Commentary for Leviticus 9:8

ויקרב אהרון אל המזבח, Aaron approached the altar, etc. This verse alludes to a conversation in the celestial spheres which is reported in the Jerusalem Talmud Makkot 2,6: "They enquired from 'prophecy': what shall be the punishment of a person who has sinned? Answer: והנפש החוטאת היא תמות. 'The person (soul) who sins, she (the soul) will die (Ezekiel 18,4)'. When they asked 'mercy' the same question the answer given by 'mercy' was: 'he shall bring a sacrifice.'" The major factor determining the value of the animal sacrifice is the thoughts it evokes in the person offering it. If that person will realise that everything which is being done to the sacrificial animal is something that should really be done to him, the offering may effect atonement for its owner. When the Torah writes that Aaron approached the altar this is another way of saying that he readied himself to place his own soul on the altar as a guilt-offering. He was aware that when he performed the act of slaughtering the animal instead, this was an act of mercy by G'd who spared his life and allowed him to present the animal's life as a substitute for his own.

ויקרב אהרן אל המזבח וישחט, “Aaron approached the altar and slaughtered;” Nachmanides writes that in his personal view, the plain meaning of the words קרב אל המזבח is that Aaron is to approach the north side of the altar where he is to perform the procedures involving the sin offering and the burnt offering, seeing these two types of offerings need to be slaughtered on the north side of the altar. (Zevachim chapter 5) The catching of the blood of these offerings must also be carried out on the north side of the altar in the appropriate vessels. Moses recorded this in abbreviated form as Aaron was already familiar with the procedure. According to a Midrash, seeing that Aaron was a קדוש ה', someone sanctified by Hashem, his life having been stained only by one marginal sin, his involvement in the sin of the golden calf, this sin was something which preyed on his mind constantly, similar to David’s remark וחטאתי נגדי תמיד, “and I am constantly conscious of my sin against You.“ (Psalms 51, 5) He felt that the image of the golden calf constantly intruded upon his imagination and interfered with the proper concentration required when presenting sacrifices on behalf of others. This is why Moses tried to restore his mental equilibrium by telling him not to be depressed, that G’d had already forgiven his involvement in that sin. Some commentators think that it had been Satan that had shown Aaron these images of the golden calf, and that Moses told Aaron that in spite of he fact that as far as G’d was concerned, his sin had been forgiven, he also had to do something to shut up Satan so that the latter would not be able to upset him at the crucial time when he would perform sacrificial duties. This is the approach taken to our verse by Torat Kohanim.

In order to understand the system of crime and punishment and the apparent ease with which atonement can be obtained by the offering of an animal, we must consider various statements by our sages. Tanchuma Shoftim posits that G'd has sworn to hold the universe and the creatures therein responsible for their deeds. If anyone were to declare that G'd is a וותרון, an indulgent and lenient G'd, he will experience that his bowels יוותרו, will become loose. (Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 5,1). If, as the prophet said in Ezekiel 18,4, the sinner ought to die for his sin, how is it that he only has to offer a sacrifice in order to escape death? I believe we can find a reason for this which is acceptable even in legal terms. At the time a person commits a sin he does not do so as a human being in full command of his faculties. Rather, he has temporarily taken leave of his senses or he would never have committed the sin in the first place. Compare Sotah 3. We are told there that prior to committing a sin man's mind is afflicted by some mental disturbance. Had the person committing the sin not descended to a spiritual level such as that of a beast he would not have committed the sin. On the day such a person becomes a penitent, his רוח, spiritual level, has reasserted itself and he again assumes the spiritual level of a human being. Would it be fair to kill such a human being because of what he did while he was on the spiritual level of a beast? When such a person has to offer a beast in expiation of his sin he will realise the anguish the beast suffers when it has to die and he will appreciate that he himself had been in a situation similar to that of the beast which now has to die. Man's sensitivity to the animal's anguish then is what really saves him from the fate of the animal. This is what the Psalmist has in mind when he speaks of "man and beast You deliver, O Lord" (Psalms 36,7). G'd has delivered the part of man which is similar to the beast because man chose to allow his spiritual part to dominate him. His spiritual part had not deserved to be punished as it had no part in his sin. When looked at from this point of view the requirement to bring this sacrifice is part of justice as opposed to being in lieu of justice. This is why the Psalmist introduced the verse we quoted by saying: משפטיך תהום רבה, "Your justice is like the great deep;"