Lev 3 Sh'mini

Sh’mini
Leviticus 9:1 – 11:47

I. Summary

A. Sh’mini = (On the) “eighth” (day, Moses called Aaron and his sons and the elders of Israel).

B. On the last day of the eight day ceremony to dedicate the Tabernacle, Moses instructs Aaron and Aaron’s sons to assume their priestly duties by making three offerings: a sin offering for himself (Aaron), a burnt offering for the people and a peace offering. God appears and a miraculous flame consumes the sacrifice on the altar. (9:1-24)

C. Two of Aaron's four sons, Nadab and Abihu, offer "alien fire" to God. God punishes these two priests by killing them immediately. In response, Aaron is silent (Hebrew can also be translated as “still”). (10:1-3)

D. Moses orders two cousins of Aaron’s deceased sons to carry their dead cousins out of the camp. Moses (on behalf of God?) forbids Aaron and Aaron’s surviving two sons (Eleazar and Ithamar) from mourning but commands the rest of the people to do so. (10:4-7)

E. God commands Aaron and his sons not to drink alcohol before entering the sacred Tabernacle asking them to distinguish between sacred and profane. (10:8-11)

F. Moses further instructs Aaron and Aaron’s surviving sons on minchah (meal) and sh’lamim (well-being) offerings. Moses gets angry with Aaron and Aaron’s sons when they do not eat the entire sin purgation offering (as they were instructed to do by Moses) because they were in mourning. Aaron points out to Moses that God would not want mourners to fully partake in the sacrifice. Moses agrees with Aaron. (10:12-20)

G. God sets out rules for which creatures may and may not be eaten. God distinguish between pure and impure (inedible) animals, birds, fish, and insects. (11:1-23)

H. God describes to Moses and Aaron the rules of impurity (things that are inherently impure, how someone or something becomes impure and how impurity ends). (11:24-47)

II. Commentary (Plaut, URJ website, Jewish Study Bible and prior Hevreh discussions)

A. Why God killed Nadab and Abihu – A number of possibilities: 1) In arrogantly doing something not prescribed by God (igniting altar fire) and which possibly was intended to be done by God, they were trespassing on authority of God. 2) They got too close to God which resulted in instantaneous death (affirming sanctity is ultimately about maintaining limits and boundaries … a reason why religious fanaticism is almost always held suspect). 3) They entered the sanctuary drunk (hence God’s specific instruction to Aaron in 10:9 after death of Aaron’s sons not to drink when entering Tabernacle). 4) They refused to marry and have children because they felt that no woman was good enough for them. 5) In refusing to ask for advice from their elders or each other, they displayed unforgivable haughtiness. 6) They became so spiritually close to the Divine that they physically ascended to be with God (only positive spin). Different approach that does not require a specific reason for their death is that their death was not God’s punishment but rather it simply happened when the sons lit the fire.

B. Aaron’s silence at death of sons –Was Aaron’s silence in the face of his sons’ wrongful acts (and resulting deaths) also wrong? Contra, Aaron’s silence was 1) his personal struggle to come to terms with tragedy of his sons’ death and/or 2) indication of Aaron’s evolution as a priest in that Aaron had to separate his priestly duties from his personal issues. Alternative translation of Hebrew = “still”. This suggests possibility that Aaron was shell-shocked into immobility (and silence?) by death of his sons. Further suggests that 1) Aaron may not have been silent and 2) issue of why Aaron was silent was moot.

C. Emotional make-up of Aaron and Moses - Moses appears estranged from his sons, who have no role in his life. Aaron has four sons who will inherit his mantle, two of whom have just been killed in front of him. There seems to be no acknowledgement of these facts, only a focus on ritual behavior. Did their leadership (and closeness to God) insulate them from harsh day-to-day realities of their personal lives?

D. Cloven hoof requirement - The parted hoof represents the duality of life. Judaism celebrates duality: land/heavens, light/darkness, humanity/God, holy/profane, Isaac/Ishmael, Jacob/Esau, Rachel/Leah, Joseph/his brothers, Moses/Aaron, Shabbat/the workday week. The parted hoof is the symbol of our sense of life.

E. Cud chewing requirement - Cud chewing repeats the theme of division because it calls to mind the bifurcated stomach. Compare to student chewing over newly received knowledge ... such repetition is necessary for student to understand and internalize significance of such knowledge.

F. Rationales for prohibition against not eating pork – 1) The hygienic argument that pig is a “filthy animal.” 2) The “pork is pagan” argument that the aboriginal Canaanites offered pig as a sacrifice in idolatrous worship. 3) The anthropological argument that the early Israelite community was attempting to distinguish itself from other populations by virtue of its dietary and eating habits. 4) The historical argument that Jews frequently gave their lives in circumstances which included pigs or pig references, e.g. i) ancestors tortured and forced to eat pig, ii) armies of Antiochus slaughtered pigs in the Jerusalem Temple in order to desecrate Temple and iii) Spanish Jews were called Marranos, “pigs” because they did not eat pig.

G. Rationales for prohibition against not eating predatory creatures – 1) Lest we prey on others. 2) Some of these animals were worshipped as gods and we deny their power by not ingesting them. 3) They once posed health risks. 4) They impose a discipline that separates us from common practices to make sure we retain our own practices since separation is part of what it means to be a holy people. Note similarity to rationales for not eating pork.

H. Connection between purification of the priests and the laws of kashrut – Both sections make a distinction between right and wrong, good and evil, clean and unclean, pure and impure, holy and the unholy. Our essential duty in life is to make such distinctions and act accordingly.

I. Kashrut as indicator of evolution of Israelite people - When God set out rules of kashrut, God arguably did so because God felt Israelites were then evolved enough to accept adherence to rules as means of getting closer to God.

III. What parasha may mean for us today

A. Being pure on the inside as well as on the outside - If an animal has split hooves (external physical trait) and brings up its own cud (internal physical trait), then it's kosher and can be eaten. A pig has split hooves but does not chew its own cud therefore is not kosher. This suggests that it's not enough for us to only act and appear proper on the outside, but we must also really be that way on the inside too, if we want to be 'kosher' good people.

B. Anger clouds judgment – Moses’ initial anger at Aaron and his sons for mourning followed by Moses’ acknowledgment of the propriety of their mourning (rather than carrying out sacrifice) tells us not to let anger get in the way of our judgment. Also suggests need to accept and deal with the death of a loved one.

C. Wrongful act v. rightful intention – Aaron’s two sons had the best of intentions when they went into the Tabernacle and chose to make an offering to God that they thought would be good to offer even though God, through Moses, had not asked them to do so. Despite their good intentions, the consequences of their actions were quite negative. Even good intentions don't justify doing something improperly.

D. Power of silence and self-control - Aaron remained silent when God killed two of his sons. He was able to control his tongue and accept his situation in dignified silence. We too, can tap into the power of silence, refrain from angrily speaking out when insulted or hurt and thereby reap the rewards that such self-control can bring.

E. Power of moderation - Nadab and Abihu had very specific instructions of just what to offer and how much. But they mistakenly reasoned that if they offered extra things to God it would be even better. While their intentions were good, they went overboard and ended up causing a lot of damage to themselves and to others. This shows the importance and value of moderation. Sometimes too much of a good thing can make things go bad.

F. Kashrut as a continuous reminder – Eating is a significant part of our daily routine. Kashrut therefore serves to continuously remind us to strive for a life of purity.

(Revised 4/19/09)