     The first category begins with a list of three
specific

types of transgressions, including - the case when a
person

refuses to provide witness (see 5:1), or should one

accidentally enter the Temple (or Mishkan) while
spiritually

unclean ('tamei' / see 5:2), or should one not keep a
promise

(to do/ or not to do something) made with an oath
('shvu'at

bitui' / see 5:4).

     Should one transgress in regard to any one of these
three

cases (detailed in 5:1-4), the specific offering that he
must

bring depends on his income.  If he is:

     a) rich - he brings a female lamb or she-goat;

     b) 'middle class' - he can bring two birds instead;

     c) poor - he can bring a simple flour offering.

  Interestingly, this korban is categorized as a "chatat"
(see

5:6,10,13), even though the Torah uses the word "asham"

[guilt] in reference to these acts (see 5:5).  It makes
sense

to consider it a "chatat", because in the standard case
(i.e.

if the transgressor be rich) - the offering is exactly the

same animal as the regular chatat - i.e. a female goat or

sheep.

  Furthermore, note that these psukim (i.e. 5:1-13) are

included in the same "dibbur" that began in 4:1 that
discussed

the classic korban "chatat", while the new "dibbur" that

discusses the korban "asham" only begins in 5:14!

     The rabbis refer to this korban as an "oleh ve-yored"

[lit. up and down] as this name relates to its graduated
scale

- which depends entirely upon the individual's financial

status.

     One could suggest that the Torah offers this
graduated

scale because these specific transgressions are very
common,

and hence it would become rather costly for the average
person

to offer an animal for each such transgression.

     The final cases (from 5:14 till the end of the
chapter)

include several other categories of transgressions - that

require what the Torah refers to as a korban asham - a
guilt

offering.  In each of these cases, the transgressor must
offer

an ayil [a ram], including:

  .    when one takes something belonging to hekdesh
('asham

     me'ilot'/ 5:14-16)

.    when one is unsure if he must bring a chatat ('asham

talui'), i.e. he is not sure if he sinned.

.    when one falsely denies having illegally held
possession

of someone else's property ('asham gezeilot' / 5:20-26),
like

not returning a 'lost item' to its owner.

THE GENERAL TITLE - KORBAN YACHID

     We titled the entire outline as korban yachid - the

offering of an individual - for this entire unit details
the

various types of korbanot that an individual (='yachid')
can

(or must) bring.  Our choice of this title reflects the

opening sentence of the Parsha: "adam ki yakriv..".- any

person should he bring an offering to God..." (see 1:2).

     The korban yachid stands in contrast to the korbanot

tzibbur - the public offerings - which are offered by the

entire congregation of Israel (purchased with the funds

collected from the machatzit ha-shekel).  The laws
relating to

korbanot tzibbur we first found in Parshat Tezaveh in
regard

to the daily "olat tamid" offering.  They continue with
the

special offering that the nation brings (collectively) on
the

holidays, as detailed primarily in Parshiot Emor (Vayikra

chapter 23) and in Parshat Pinchas (Bamidbar chapters
28-29).

WHICH SHOULD COME FIRST?

     Now that we have explained the logic of the internal

order of each section, we must explain why the laws of
korban

nedava precede those of korban chova.  Intuitively, one
would

have perhaps introduced the compulsory korban before the

optional one.

     One could suggest that Parshat Vayikra begins

specifically with the korban nedava since these korbanot
in

particular reflect the individual's aspiration to improve
his

relationship with God. Only afterward does the Torah
detail

the korban chova, which amends that relationship (when
tainted

by sin).  Additionally, perhaps, the korban nedava
reflects a

more ideal situation, while the obligatory sin-offering
seeks

to rectify a problematic situation.

     We may, however, suggest an even more fundamental
reason

based on the 'double theme' which we discussed in our
study of

the second half of Sefer Shmot.

     Recall from our previous shiurim that the mishkan
served

a dual purpose:

     A)  to perpetuate the experience of Har Sinai

                         (emphasized by Ramban); and

     B)  to atone for chet ha-egel (emphasized by Rashi).

(A)  REENACTING HAR SINAI

     Recall how the covenantal ceremony that took place at
Har

Sinai (when Bnei Yisrael accepted the Torah) included the

public offering of "olot" & "shlamim" (when the declared

"na'aseh ve-nishma"/ see Shmot 24:4-7).  In fact, in that

ceremony we find the very first mention in Chumash of a
korban

shlamim, suggesting a conceptual relationship between the

korban shlamim and Har Sinai.

  [Note also that Chumash later refers to the korban
shlamim

  as a 'zevach' (see 3:1 & 7:11).  The word zevach itself
is

  also used to describe a feast, generally in the context
of

  an agreement between two parties.  For example, Lavan
and

  Yaakov conduct a zevach after they enter into a covenant

  ('brit') agreeing not to harm each other (see Br.
31:44-54).

  Today, as well, agreements between two parties are often

  followed or accompanied by a lavish feast of sorts (e.g.

  state dinners, weddings, business mergers, etc.).

  Therefore, one could suggest that by offering a zevach

  shlamim, an individual demonstrates shows his loyalty as
a

  joint partner in a covenantal relationship with God.]

     The korban ola also relates to Ma'amad Har Sinai,
based

not only on the above parallel, but also based on a key
phrase

- "isheh reiach nichoach l-Hashem" - that the Torah uses

consistently in its description of the korban ola.  [See

1:9,13,17.]

     This exact same phrase is also found in the Torah's

description of the "olat tamid", the daily congregational

offering, as inherently connected to Bnei Yisrael's
offerings

at Har Sinai:

  "Olat tamid ha-asuya BE-HAR SINAI, le-reiach nichoach
isheh

  l-Hashem" (see Bamidbar 28:6).

     Similarly, in Parshat Tetzaveh, when the Torah first

introduces the olat tamid and summarizes its discussion of
the

mishkan - we find the exact same phrase:

  "... le-reIach nichoach isheh l-Hashem... olat tamid le-

  doroteichem petach ohel mo'ed..." (Shmot 29:41-42)

     Hence, by offering either an ola or a shlamim - the

efficacious reminders of Ma'amad Har Sinai - the
individual

reaffirms the covenant at Har Sinai of "na'aseh v'nishma"
-

the very basis of our relationship with God at Ma'amad Har

Sinai.

  [One could also suggest that these two types of korbanot

  reflect two different aspects of our relationship with
God.

  The ola reflects "yirah" (fear of God), while the
shlamim

  may represent "ahava" (love of God).]

     Recall also that the last time Bnei Yisrael had
offered

olot & shlamim (i.e. before chet ha-egel) was at Har
Sinai.

But due to the sin of the Golden Calf, God's shechina had
left

Bnei Yisrael, thus precluding the very possibility of
offering

korbanot.  Now that the mishkan is finally built and the

Shchina has returned (as described at the conclusion of
Sefer

Shmot), God's first message to Bnei Yisrael in Sefer
Vayikra

is that they can once again offer olot & shlamim, just as
they

did at Har Sinai - at not only as a nation, but also as

individuals.

     This observation alone can help us appreciate why the

very first topic in Sefer Vayikra is that of the voluntary

offerings - of the korban ola & shlamim, and hence it
makes

sense that they would precede the obligatory offering of

chatat & asham.

(B) KORBAN CHOVA - BACK TO CHET HA-EGEL

     In contrast to the 'refrain' of 'isheh reiach
nichoach'

concluding each korban nedava, we noted that each korban
chova

concludes with the phrase "ve-chiper alav ha-kohen... ve-

nislach lo".  Once again, we find a parallel to the events
at

Har Sinai.

     Recall our explanation that Aharon acted as he did at

"chet ha-egel" with the best of intentions; only the
results

were disastrous.  With the Shchina present, any
transgression,

even should it be unintentional, can invoke immediate

punishment (see Shmot 20:2-4 & 23:20-22).  Nevertheless,
God's

attributes of mercy, that He declares when He gives Moshe

Rabeinu the second "luchot", now allow Bnei Yisrael
'second

chance' should they sin - i.e.  the opportunity to prove
to

God their sincerity and resolve to exercise greater
caution in

the future.

     We also find a textual parallel in Moshe Rabeinu's

statement before he ascended Har Sinai to seek repentance
for

chet ha-egel: Recall how Moshe Rabbenu told the people:

  "Atem chatatem chata'a gedola. ulai achapra be'ad

  chatatchem" (Shmot 32:30; read also 32:31-33).

     Later, when Moshe actually receives the thirteen
/midot

ha-rachamim' on Har Sinai along with the second luchot
(34:-

9), he requests atonement for chet ha-egel:

     "... ve-salachta le-avoneinu u-lechatoteinu..."
(34:9).

     This key phrase of the korban chova - "ve-chiper
alav...

ve-nislach lo" - may also relate to this precedent of
God's

capacity and willingness to forgive.  The korban chova
serves

as a vehicle by which one can ask forgiveness for sins

committed "b'shogeg" and beseech God to activate His
"midot ha-

rachamim" [attributes of mercy] to save them for any

punishment that they may deserve.

     Therefore, we may conclude that the korban nedava

highlights the mishkan's function as the perpetuation of

Ma'amad Har Sinai, while the korban chova underscores the

mishkan's role as means of atonement for chet ha-egel.

WHO NEEDS THE 'KORBAN'?

     With this background, one could suggest that the
popular

translation of korban as a sacrifice may be slightly

misleading.  Sacrifice implies giving up something for
nothing

in return.  In truth, however, the 'shoresh' (root) of the

word korban is k.r.v., 'karov' - to come close.  Not only
is

the animal brought 'closer' to the mizbeiach, but the
korban

ultimately serves to bring the individual closer to God.
The

animal itself comprises merely the vehicle through which
this

process is facilitated.

     Therefore, korbanot involve more than dry, technical

rituals; they promote the primary purpose of the mishkan -
the

enhancement of man's relationship with God.

     In this sense, it becomes rather clear that it is the

individual who needs to offer the "korban" - as an
expression

of his commitment and loyalty to his Creator.  Certainly
it is

not God who needs to consume them!

     For the sake of analogy, one could compare the
voluntary

offerings [the korban nedava] to a gift that a guest
brings to

his host..  For example, it is only natural that someone
who

goes to another family for a shabbat - cannot come 'empty

handed'.  Instead, the custom is to bring a small gift, be
it

flowers, or wine, or something sweet.  Certainly, his
hosts

don't need the gift, but the guest needs to bring
something.

But the reason why they are spending quality time together
is

for the sake of their relationship. The gift is only a
token

of appreciation - nonetheless a very important act.

TEFILLA KENEGED KORBANOT

     In closing, we can extend our study to help us better

appreciate our understanding of "tefilla" [prayer before
God].

     In the absence of the Bet ha'Mikdash [the Temple],
Chazal

consider 'tefilla' as a 'substitute' for korbanot.  Like

korbanot, tefilla also serves as a vehicle through which
man

can develop and strengthen his relationship with God.  It
is

the individual who needs to pray, more so that God needs
to

hear those prayers

     As such, what we have learned about korbanot has
meaning

even today - as individual tefilla should embody both
aspects

of the korban yachid: nedava and chova.

  Tefilla should primarily reflect one's aspiration to
come

closer to God - an expression of the recognition of his

existence as a servant of God.   And secondly, if one has

sinned, tefilla becomes an avenue through which he can
amend

the tainted relationship.

     Finally, tefilla, just like the korbanot of the
mishkan,

involves more than just the fulfillment of personal

obligation.  Our ability to approach God, and request that
He

evoke His "midot ha-rachamim" - even should we not be
worthy

of them - should be considered a unique privilege granted
to

God's special nation who accepted the Torah at Har Sinai,

provides an avenue to perfect our relationship.  As such,

tefilla should not be treated as a burden, but rather as a

special privilege.

                              shabbat shalom,

                              menachem

=================

FOR FURTHER IYUN -

A.  In regard to the nature of the laws in Parshat
Vayikra;

even though they primarily focus on the details of what
the

owner must do with his korban, this section also details

certain procedures that can be performed only by the
kohen.

Even though we may have expected to find those details in

Parshat Tzav (that discusses the korbanot from the kohen's

perspective), one could explain that these details are

included here for the kohen's functions as 'shaliach'

(emissary) of the owner.  Ideally, the owner should bring
the

korban himself.  However, in light of the events at chet
ha-

egel, God decided to limit this work to the kohanim, who
were

chosen to work in the mikdash on behalf of the rest of the

nation (see Devarim 10:8).

B.  Although korban mincha is not mentioned at Har Sinai,
it

may be considered a subset of the general ola category.

Namely, the mincha may be the korban ola for the poor
person

who cannot afford to bring an animal.  Note that the 'olat
ha-

of' is connected to korban mincha by a parsha stuma.  The
olat

ha-of, too, is a special provision for one who cannot
afford

a sheep.

C.  The two basic levels of kedushat korban explain why
the

ola precedes the shlamim in the discussion in our parsha.
The

greater the portion offered on the altar, the higher the
level

of kedusha:

1)  Kodshei Kodashim - the highest level of kedusha:

     ola: cattle, sheep, and fowl.

          The entire korban ola is burnt on the mizbeiach.

     mincha: the five various ways to present the fine
flour.

          The 'kmitza' (a handful) is burnt on the
mizbeiach;

          The 'noteret' (what is left over) is eaten by
the

kohen.

2)  Kodashim Kalim - a lower level of kedusha

     shlamim: cattle, sheep, and goats.

     The fat surrounding the inner organs go onto the

mizbeiach.

     The 'chazeh ve-shok' (breast and thigh) go to the
kohen,

while the meat that remains may be eaten by the owner.

D.  Leaving aside the difficulty in pinpointing the
precise

difference between sins requiring a chatat and those
requiring

an asham, it seems clear that a korban asham comes to

encourage a person to become more aware of his
surroundings

and actions.  For example, if one is unsure whether or not
he

sinned, his korban (asham talui) is more expensive than
the

korban chatat required should he have sinned for certain.
The

Torah demands that one be constantly and acutely aware of
his

actions at all times, so as to avoid even accidental

wrongdoing.

E.  Note that the phrase 'reiach nichoach' does appear
once in

the second (korban chova) section (4:31), in the context
of a

chatat brought by a layman ('me-am ha-aretz').

  The reason may lie in the fact that the layman may
choose

which animal to bring for his chatat - either a female
goat

('se'irat izim') or a female lamb.  Therefore, if he
chooses

the more expensive option - the goat - his offering bears
some

nedava quality, thus warranting the description 'reiach

nichoach'.

     Another difference between a lamb and a goat: is that
a

lamb has a fat tail, which prevents one from identifying
the

animal' gender from afar.  Therefore, one looking upon
this

korban from a distance might mistake it for an ola (which
is

always male, as opposed to the layman's chatat which must
be

female).  A goat, by contrast, has a thin tail, thus
allowing

one to easily determine the animal's gender and hence its

status as a chatat.  Therefore, by bringing a goat rather
than

a lamb, the sinner in a sense broadcasts his sin and

repentance.  This perhaps renders the chatat a nedava of

sorts, in that the sinner sacrifices his honor in order to

demonstrate the principle of repentance ("lelamed derech

tshuva la-rabim").

===

F.  ASHAM GEZEILOT  (a mini-shiur)

     The last korban dealt with in the parsha, korban
asham,

atones for three general categories of sins:

5:14-16 Accidental use of 'hekdesh' - known as asham

me'ilot;

5:17-19 When one is unsure if he sinned at all - known as
an

asham talui;

5:20-26 Several cases for which one brings an asham vadai.

     Although all three categories require the
transgressor to

offer an asham, the final parsha (5:20-26) begins with a
new

dibbur!  This suggests a unique quality latent in this
final

group.  Indeed, the sins in this category all involve

intentional transgressions (be-meizid) against someone
else.

The previous cases of asham, by contrast, are inadvertent
sins

(be-shogeg) against God.

     It would be hypocritical for one who sins
intentionally

against God to bring a korban.  The korban chova is
intended

for a person who strives for closeness with God but has

inadvertently sinned.  The obligation to bring a korban

teaches him to be more careful.  Why should the Torah
allow

one who sins intentionally against God the opportunity to

cover his guilt?  The mishkan is an environment where man

develops spiritual perfection, not self-deception.

     Why, then, would the Torah provide for a korban asham
in

cases of intentional sin?

     This group, known as an 'asham gezeilot', deals with
a

thief who falsely avows his innocence under oath.  The
Torah

grants the thief-perjurer atonement through an asham, but
only

after he first repays his victim with an added one-fifth

penalty.

     Why should a korban be necessary at all?  The victim
was

repaid and even received a bonus.  Why should God be
involved?

     The standard explanation is that the thief sinned
against

God by lying under oath.  Although this is undoubtedly the

primary reason for the necessity of a sacrifice, one
question

remains: why does he bring specifically an asham?  All
other

instances of perjury require a chatat oleh ve-yored (see
5:4)!

     A textual parallel between this parsha and a previous
one

may provide the answer. The parsha of "asham gezeilot"
opens

as follows:

  "nefesh ki techeta, ve-ma'ala ma'al b-Hashem ve-kichesh
be-

  amito..." (5:21).

     This pasuk defines the transgression against one's

neighbor as 'me'ila b-Hashem' [taking away something that

belongs to God]!  This very same phrase describes the
first

case - 'asham me'ilot', unintentional embezzlement of

'hekdesh' (Temple property / see 5:14-16):

     "Nefesh ki timol ma'al b-Hashem - ve-chata
bishgaga..."

     This textual parallel points to an equation between
these

two types of asham: unintentional theft of hekdesh and

intentional theft of another person's property.  [Note
that

both require the return of the principal and an added
penalty

of 'chomesh'.]

     The Torah views stealing from a fellow man with the
same

severity as stealing from God!  From this parallel, the
Torah

teaches us that unethical behavior towards one's neighbor

taints one's relationship with God, as well.

     [See also Tosefta Shavuot 3:5!]

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.atlchai.org/pipermail/par-lite/attachments/20110309/9e4235be/attachment-0003.htm 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: vayik1.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 59736 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.atlchai.org/pipermail/par-lite/attachments/20110309/9e4235be/attachment-0003.pdf 