Comentario sobre Levítico 1:8

בני אהרן הכהנים THE SONS OF AARON THE PRIESTS — i e. only as priests : when they are ministering in their priestly dignity; but if an ordinary priest officiates in the eight garments of the High Priest his service is invalid (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Nedavah, Chapter 5 9; Zevachim 18a).

V’ETH HAPADER.’ Onkelos translated it: tarba (fat), and this is also the concensus of opinion of all commentators, the word (pader) having no companion in the Hebrew language. In my opinion the word is not a generic term for all kinds of fat, but signifies specifically the thin layer of fat which spreads over and divides between the inwards, and the word pader is one of those terms whose letters are interchangeable, thus: pader — pared (division), [and is so called] since it divides between the upper and the lower inwards. That is why our Rabbis have said¹⁰⁰Yoma 26a. that [when the limbs are taken up to the altar] the pader is spread over the throat of the animal at the place where the act of slaughter was performed, for this is considered regard for Him Who is on high, since that fat is fit to be spread and serve as a cover. It is also customary among the nobility of nations to spread it over a roast. If, however, the word pader is indeed a generic term for all kinds of fat, [it is my opinion that] fat is so called because it is the greasy substance which is “separated” from the flesh, and such in fact is the term used as an equivalent for fat by students of nature, as I will mention.¹⁰¹Further, 3:9.

הפדר, fat.

ואת הפדר, “and the fats.” Nachmanides in commenting on Onkelos translating the word פדר as meaning ”fat,” writes that this is not a generic term for all the various fat parts of the animal, but refers only to a thin fatty membrane separating between different parts of the innards. The origin of the word פדר is that it is one of the words which appear in forward and backward spelling, i.e. פרד, the same root, spelled in a different order of the letters means “to separate.” The membrane in question separates upper from lower parts within the innards of the ruminants. This is why our sages have said that the priest is to spread out this membrane above the place where the knife made the incision when it slaughtered the animal. This is a way of showing respect for the animal that becomes the instrument of the donor’s achieving atonement for his sin. Dignitaries among the nations of the world were in the habit of spreading this membrane over the part of it that they roasted. If the name פדר were to apply to fatty parts of the animal in general, this would be because the fat parts separate the flesh from the bones, etc. Maimonides (Moreh, Nevuchim third part chapter 46) writes that the underlying reason of the legislation involving animal sacrifices is connected to the practices of the Egyptians and the Sumerians. (inhabitants of Mesopotamia, the competing civilization of that of the Egyptians.) Jews who had lived within either civilization observed these people actually deifying cattle and sheep, the Egyptians worshipping sheep, and the Chaldaeans male goats, (satyrs) whereas the Indians worship cows to this day, believing them to be their reincarnated ancestors. It is forbidden to slaughter cows in India, as it is considered equivalent to murdering a god. G’d, in order to instill in us an abhorrence of such forms of paganism, demanded from us to sacrifice these animals, in order to demonstrate that we had been weaned from such mistaken beliefs. By means of these animals being sacrificed as gifts to G’d, we are absolved from deviant philosophical and theological thoughts. False philosophies represent a disease of the soul and therefore the personality, and just like any other disease, can be cured only by applying a medicine that represents the opposite of the harmful substance that causes the disease. Nachmanides writes that Maimonides’ writing concerning this subject are worthless, believing that if we are to look for a rationale for animal sacrifice at all, it is better to accept the view that seeing that man’s deeds are the final result of the brain’s thought, the spoken intention to do certain things, and finally, the carrying out in practice of what had been planned and discussed, G’d commanded that in order to rid ourselves of all vestiges of sin we must reverse the process, by first sanctifying the sacrificial animal in our mind, then leaning on it and expressing our remorse with words, and finally, by utterly destroying the symbol of our sin through sprinkling its blood on the altar and burning up the physical remains by fire, we rid ourselves of our having been involved in the sin that led to this process of expiation. During the procedures involving these activities of the priest with the sacrificial animal, the owner is to reflect on all that he had done wrong, as well as on the mercy of the Lord Who accepts the animal’s blood instead of the sinner’s blood. The bodily remains of the animal are accepted by G’d in lieu of our own body, and the animal’s blood is accepted in lieu of our own contaminated soul. Burning of the innards and kidneys are symbolic of the seat of the thoughts of man (according to our tradition). The gifts to the priests performing these procedures are designed to inspire them to pray on our behalf so that the bulk of the Jewish people will be spared and not become enmeshed in sin.

את הנתחים ואת הראש, ”the various pieces including the head, etc.” The head had not been part of the animal which had been skinned as it had already been severed from the rest of the animal at the time of slaughter. This is why the Torah had to mention the head especially (Sifra 4, 6,3). In that case, why did the Torah have to mention the פדר, “fat-parts,” separately also? This was to tell us that the head together with the fat-parts were to be burned after the area where the head had been slaughtered had been covered with the fat-parts.
The expression פדר, which means “at-parts,”is a translation of the word פרד, i.e. the same letters in reverse order. This is an allusion to the fact that these fat-parts separate (פדר) between the lower and upper intestines. The whole procedure was to make it as dignified as possible seeing the area where the head had been severed had become bloody and dirty. Even nowadays, when people barbecue animals on the spit, they cover the head separately as mentioned by Nachmanides.

Since it was already cut off. Once the signs (windpipe and esophagus) were cut, Rashi calls the head “cut off,” because the animal’s life-force depends on them. As a result, it is considered as if it was placed in a basket. The head is not included in skinning, but rather is brought as is with the skin.

וערכו בני אהרן, “and Aaron’s sons shall arrange, etc.; when the same procedure is to be performed with offerings involving sheep or goats, (verse 12) the Torah uses the singular mode for the verb ערך, The reason is that cattle are so much heavier that more than one priest was required to handle all that.

וערכו בני אהרן, “and Aaron’s sons shall arrange” on the pieces of the burnt offering;” seeing that it is of the category of cattle, big animals, the Torah uses the plural mode whereas with sheep or goats the Torah uses the singular mode for this procedure. (compare verse12)

את הראש את הנתחים [AND THE PRIESTS … SHALL SET] THE PIECES, THE HEAD etc. [IN ORDER] — Since the head was not included in the law prescribing flaying (v. 6) as it was already as good as cut off by the act of slaughter, it therefore was necessary to enumerate it separately here since Scripture wishes every part of the animal to be put on the altar (cf. Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Nedavah, Chapter 6 3; Chullin 27a).

And covers. It is understandable for Scripture to mention “the head,” for it is needed to be included, because it had already been cut off and it was not included in the skinning. However, why is it necessary to say “the fat”?

ואת הפדר AND THE FAT — Why is this mentioned separately (is it not included in the word הנתחים)? In order to teach you that he must bring it up on the altar together with the head, and that with it he must cover the throat of the animal (בית השחיטה, lit., the place where the act of slaughter was performed). This (covering the cut in the throat) was done in way of regard for God on high (Chullin 27a).

Protrude. Meaning: They cut thick pieces of wood that will not protrude outside the pile, which is where they burnt the offerings’ limbs; it is one amoh (cubit) by one amoh. The cut pieces of wood were also one amoh long so they would not protrude outside the pile. This was so the wood would not interfere with the kohanim’s feet when they walked around the pile.

אשר על המזבח WHICH IS UPON THE ALTAR — upon the altar: this implies that the logs of wood must not project beyond the woodpile (מערכה) (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Nedavah, Chapter 6 5).