וַיִּקְרָ֖א אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֑ה וַיְדַבֵּ֤ר יְהֹוָה֙ אֵלָ֔יו מֵאֹ֥הֶל מוֹעֵ֖ד לֵאמֹֽר׃

An He summoned Moshe and spoke to him from the Tent of Meeting (Mishkan) , saying:

דַּבֵּ֞ר אֶל־בְּנֵ֤י יִשְׂרָאֵל֙ וְאָמַרְתָּ֣ אֲלֵהֶ֔ם אָדָ֗ם כִּֽי־יַקְרִ֥יב מִכֶּ֛ם קׇרְבָּ֖ן לַֽיהֹוָ֑ה מִן־הַבְּהֵמָ֗ה מִן־הַבָּקָר֙ וּמִן־הַצֹּ֔אן תַּקְרִ֖יבוּ אֶת־קׇרְבַּנְכֶֽם׃

Speak to the Bnei Israel  and tell them: If an Adam (person) presents an animal offering to God  you (i.e. they) should bring your sacrifice from the cattle and from the sheep.

אִם־עֹלָ֤ה קׇרְבָּנוֹ֙ מִן־הַבָּקָ֔ר זָכָ֥ר תָּמִ֖ים יַקְרִיבֶ֑נּוּ אֶל־פֶּ֜תַח אֹ֤הֶל מוֹעֵד֙ יַקְרִ֣יב אֹת֔וֹ לִרְצֹנ֖וֹ לִפְנֵ֥י יְהֹוָֽה׃

If his offering is from the cows, an unblemished male should be brought to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting  and he shall sacrifice it of his  own will before God.

וְסָמַ֣ךְ יָד֔וֹ עַ֖ל רֹ֣אשׁ הָעֹלָ֑ה וְנִרְצָ֥ה ל֖וֹ לְכַפֵּ֥ר עָלָֽיו׃

And he shall lay his hand on the head of the whole burnt offering, that it may be willed on his behalf to be forgiven over him. (Vayikra/Leviticus 1:1-3)

Cleary these verses are referring not to an expiatory sin offering, but to a voluntary “gift”  to the Lord.  This triad of verses then concludes with the Divine acceptance of such a gift and a total non sequitur ; “to be forgiven over him”.

Who Is being forgiven here? And for what sin? After all, this is not a sin sacrifice. This is a prize meal for the Almighty. Hence, wherein lies the transgression? Indeed, had the presenter been unwittingly guilty of some sin he would have to bring an entirely separate – mandatory –  sin offering (קרבן חטאת). And if he had consciously committed a spiritual transgression, no animal sacrifice would be of any use, no matter how grand.

We will circle back to these questions shortly.

But first let us examine a different sort of voluntary offering, one that is the very opposite of the prime bullock or prize sheep  specified in the opening verses.

וְנֶ֗פֶשׁ כִּֽי־תַקְרִ֞יב קׇרְבַּ֤ן מִנְחָה֙ לַֽיהֹוָ֔ה סֹ֖לֶת יִהְיֶ֣ה קׇרְבָּנ֑וֹ וְיָצַ֤ק עָלֶ֙יהָ֙ שֶׁ֔מֶן וְנָתַ֥ן עָלֶ֖יהָ לְבֹנָֽה׃

When a soul (נפש) presents an offering of grain to God: The offering shall be of choice flour;  and he shall pour oil upon it, and place frankincense on top 

…וֶֽהֱבִיאָ֗הּ אֶל־בְּנֵ֣י אַהֲרֹן֮ הַכֹּהֲנִים֒ וְקָמַ֨ץ מִשָּׁ֜ם מְלֹ֣א קֻמְצ֗וֹ מִסׇּלְתָּהּ֙ וּמִשַּׁמְנָ֔הּ עַ֖ל כׇּל־לְבֹנָתָ֑הּ וְהִקְטִ֨יר הַכֹּהֵ֜ן אֶת־אַזְכָּרָתָהּ֙ הַמִּזְבֵּ֔חָה אִשֵּׁ֛ה רֵ֥יחַ נִיחֹ֖חַ לַיהֹוָֽה׃

.. and present it to Aharon’s sons, the priests; and (the priest) shall scoop up a handful of its choice flour and oil, as well as all of its frankincense; and the priest shall immolate this token portion on the altar, a fragrant fire offering to God.

וְהַנּוֹתֶ֙רֶת֙ מִן־הַמִּנְחָ֔ה לְאַהֲרֹ֖ן וּלְבָנָ֑יו קֹ֥דֶשׁ קׇֽדָשִׁ֖ים מֵאִשֵּׁ֥י יְהֹוָֽה

And the remainder of the (grain) offering shall be for Aharon and his sons, the holy of holies among the fire offerings to God. (Vayikra 2:2-4)

There are three key differences between the voluntary sacrifice of a prime bullock or sheep and the paltry offering of flour, oil and frankincense

The luxurious animal sacrifice is being made by an “Adam”, the most generic and earthy category of human being. By contrast, the modest meal offering is being brought by a “Nefesh” – a soul; clearly a much higher degree of human being than an “Adam” (lit. earth)

Unlike the animal sacrifice which is burnt whole, the seemingly insignificant meal offering is mostly consumed by the priests. And it’s not much of a meal compared to all the steaks and lamb chops that are being barbecued all around them.

Whereas the animal offering is seen as some sort of expiation for a sin, there is no such reference regarding the meal offering.

Now all of this seems rather counterintuitive:

One would assume the generous bearer of a costly bullock or prize sheep would  rate higher on the spiritual ladder than the presumed pauper who brings a bit of flour and oil.

As well, one would assume the priests would sooner feast on the bullock or sheep rather than chew on a pathetic concoction of flour and oil.

And finally, why does the bearer of a bullock need forgiveness while the lowly pilgrim with his flour, oil and frankincense does not?

The Prophet Yeshaya/iaiah enables us to understand what in fact is going on here:

לָמָּה־לִּ֤י רֹב־זִבְחֵיכֶם֙ יֹאמַ֣ר יְהֹוָ֔ה שָׂבַ֛עְתִּי עֹל֥וֹת אֵילִ֖ים וְחֵ֣לֶב מְרִיאִ֑ים וְדַ֨ם פָּרִ֧ים וּכְבָשִׂ֛ים וְעַתּוּדִ֖ים לֹ֥א חָפָֽצְתִּי׃

“What need have I of all your sacrifices? “ God would say. “I am fed up with burnt offerings of rams, and fatty animals, and the blood of bulls and sheep and goats I never craved …  Who asked that of you?” (Yeshaya/Isaiah 1:11-13)

The opening chapters of Vayikra/Leviticus discuss voluntary offerings, and addresses the motivation behind the different types of offering; between the  prime Tomahawk steak and the humble pita.  God requests neither but desires only the latter.

The bearer of the prize bullock – like the builder of the temple – is not interested in glorifying the Amighty. He is interested in glorifying himself.

When he selects the unblemished bullock – truly the Rolls Royce of ancient times – the mogul is surely coming with an entire entourage of family and cronies who will ooh and ahh at the grandness of his gesture. This is in fact no mitzvah. Indeed it is a sin.  God allows it because he understand human nature, and the nature of so many wealthy people who need to bullock their way into the klieg lights and show how easy it is for them to write off their prime head of cattle as it burns to a crisp …  on God’s altar no less.

And because this is a sin, it requires forgiveness. Which, in His magnanimity, God grants on account of the human weakness the offering represents.

By contrast, the individual who brings the meal offering is in quest of neither glory nor fame. He is a “soul” not a lump of earth. His longing is to break bread with the Almighty. Which is why his offering is “the holy of holies” as opposed to the gratuitous, attention-grabbing waste of the bullock or sheep.

indeed, the soul who brings the meal ofering could even be a magnate himself. But rather than waste a fortune on a prime steak and rib dinner for a God who has no need for it, he would use that money to – without fanfare – help the poor, lift a widow, welcome a stranger to his table – indeed, do all the things that God actually wants.

So, yes, the Torah makes allowances for a mogul’s foibles and fantasies. Because such is their weaknesss of character. If we don’t indulge the bottomless need for “kavod” (honor)  which  is so characteristic of many rich “adams”, they would end up neither bringing their bullocks nor giving philanthropically.

By contrast, the Torah makes it very clear who the real “nefesh” is and what his motivations are. The holy of holies, indeed.

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)