Skip to main content

Exclusive Service of Hashem - Parashat Tzav 5776- March 25, 2016

Our parasha, Parashat Tzav, continues from the description in last week’s parasha of the various offerings that were offered in the Tabernacle and in the Beit HaMikdash – the Temple in Yerushalayim.

One unique phrase is repeated time and again – le’Hashem – to Hashem: a memorial offering to Hashem, that they will offer to Hashem, a pleasant odor to Hashem, to name a few.

“To Hashem” is an ambiguous phrase. What does it mean? What does it add? Does “to Hashem” convey the possessive case – as in G-d’s memorial offering? Alternatively, does “to Hashem” indicate the intended recipient – a memorial offering to G-d? Perhaps, “to Hashem” means something else. What is the meaning of the phrase “to Hashem”'?

One example of a similar usage of the phrase, “to Hashem” is from the Passover offering that was celebrated in Egypt and is mentioned in the Seder. In parashat Bo, the Torah says, “And thus you will eat it (the Pascal sacrifice): with your loins girded, your shoes on your feet and your staff in your hand; and you will eat it quickly, it is a Pesach offering – to Hashem.” A similar statement is made in the Seder – a Pesach offering to Hashem.

Again, we have cause to ask our question – what is the meaning of the phrase – to Hashem?

Rashi, commenting on the verse above, explains that the phrase – a Pesach offering to Hashem – means that even the manner in which the Pesach was eaten – hurriedly and prepared for travel – must convey the purpose of eating this sacrifice. The sacrifice is exclusively identified with the service of Hashem. To contextualize the enjoyment of eating the roasted lamb of the Pesach sacrifice, the Torah commands us to eat the Pesach in such a way as to convey its exclusive identification with the service of Hashem.

Returning to our parasha, the meaning of “to Hashem” is clear – the service of each of these sacrifices described in our parasha must be exclusively identified with the service of Hashem.

Should not all mitzvot be described as “to Hashem”? Why are these sacrifices labeled with the demand of “to Hashem”? In other words, when does the Torah demand the application of this principle of exclusivity in the service of Hashem and when do we not make that demand?

Apparently, some mitzvot touch on fundamental ideas of G-d. The institution of sacrifices is one such example. In this case, the Torah demands that the one who is serving Hashem must have a proper idea of Hashem in mind – he must be able to distinguish unambiguously between Hashem and all other notions of god. He must be able to distinguish unambiguously between service of Hashem and service of something other than Hashem.

Regarding other mitzvot, one needs only to have proper intent for the mitzvah. For example, when we read the megilah on Purim, we had to have in mind that we were fulfilling that commandment. When we will eat matza on Pesach, we will need to have in mind that we are about to fulfill the mitzva of matza. The service is the performance of the mitzvah. That is all that is required. The mitzva does not directly touch on one’s notion of G-d. Even the mitzva of sippur yetziat mitzrayim – telling the story of our leaving Egypt requires only the retelling of the exodus story and the requisite praise Hashem. Even one who does not have a completely accurate idea of Hashem may fulfill the mitzva. However, when we are called upon to make the most fundamental distinction – the distinction between Hashem and anything else - halacha requires exclusivity “to Hashem”.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Vows Compromise Our Free Will - Parshat Vayetze 5776 - November 20, 2015

At the opening of this week’s parasha , Vayetze, Ya’akov is leaving eretz Yisrael to find refuge in Charan from his brother, Esav. He arrives at HaMakom – The Place – to sleep for the night – the place of Ya’akov’s famous ladder dream. Morning comes. Yaakov takes the stone that he slept on, makes a monument to Hashem with it and anoints it with oil. He renames the place Beit E-l – House of Hashem. The Torah then records that Ya’akov made a neder – a vow. “If the Lord will be with me and will guard me on this path that I am going and will give me bread to eat and clothes to wear and will return me in peace to the house of my father … then I will give one-tenth of all that I have to Hashem.” At first glance, the fact that Ya’akov made a vow seems inappropriate. In general, the Torah looks down on vows. Our chachamim say noder nikra cho’te – one who makes a vow is treated like a sinner. What is wrong with making a vow? Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch explains that at worst a vow elevates tr...

Project Exodus

Mrs. Shelley Kutliroff, Morah Anat Kampf and Rabbi Moshe Nachbar (not shown) are leading the Junior High School students in Project Exodus with additional guidance from Talya Tsuna and Dr. Whitney Kennon. Project Exodus is a project of and is being funded by a grant from The Jewish Community Partners. The Junior High Students at the Margolin Hebrew Academy will be studying the history of the Jews from the Former Soviet Union via interviews with many local Jewish immigrants from the FSU. Project Exodus is an attempt to permanently document and archive the experiences of Jewish immigrants to Memphis from the former Soviet Union. This project is the inspiration of Lynne Mirvis.

Responding to Disaster in Baton Rouge - Parashat Ki Tavo 5776 - September 23, 2016

This has been a unique week for the students of the Feinstone Yeshiva of the South! In a normal week, two presentations – one by Rabbi Dovid Lieberman on the topic of Free Will and another by Ambassador Yoram Ettinger on the topic of supporting the State of Israel – would have been momentous. But this was no ordinary week. Our students – Cooper Yeshiva on Sunday/Monday and Goldie Margolin on Wednesday/Thursday – partnered with Nechama-Jewish Response to Disaster in providing disaster relief to three families who suffered catastrophic loss during last month’s floods in Baton Rouge, LA. Our students hauled damaged personal effects to the curb. They removed damaged drywall, flooring, paneling and appliances. They removed many, many nails. Our students worked very hard. As a chaperone for each of these two trips (CYHSB and GMSG), I saw the students witnessing destruction first-hand. The scenes were sobering. We saw block after block of homes devoid of life – families gone and the guts of t...