Midrash sobre Proverbios 14:28
בְּרָב־עָ֥ם הַדְרַת־מֶ֑לֶךְ וּבְאֶ֥פֶס לְ֝אֹ֗ם מְחִתַּ֥ת רָזֽוֹן׃
En la multitud de pueblo está la gloria del rey: Y en la falta de pueblo la flaqueza del príncipe.
Sifra
1) (Vayikra 2:2) ("And he shall bring it to the sons of Aaron, the Cohanim, and he [the Cohein] shall take, etc."): (It could have been written "vehevi" ("And he shall bring.") Why "veheviah"? ("And he shall bring it")? That he not bring it by halves. So that if he said: "I vow to bring a meal-offering of two issaron," he should not bring it in two vessels but in one. "to the sons of Aaron" — even if they are very many (i.e., they can apportion the various services among themselves.) And thus is it written (Mishlei 14:28): "In the multitude of the people is the King's glory." "the Cohanim": We are hereby taught that kemitzah (the taking of the fistful) is the mitzvah of the priesthood. (non-Cohanim may not perform it.) (For without the exclusion clause I would reason:) Does it not follow (that kemitzah does not require a Cohein)? viz.: If shechitah, for which "north" was required, a Cohein was not required, kemitzah, for which north was not required, how much more so should a Cohein not be required! — This argument is refuted by melikah, which does not require "north," yet does require a Cohein. — No, this may be true of melikah because it requires the altar, as opposed to kemitzah, which does not require the altar. And since it does not require the altar, it should not require a Cohein. It is, therefore, written: "… the Cohanim, and he (the Cohein) shall take the fistful" — kemitzah is the mitzvah of the priesthood.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy