Achrei Mos Kedoshim
Gusto
We are forbidden to eat a sacrifice past its allowed time. The Torah claim that this is ‘desecrating the Holies of Hashem’. How’s that?
A person is affected by how he experiences Mitzvos. If he had a good experience then he connects to Mitzvos, and if not, he feels disconnect. Rashi (Sukkah 49) says that doing Mitzvos in a way that’s enjoyable is considered loving Mitzvos!
Therefore we can see that eating half-rotten sacrifice meat, – meat way past its prime, – breeds an attitude of distain for the Holies – sacrifices – by that person. That’s why he has disgraced the Holies. To whom? To himself!
What is the lesson? Ensure that every mitzvah we do is FUN!
Finding Common Ground
‘Do not hurt the stranger, he shall be as the townsfolk. Love him as yourself, for you were strangers in Egypt too’.
Rashi explains that we ought not make fun of his being a stranger for we too were strangers. People in glass houses ought not throw stones.
We had another suggestion: To befriend someone one needs to find common ground. A ger, a stranger, is often coming from a society so alien that it is hard for us to find something in common with him. So the Torah starts us off with the fact that we both experienced being a stranger in another land. Thats a commonality. This leads to connection.
The lesson here; seek similarities between yourself and your fellowman, and you are well on the road to loving him. Often, the first thing similar people look for is their differences. Perhaps this comes from being unhappy in your own skin, forcing yourself to try and self-define. Methinks thats pretty sad.
Giving Lousy Stuff
Paradox; The rule in charity is that we give the best: ‘all the fat for Hashem’. No second-rate stuff. Yet the Torah tells us to leave the leftovers in our fields for the poor: the corner-ends, dropped pieces, forgotten bundles and dropped off grapes. Why not give good stuff?
One suggestion was that the Torah knows its hard for someone to part with hard-earned produce, so it only asks for what a person does not feel bad about giving, even though ideally he should give the best.
And perhaps another thought: we do not give these presents to the poor to fill a given quota, such as a tithe, or even based on the needs of the poor. Indeed, we fulfill our obligations only from our very best produce. Rather this derives from the lousy nature of these gifts: these parts are not important or meaningful to their owner. So the Torah says ‘Come on, you can spare these!’. The very fact that they are not good stuff obligates their owner to a larger-than-normal donation.
The Buck Stops Here
Why were the two goats used in the Yom Kippur sacrifice exactly the same size, price and look? Why do they need to be the same?
The kids suggested that since the two was one for Hashem and one for Azazel, they needed to be fair, to appease Azazel that he received the same korban as Hashem had. Interesting thought.
We suggested that these sacrifices atoned and addressed Responsibility. We believe we are responsible for our own actions. Our conditioning and other factors may influence how easy or hard it will be to fulfill the commandments, but at the end of the day we must be personally accountable.
People are born with a predisposition to thievery, homosexuality and murder. Yet they must not steal, act out their homosexuality nor kill. Indeed, their trial is harder, and doing the right thing comes to them with difficulty. They will be compensated for that difficulty, no doubt. But they need to toe the line.
The two goats are identical. There is no difference between them. Yet one end up in the holiest place in the world, the Kodesh HaKodoshim, and the other in the boondocks. Two goats, radical difference, and no background to blame it on.
This symbolizes us. We too are like that. We start out the same, and end up radically different, some of us good people, others wicked. And the message here is that our lives are not because of a broken home or a whole one. Rather, they are because of our choice. This sacrifice celebrates choice, represented by the lottery deciding each goat’s future.
Ultimately we accept responsibility for our choice, we accept our guilt. We take ownership of our bad behavior. At this point atonement can begin.
Playing G-d
A judge may not help a poor man. The judge may think ‘This fellow is so poor, the rich man ought to support him anyhow; let me rule in his favor, as if the money really was his’. Absolutely forbidden!
Why?
Perhaps the court is represnts the “place of justice” in this world, and truth must reign there absolutely. After the judgement people can do chessed, but the ruling – the naked truth – must be heard.
Perhaps too the integrity of the court in on the line: if we can toy with the truth, – even for good reason, – we will come to be lax and toy with it elsewhere too.
One more thought: a judge sits supremely powerful: his decision alone determines the outcome. And judges may start playing G-d. They will make things right. This cannot be. A judge needs to know that he has a restricted mandate, and that, – only that – is his job.
We let him know: Do not favor a pauper in court. You do not run the world!
Going Public
The Torah describes giving a son to Molech as a desecration of G-d’s name. Why is that?
The Sforno explains that if for Hashem we only sacrifice animals but for Molech this fellow gave his son, by comparison it would seem that Molech is more important. That is a desecration of His Name.
(Lessson: When we spend more on a couch then on mitzvos, that is a desecration of Hashem’s Name!)
We suggested that someone so totally committed to Molech that he sacrifices his own son makes a statement: He announces that idol worship is what’s important, not service of Hashem. A public stand influinces others, and in this case it constituutes a desecration on Hashem’s Name and cause.
Do take a public stand, – for the good! That’s a Kiddush Hashem!
Spilling Blood
Sacrificing an animal outside of the Mishkan is considerd a ‘spiller of blood’. This refers to one of two scenarios; either one who sacrifices a Korban, to be sacrificed inside the Mishkan, outside of it, or it refers to the period when meat was only permitted as a Korban, when all slaughtering needed to be done inside the Mishkan.
Rashi eplains the ‘spiller of blood’ as meaning that these actions are as serious as spilling blood. There is no connection to murder here, rather an expression of how serious what he did is.
Sefer HaChinuch, however, explains this pasuk literally: we may kill animals, but only for human benefit. Sometimes we need the flesh of an animal for our health, medicine or other needs, and that is Ok. Gratuitous killing is out. Animals have rights too.
Without human benefit, depriving an animal of life is murder. Although not carrying the penalty that human murder does, it is still a very serious sin. The Torah is expressing here that if an animal permitted to be slaughtered only in the Mishkan is killed outside the Mishkan instead, this killing is actual murder.
These are strong words. The Nodah B’yehuda in Yorah Deah 10 permits hunting, although he deems it unJewish and cruel. He does not consider killing animals anything like murder. But the Chinuch certainly does.
What ought to be our attitude towards animals? Can we can kill ants invading our home and causing us pain? Yes. But we simply have no right to kill them for no reason. Is having fun considered a reason? Most probably not. If we can get the animal out of the way in other ways, perhaps we ought to refrain from killing them. Animals have a right to be left alone unless we need to kill them, and here we can just as well make do without killing them.
©2013
kollel parshah | Tiferet Ramot 83-21, Jerusalem, Israel, 97290
This email was sent to [email protected].
To ensure that you continue receiving our emails, please add us to your address book or safe list.
View this email on the web here.
You can also forward to a friend.
Unsubscribe
Powered by Mad Mimi ®