Kommentar zu Wajikra 10:9

ושכר ‎יין [DO NOT DRINK] WINE NOR STRONG DRINK — do not drink wine in a manner that brings out its intoxicating force (i. e. do not drink a “log” of wine) (Sifra, Shemini, Section 1 1; Keritot 13b).

DRINK NO WINE NOR STRONG DRINK. “[Do not drink] wine to such an extent that it has an intoxicating effect.” This is Rashi’s language. The meaning thereof is that if he paused during the drinking [of a fourth of a log of wine], or if he mixed a little water into it, he is free from punishment. The opinion of the Rabbi [Rashi] is thus that the priests were only prohibited from drinking wine, but not from other intoxicating drinks, the meaning of the term sheichar (strong drink) mentioned here being derived from the law of the Nazirite [where a similar expression appears,¹⁰⁹He shall abstain from wine and ‘sheichar’ (strong drink) (Numbers 6:3). and only wine is forbidden to him].¹¹⁰The word sheichar must not therefore be understood as strong drink [as it is found in all English translations], but rather as “strong wine.” The vav in the Hebrew yayin v’sheichar (literally: “wine and strong wine”) is thus to be understood as if it said yayin k’shehu sheichar — you must not drink “wine when it is strong wine,” or “when it is intoxicating” (Mizrachi). Rambam’s opinion, however, as mentioned further on in the text, is that sheichar means “strong drink,” and the priests were warned against both — wine and strong drink, although the punishment for violation was different for each. This is correct according to my opinion. But in the opinion of Rabbi Moshe [ben Maimon],¹¹¹Mishneh Torah, Hilchoth Bi’ath Hamikdash 1:2. however, other intoxicating drinks are prohibited [through a negative commandment, without being punishable by death, and the Service performed after drinking them is not invalidated, whereas for drinking wine the punishment is death by the hand of Heaven, and the Service is invalidated]; thus sheichar is to be understood in its plain sense [i.e., strong drink]. The reason why this commandment was given at that time, was in order that the priest should not go astray through the intoxicating effect of wine, and thus come to entertain some improper thought which might cause his death, as happened to [Aaron’s] sons. It is possible that when the Rabbis interpreted¹¹²Vayikra Rabbah 12:1. that Nadab and Abihu died because they entered the Sanctuary whilst intoxicated by wine, they meant to say that it was because of the wine they had drunk that they erred in the matter of the strange fire,¹¹³Above, Verse 1. but not that their punishment actually was because they had drunk the wine, since they had not yet been warned against it. Rather, their punishment was because they erred with respect to the fire of G-d, as I have alluded to.¹¹³Above, Verse 1.

יין ושכר, ”wine and strong alcoholic drink,” according to Rashi the Torah speaks of wine when drunk in a manner which will induce intoxication. [The word שכר referring to the effect of the wine. Ed.] Maimonides feels that the prohibition recorded here applies as such only to wine, and we know this from the Nazirite whom the Torah only forbade wine and grape and derivatives. According to Maimonides, other alcoholic drink is forbidden to the priest who enters the holy precincts. Being drunk on wine is punishable by premature death at the hand of heaven, whereas drunkenness incurred through other intoxicant carries the 39 lashes penalty. (Maimonides Sefer Hamitzvot, negative commandment #73

יין ושכר אל תשת, “do not drink wine or intoxicating liquids!” Sifra Shemini 1,2 writes that if the Torah had not added the word שכר I would have understood the prohibition as applying only to the drinking of wine, not to the consumption of other liquids causing drunkenness. If the word שכר includes all intoxicating liquids, why did the Torah have to single out “wine?” Drunkenness due to consumption of wine is punishable by death; intoxication with other liquids, while forbidden, is not punishable by death at the hands of heaven.

In a manner which intoxicates. Meaning: If he took a break [in drinking] or he mixed it with the smallest measure of water he is exempt. [You might ask:] Rashi writes, without any qualifications, that one who enters the Tent of Meeting [while he is intoxicated] is liable the death penalty. However, Toras Kohanim it implies that only if one was intoxicated and performed Divine service is he liable death! The answer is: Since it is derived from a gezeiroh shovoh, and regarding sanctification of the hands it is written in Parshas Ki Sisa explicitly (Shemos 30:20): “Or whenever they approach the Altar for Divine service,” which is only at the time of Divine service, therefore it was unnecessary for Rashi to specify here.

יין ושכר אל תשת, “do not drink wine or other intoxicating drinks;” this commandment applies when on that day the priest is called upon to perform service in the Temple. Seeing that the High Priest is called upon to do so daily or at least to be ready to do so daily, it is addressed here to him in the singular mode. It is a cautionary commandment, to protect him against becoming inebriated. We know that normally there are many occasions when the consumption of wine is not prohibited, but is part and parcel of our rituals, and the priests are included in this also. We know already from Noah’s experience how overindulgence in alcoholic drink can cause man to lose his dignity not only temporarily but permanently. Solomon, in Proverbs 23,29-31 dwells on the manifold evils that can beset anyone who drinks to excess, so much so that the red colour of wine is used by him as a symbol of blood, i.e. bloodshed, that can be the result of drunkenness. Solomon continues with: כי יתן בכוס עינו יתהלך במישרים, “only he who will look at the cup will walk upright.” This sounds somewhat peculiar at first glance until we notice that the word כוס for “cup” is misspelled as if it were referring to כיס, ”pocket.” What Solomon means is that drinking too much may result in the drunk becoming a thief, desirous of obtaining by illegal means what is in someone else’s pocket. This is why he continues with: אחריתו כנחש נחש וכצפעני יפרש, “in the end it bites like a snake and stings like a viper.” He who aims at illegal gain will wind up walking upright, as he will have lost what was rightfully his and therefore can walk upright having nothing to carry that would force him to stoop under its weight. Some commentators understand the comparison Solomon makes with the snake as referring to the original serpent, and they explain Adam’s having drunk too much wine when celebrating his nuptials as the cause of his eating from the tree of knowledge as the result of his having been drunk. They suggest that the word כנחש be read as בנחש, that Adam transgressed the Lord’s commandment as he too had been seduced by the snake by means of drinking too much wine. Eventually he had become cursed through the serpent. (Proverbs 23,32.) This is what the Torah meant when it wrote in Genesis 3,15: ואתה תשופנו עקב, “and you shall bruise its heel.” Seeing that wine had become the means through which man had been led into sin, when we use wine at joyous occasions, we do so after taking permission to do so from the people present by saying: סברי, to which those present respond with the word לחיים, “may this occasion of drinking wine be an auspicious one, leading to constructive life.” There is an interesting story in the Talmud, tractate Shabbat, folio 66 about Rabbi Akiva having made a festive meal for his son, at which he pronounced the words: חמרא וחיי לפום רבנן ולפופ תלמידהון, “wine for the good life of the scholars and their disciples!” When Solomon says in Proverbs 23,33: ועיניך יראו זרות, “and your eyes will see strange things,” he means that when under the influence of wine you will imagine that things which are forbidden are in reality permitted. This leads you to commit adultery, and to abuse the power of speech by speaking in a manner unworthy of a sane human being. Not only this, but ultimately it can lead you to commit idolatry. He bases himself on Exodus 32,6: וישב העם לאכול ושתו ויקומו לצחק, “the people sat down to eat; they drank, and they got up in order to make merry.” Our author quotes a similar verse from Psalms 81,10, the psalmist saying: לא יהיה בך אל זר ולא תשתחוה לאל נכר, “you shall have no foreign god and you shall not bow down to an alien god.” In both instances the reference is to the golden calf to which the Jewish people bowed and around which many of them danced. When Solomon in Proverbs speaks of ולבך ידבר הפוכות, “your heart will speak perversities,” he refers to four such perversities; a) idolatry, 2) forbidden sexual unions, 3) shedding innocent blood, and 4) slander. In verse 20 of the same chapter in Proverbs where we read: אל תהי בסבאי-יין בזוללי בשר למו, “do not belong to the category of people who guzzle wine, or to those who glut themselves with meat!,” he hints at the ben sorrer umoreh, the wayward son whose end is execution based on the testimony of his own parents. (Deuteronomy 22,18-21) This lad’s corruption had begun because he drank to excess. On the subject of drinking wine, we have another comment in the Talmud, tractate Eyruvin folio 65, by Rabbi Chiya son of Ashi, according to which anyone who can drink wine and whose faculties are not negatively affected by this, is on a mental/spiritual level equivalent to the seventy elders who helped Moses look after the Israelites in the desert. He bases himself on the numerical value of the word יין, wine, which is 70. The word סוד, secret, also has a numerical value of 70. Overindulgence in wine, loosens one’s tongue and makes a person unable to keep a secret. One of the outstanding features of the seventy elders was their ability to remain discreet and not reveal what was supposed to be kept secret. Our sages coined the phrase therefore that “when wine enters a person’s body his secrets become revealed.” [One ‘seventy’ is replaced by another ‘seventy.’ Ed.] Rabbi Chaninah, on the same folio, states that anyone who while under the influence of wine is more open to view his companions agreeably, proves that he possesses some characteristic displayed by his Creator. He bases himself on Genesis 8,21, וירח את ריח הניחוח, where the Lord is portrayed as becoming receptive to the fragrance of Noach’s offering. [The Talmud had previously shown that ריח, customarily translated as smell, is also used as a term describing imbibing. In the quote cited, G–d undertakes never to bring on a deluge again as a reaction to that fragrant odour. Ed. When examining why wine was created, seeing that it is potentially destructive in its effect, the Talmud states that Solomon has provided the answer in Proverbs 31,6, where he advises תנו שכר לאובד ויין למרי נפש, “give liquor to one who is about to perish and wine to someone who is embittered, (in mourning for a relative). [Our author continues about the subject of wine and its advantages and disadvantages. I have omitted the balance of this paragraph. Ed.] An alternate interpretation of the introductory words of our verse: the priest is advised not to indulge in intoxicating drink (even when not called for duty in the Temple, and even when in mourning;)

'יין ושכר וגו, wine and other alcoholic drink, etc.” according to Rashi, the addition of the word ושכר in this verse is meant to refer to a quantity that will cause drunkenness by the person consuming the wine. (based on Torat Kohanim) This has also been confirmed in the Talmud, tractate K’ritut, folio 13, where Rabbi Eliezer understands the verse to mean: “do not drink wine in quantities liable to result in your becoming drunk, or in a manner which will lead to drunkenness.” If, for instance, the priest drinking wine had first added water to it in order to weaken its capacity to intoxicate, he would not be guilty of violating this commandment.

‎‏ בבאכם אל אהל מועד WHEN YE GO INTO THE APPOINTED TENT — I have in these words only a law that forbids this when ye go into the Sanctuary; whence can it be derived that it applies also whenever they approached the outer altar? But there is mention here of entering into the appointed tent and there is mention, in connection with the sanctification (the washing) of the hands and feet, of entering into the appointed tent (Exodus 30:20). What is the law there? It (the Torah) made the law regarding approaching to the altar exactly similar to that regarding entering the appointed tent (“when they go into the appointed tent they shall wash with water … or when they come near to the altar”)! Here, also, it makes approaching the altar exactly similar to entering the appointed tent (Sifra, Shemini, Section 1 5).

WHEN YE GO INTO THE TENT OF MEETING. “From this verse I know only [that they are forbidden to drink wine and strong drink] when they go into the Sanctuary. Whence do I know that this applies also whenever they approach the altar? Entering the Tent of Meeting is mentioned here, and entering the Tent is also mentioned in connection with the washing of hands and feet.¹¹⁴When they go into the Tent of Meeting, they shall wash with water, that they die not; or when they come near to the altar to minister, to burn a fire-offering unto the Eternal (Exodus 30:20). Now just as there the Torah made approaching the altar similar to entering the Tent of Meeting, so here too it made approaching the altar like entering the Tent of Meeting.” This is Rashi’s language, and that of the Torath Kohanim.¹¹⁵Torath Kohanim, Shemini 1:4.
It would appear from this analogy that a priest [drunk with wine] is not liable to death for approaching the altar or for entering the Sanctuary, unless he performed there some [Divine] Service, just as in the case of washing the hands and feet, where the admonition is only against performing the Service [without washing], as it says, or when they come near to the altar to minister, to burn a fire-offering unto the Eternal.¹¹⁴When they go into the Tent of Meeting, they shall wash with water, that they die not; or when they come near to the altar to minister, to burn a fire-offering unto the Eternal (Exodus 30:20). In this form it is taught there in the Sifra:¹¹⁶Ibid. “Sifra” is another name for the Torath Kohanim. See in Seder Vayikra, Note 121. “Rabbi¹¹⁷The redactor of the Mishnah, or as he is often known, Rabbeinu Hakadosh, “our holy teacher,” or simply “Rabbi.” states: Here it says, when ye go into the Tent of Meeting, and there [in connection with the law of the priests washing their hands and feet] it says, when they go into the Tent of Meeting.¹¹⁴When they go into the Tent of Meeting, they shall wash with water, that they die not; or when they come near to the altar to minister, to burn a fire-offering unto the Eternal (Exodus 30:20). Now just as there He made going out [of the Sanctuary] similar to going into it,¹¹⁸If the priest who was in the Sanctuary touched something which necessitates washing of his hands and feet, or if he had given up his intent of doing any more ministration and then decides to do it, he must wash his hands and feet a second time, even though he is no longer, strictly speaking, “entering the Sanctuary,” since he is there already (Derech Hakodesh, commentary on the Sifra by Vidal Hatzarfati). See also my Hebrew commentary, p. 51, for a different commentary on this text by Rabad. and the altar similar to the Tent of Meeting, and the penalty of death [by the hand of Heaven] is only if he performed the Service [without washing], so here also He made going out [of the Sanctuary] similar to going into it,¹¹⁹Thus if he drank the wine whilst inside the Sanctuary and performed the Service, he is liable just like when he drank the wine outside the Sanctuary and entered it in a state of intoxication (ibid.). and the altar similar to the Tent of Meeting, and the punishment is only if he performs the Service [whilst intoxicated].” That is to say, the liability [to punishment] is only if the priest performs the Service, whether he entered while drunk, or drank there [after he had come in] and then performed some Service. There [in the Sifra]¹²⁰Torath Kohanim, Shemini 1:5. the Rabbis have said: “It shall be a statute forever.¹²¹In Verse 9 before us. This includes the pouring of oil [upon the flour of a meal-offering], mixing it, waving it, bringing near [the meal-offering to the altar], removing the handful and burning it, pinching a bird’s head, and sprinkling the blood,” [so that all these acts must not be done by the priest while drunk, and if he did any of them in that state, he is liable to death by the hand of Heaven]. For since Scripture stated, to burn a fire-offering unto the Eternal,¹¹⁴When they go into the Tent of Meeting, they shall wash with water, that they die not; or when they come near to the altar to minister, to burn a fire-offering unto the Eternal (Exodus 30:20). [I might have excluded these acts from this law since they are not “a fire-offering”], therefore it was necessary to include them [here in the verse before us].
It further appears that this liability [to punishment] does not apply where one offers up on a bamah.¹²²Literally: “a high place.” This was an altar built prior to the establishment of a central Sanctuary, on which offerings to G-d could be brought; on such an altar even a non-priest could perform the rites of offering. Bamoth were permitted until the eighth day of consecration when the Tabernacle was erected, but from that day onwards they were prohibited until the people came into the Land of Israel, when for a period of fourteen years comprising the conquest and division of the Land, the Tabernacle was at Gilgal, and bamoth were temporarily permitted. Then a central Sanctuary was built at Shiloh, which lasted for 369 years, and during that time the bamoth were again prohibited. After the Philistines destroyed the Sanctuary at Shiloh, the bamoth were once again permitted. This period [covering also the reigns of Saul and David] lasted 57 years, and is known as that of Nob and Gibeon. Then finally the Sanctuary at Jerusalem was built, and from then on the bamoth were prohibited forever, since that is “the Eternal House,” so that even when it was destroyed, the place is still holy. — From this account it is thus clear why as stated in the Torath Kohanim [mentioned further on in the text] the central Sanctuary at Shiloh and “the Eternal House” at Jerusalem were alike as far as the prohibition to perform the Service while drunk is concerned. In both only a priest could perform the Service, while at a bamah even an Israelite was permitted to do it. That is why the Rabbis said there [in the Torath Kohanim]:¹²⁰Torath Kohanim, Shemini 1:5. “From this verse I know only that it is prohibited [to perform the Service] in the Tent of Meeting [while drunk]. Whence do I know to include the Sanctuary at Shiloh and the Eternal House at Jerusalem? Scripture therefore says, it shall be a statute for ever.” For this prohibition applies to the priests performing their Services, and it was not necessary that it be a priest who performed the Service at a bamah;¹²²Literally: “a high place.” This was an altar built prior to the establishment of a central Sanctuary, on which offerings to G-d could be brought; on such an altar even a non-priest could perform the rites of offering. Bamoth were permitted until the eighth day of consecration when the Tabernacle was erected, but from that day onwards they were prohibited until the people came into the Land of Israel, when for a period of fourteen years comprising the conquest and division of the Land, the Tabernacle was at Gilgal, and bamoth were temporarily permitted. Then a central Sanctuary was built at Shiloh, which lasted for 369 years, and during that time the bamoth were again prohibited. After the Philistines destroyed the Sanctuary at Shiloh, the bamoth were once again permitted. This period [covering also the reigns of Saul and David] lasted 57 years, and is known as that of Nob and Gibeon. Then finally the Sanctuary at Jerusalem was built, and from then on the bamoth were prohibited forever, since that is “the Eternal House,” so that even when it was destroyed, the place is still holy. — From this account it is thus clear why as stated in the Torath Kohanim [mentioned further on in the text] the central Sanctuary at Shiloh and “the Eternal House” at Jerusalem were alike as far as the prohibition to perform the Service while drunk is concerned. In both only a priest could perform the Service, while at a bamah even an Israelite was permitted to do it. [therefore the prohibition did not apply there].
Now the meaning of the expression when ye go into the Tent of Meeting, is “when you perform Service,” and He used this expression because all the Services were done there, either inside the Tent or at the altar of the burnt-offering which was at the door of the Tent of Meeting. The general principle then, is that the prohibition and punishment in these matters are only to the effect that the priest should not perform the Service while drunk with wine or with hands and feet unwashed, likewise if he lacks any of the required priestly garments; but merely for entering the Sanctuary in these conditions, there is no prohibition in the Torah. Thus that which we have been taught in the Mishnah:¹²³Keilim 1:9. “Rabbi Yosei says: In five things is the space between the Porch [of the Sanctuary] and the altar equal to the Sanctuary: that those priests may not enter there who have a blemish, or who have dishevelled hair,¹²⁴In our Mishnah: “or who have dishevelled hair, or who have drunk wine.” or who have hands and feet unwashed” and the whole Mishnah there — all these are gradations of Rabbinic enactment [and are not matters prohibited by Scriptural law]. In the opinion, however, of Rabbi Moshe [ben Maimon],¹²⁵Mishneh Torah, Hilchoth Bi’ath Hamikdash 1:15-16. See “The Commandments,” Vol. II pp. 68, 72-73. one who [wilfully] enters the Sanctuary [in the above-mentioned conditions] without performing the Service, [has also violated] a negative commandment, for which the punishment is not death [by the hand of Heaven but whipping].

בבאכם אל אהל מועד, “when you enter the Tent of Meeting.” Torat Kohanim writes that the death penalty applies only if the drunkenness occurs while the priest in question is performing his duties at the time. The meaning of the word שכר is perceived as its face value, i.e. “alcoholic, potentially intoxicating drink.”

אל תשת, “do not drink!” Even though in according to Jewish custom other mourners are given wine to drink, as is written in Proverbs 31,6: תנו שכר לאובד ויין למרי נפש, “give liquor to those who are about to perish, and wine to those who are embittered,” you and your sons must not drink it is as you are not used to it as you do not observe the customs of mourners. Furthermore, you are prohibited from imbibing on pain of death when you are on duty in the holy precincts to the Temple. It is simply not befitting that a drunk person should perform sacrificial service.