Join our weekly Peninim on the Torah list!

Category

Back to Home -> Tzav ->


This is the law of the (korban) Chatas, Sin-Offering; in the place where the (korban) Olah, Elevation-Offering is slaughtered shall the Sin-Offering be slaughtered. (6:18)

The Torah teaches us that we are to slaughter the Korban Chatas in the same place as the Korban Olah–in the northern part of the courtyard. In the Yerushalmi Yevamos 5:3, Chazal comment that the purpose of slaughtering the Olah in the same location as the Chatas is to minimize the publicity that might follow the sinner who seeks to repent and offer his contrition. The Korban Olah was not necessarily brought for any sin or wrongdoing, but rather as a gift to Hashem, especially if one had inappropriate thoughts that left him feeling guilty. Since one rarely escapes sinful…

Continue Reading

Command Aharon and his sons, saying: This is the law of the (Korban) Olah, elevation offering. (6:2)

Chazal attribute the use of the more emphatic form of introduction, um, “command”, to the laws of the Korban Olah, to the urgency of the matter. The Torah exhorts the Kohanim to be especially zealous in performing the Olah service, now, as well as in future generations. The reason for this special emphasis is the monetary loss incurred by the Korban Olah. Chazal offer a number of explanations for this monetary loss. The most common explanation is that nothing remains for the Kohanim after the rest of the Olah is burned on the Mizbayach. Although they receive the hide, it…

Continue Reading

“And they shall make an ark of shittim wood… and you shall plate it with pure gold, from inside and out shall you plate.” (25:10,11)

In the Talmud Yuma 72b Chazal emphasize that one must cultivate an inner purity. They derive this from the Aron Ha’Kodesh, the symbol of Torah. It was to be plated with pure gold, inside and out. Chazal infer from this pasuk that “any talmid chacham, Torah scholar, whose inner essence is not in consonance with his outward purity/appearance can not justifiably be considered a talmid chacham. One must be “tocho k’baro,” maintain a symmetry between his essence and the image he projects. All too often, we focus upon our external image and the impression we make upon others, while we…

Continue Reading

“And they shall make for Me a sanctuary and I will dwell among them.” (25:8)

The Midrash tells us that when Moshe was commanded to build a Sanctuary for Hashem, he trembled and asked, “How can a man make a house for G-d if even the heavens cannot contain You?” Hashem responded, “I do not ask them to make anything commensurate with My capacity. I ask of them only that they build in accordance with their own capacity.” The words of the Midrash, are ojf hpk, “according to their own unique abilities.” They must attain their own potential – theirs and not another’s! When Hashem asked Moshe to sacrifice upon the Mizbayach, Moshe asked, “If…

Continue Reading

“And shittim wood.” (25:5)

Rashi cites the Midrash that explains how Bnei Yisrael were able to secure shittim wood in the desert. These trees did not grow all over the wilderness. Yaakov Avinu had brought these cedars to Egypt. He “saw” that one day his descendants would leave Egypt and build a Mishkan which would require this type of wood for its construction. Let us take a moment to think about Yaakov’s foresight. He prepared for his children’s spiritual future. What about their material/physical existence? What did he provide for them? Nothing! Indeed, Bnei Yisrael are lauded for following Hashem into the desert, trusting…

Continue Reading

“And tachash skins and shittim wood.” (25:5)

Rashi says that the Mishkan, its vessels, and the priestly garments were made from thirteen types of raw materials. When we count the materials, however, we find that there were actually fifteen. The commentators offer a number of explanations to reconcile this disparity. Interestingly, Rashi questions the desert origin of two of these materials. Rashi specifically wonders how Bnei Yisrael were able to obtain the shittim wood and the tachash skins in the desert. He explains that Yaakov Avinu brought the shittim wood to Egypt for the sole purpose of using it in the future Mishkan. The tachash was a…

Continue Reading

“And he said (Yitzchak), ‘Your brother came with cleverness and took your blessing.'” (27:35)

Probably one of the most difficult narratives in the Torah to understand, is the one which depicts Yaakov as “taking” the blessings from Yitzchak, through a manner uncharacteristic of someone who is considered to be the epitome of veracity. We do not understand the ways of Hashem. Why did He choose that Yitzchak be unaware that he was actually blessing Yaakov — and that Eisav was actually not fit for blessing altogether. The Zohar Ha’Kadosh comments that this scenario was essential so that the blessing would come directly from Hashem to Yaakov via the medium of the unsuspecting Yitzchak. The…

Continue Reading

“And Eisav was a man who knew hunting, a man of the field, and Yaakov was a wholesome man dwelling in tents.” (25:27)

Eisav is not depicted as a hunter, but as a man who “knew” hunting, a professional hunter who is an expert at his chosen vocation. Eisav is the consummate hunter, the one who sets the standard for excellence in the field of hunting, the one to whom everybody looks up. Eisav is a “doer;” his entire essence bespeaks accomplishment and success. Yaakov, on the other hand, is portrayed as a man who dwells in tents, the quiescent scholar who remains cloistered from society, his mind buried in his books. Undoubtedly he is successful at what he is doing. In the…

Continue Reading

“And the boys grew up and Eisav was a man who knew hunting, a man of the field; Yaakov was a wholesome man dwelling in tents. ” (25:27)

With these few words, the Torah characterizes the essence of Yaakov and the essence of Eisav. Indeed, it seems that the text pinpoints the predominant difference between the two brothers. One question is readily apparent. Eisav was a rasha m’rusha, evil incarnate. Even before his birth, in his mother’s womb, his wicked tendencies were already manifest. Chazal teach us that when Rivkah passed by a house of idolatry, Eisav gravitated towards it. All this while he was still in the womb! On the day that he sold his birthright, he committed five cardinal sins. Is this a man who should…

Continue Reading

“And the children agitated within her.” (25:22)

Chazal teach us that even prior to their birth, Yaakov and Eisav clearly exhibited their innate tendencies. They explain that the word, “ummur,hu,” is derived from the word, .r, which means “to run.” When Rivkah passed the Bais Ha’Midrash of Shem and Ever, Yaakov “ran,” struggling to come forth to study Torah. In contrast, when she passed a house of idol-worship, Eisav “ran,” trying to emerge. This Midrash has long been a source of discussion regarding the relative quality of Torah study, given the nature of the spiritual environment. This is inferred from the fact that Yaakov desired to “escape”…

Continue Reading

Subscribe To Our Newsletter

Join our weekly Peninim on the Torah list!

You have Successfully Subscribed!