Commentaire sur L’Exode 29:26

OF THE RAM OF CONSECRATION WHICH IS AARON’S. He did not mention here Aaron’s sons, although the ram was for the consecration of all of them. The reason for this is that Scripture commanded [in the first part of the verse before us], And thou [i.e., Moses] shalt take the breast of the wave-offering of the ram of consecration because it is Aaron’s, since the breast of the offering is by right not Aaron’s, for it does not belong to the owner of the animal [but to the priest,¹⁹⁸Ibid., 7:31. and since on this occasion Aaron and his sons were the owners of the ram of consecration, and Moses the officiating priest, the breast in this instance belonged to Moses]. Now having stated the reason why it does not belong of right to Aaron, there was no need any more to declare that it does not belong to his sons, for they follow him in their rights [and where it does not belong to him, it likewise does not belong to them]. Further, however, He does say, And thou shalt sanctify the breast of the wave-offering… of the ram of consecration, even of that which is Aaron’s, and of that which is his sons’,¹⁹⁹Verse 27. for the intent is to state: “just as he [Moses] takes of the offering which belongs to them all, the breast and the shoulder,²⁰⁰“And the shoulder,” is merely an expression, for it is clearly stated in Verse 22 that the shoulder was also burnt on the altar, and Rashi also so states it clearly. so shall they — the father and the sons [High Priest and common priests] — take of the future [peace-] offerings which they [the children of Israel] will offer up.”

מאיל המלואים אשר לאהרן, “from the bull of the consecration rites concerning the appointment of Aaron to the priesthood.” Even though this same ram served as a consecration rite ram also for his sons, they are not mentioned here, seeing that Aaron was considered the owner offering these sacrifices. Moses acts as Aaron’s and his sons’ priest at this stage, performing the rites the priest generally performs for the owner of the sacrificial animal as his appointed emissary. Once this point had been made, we need not wonder that in the next verse Aaron’s sons are mentioned as also partaking of the meat of these animals. Father and sons will partake in the portions normally assigned to the priests of such offerings which are not burned up on the altar.

V. 26. Beim איל המלאים, durch welchen den werdenden Priestern insbesondere die richtige Würdigung der mit ihrer Würde verknüpften Rechte und Vorzüge nahe gelegt werden sollte, war שוק הימין, das Symbol der voranschreitenden Machtstellung, zu den zu opfernden אימורים gelegt worden. Die חזה, die Brust des Priesters, sein geistiges Sinnen und Wollen, blieb zurück für die gewöhnliche תנופה-שלמים und ward, wie sonst dem כהן, so hier Mosche zum Anteil, dem die werdenden Priester ihr geistiges Sinnen und Wollen verdankten, und dessen Lehre sie es geweiht halten sollten.

אשר לאהרן, “which was Aaron’s;” at this point Aaron’s sons are not mentioned, as he was the principal figure. The expressions: תנופה and תרומה, are basically the same but the breast is called תנופה, elevation, which had been heaved, and subsequently eaten by Aaron, whereas the thigh was burned up on the altar. In subsequent generations both would be eaten by the priests.