פירוש על ויקרא 10:2

ותצא אש AND THERE WENT OUT FIRE — Rabbi Eleizer said: the sons of Aaron died only because they gave decisions on religious matters in the presence of their teacher, Moses (Sifra, Shemini, Mechilta d'Miluim 2 32; Eruvin 63a). Rabbi Ishmael said: they died because they entered the Sanctuary intoxicated by wine. You may know that this is so, because after their death he admonished those who survived that they should not enter when intoxicated by wine (vv. 8—9). A parable! It may be compared to a king who had a bosom friend, etc., as is to be found in Leviticus Rabbah 12:1, 4 (cf. Biur).

AND THERE CAME FORTH FIRE ‘MILIPHNEI’ (FROM BEFORE) THE ETERNAL. The meaning of “miliphnei the Eternal” is like: “from before the pnei (presence of) the Eternal.” The student learned [in the mystic lore of the Cabala] will understand, for I have already explained this.⁵³Exodus 30:1. The nature of the sin of Nadab and Abihu you may know from that which it says, and they offered ‘strange fire’ before the Eternal,⁵⁴Verse 1. and it does not say “and they offered before the Eternal ‘incense’ which He had not commanded them.” Thus they put incense upon the fire, similarly to that which Scripture says, they shall put incense ‘b’apecha’ (before Thee),⁵⁵Deuteronomy 33:10. See following note. and they directed their thoughts only to this,⁵⁶In quoting the language of Ramban, Menachem of Ricanti adds the following explanatory note: “Know that the incense is offered towards the attribute of justice, as it is said, they shall put incense ‘b’apecha’ (literally: ‘before Thy anger’). It is for this reason that the burning of incense stays the plague. (Numbers 17:11-15). However, the priest who offered it had to direct his mind to the perfect Unity of G-d. And since Nadab and Abihu directed it only to the attribute of justice (see Note 58), therefore they were punished.” See further, my Hebrew commentary p. 46. and thus it was not a fire-offering of a sweet savor.⁵⁷Above, 1:9, etc. This is the sense of the expression, and they laid ‘aleha’ (upon her) incense.⁵⁸Verse 1. The word aleha (upon her) is an allusion to the attribute of justice. and it does not say “and they laid upon them [i.e., the censers] incense,” as is said with reference to the company of Korah, and put fire therein, and put incense upon them,⁵⁹Numbers 16:7. and again it is said there, and put incense upon them.⁶⁰Ibid., Verse 17. But here it says upon her, to allude [to the fact] that they put the incense only on “the fire,” [and therefore it says], And there came forth fire from before the Eternal, and devoured them. It is possible that the verse which He said, Ye shall offer no strange incense thereon,⁶¹Exodus 30:9. alludes to this, meaning that he should not cause it [the fire] to be strange. It is in connection with this that Scripture states, when they [Nadab and Abihu] drew near before the Eternal, and died,⁶²Further, 16: 1. which means “when they offered l’phanav they died.”⁶³I.e., when they offered the incense l’phanav alone [to the attribute of justice alone, as explained above] they died.

וימותו לפני השם. They died in the presence of the Lord. The words: "in the presence of the Lord" may be intended to inspire fear and reverence for the Tabernacle in the people who witnessed that even people who entered in order to offer the offering dearest to G'd, incense, had died as a result of doing something unauthorised. There is also an allusion here that their death was due to something they had done previously and which involved the presence of G'd. I refer to Exodus 24,10 where these two sons were reported as having beheld G'd (compare Vayikra Rabbah 20,10 and G'd was reported there as not punishing the "nobles of Israel" at that time). These "nobles" were Nadav and Avihu.

ותצא אש מלפני ה' ותאכל אותם, this is a reference to the fire mentioned in 9,24 The construction is similar to the one in Exodus 19,8 which we explained at the time, as well as the verse in Judges 17,3-4 where the fact that Michah returned the money to his mother is also mentioned twice in successive verses. In neither of these verses does the author refer to an additional event. Here too, the two verses refer to the same fire.

Only because they rendered. This raises a difficulty: There is no [liability for] punishment without a warning! I will answer this difficulty in the next comment.

'ותצא אש מלפני ה, “and fire came forth from before the Lord, etc.” this was because they had not acted appropriately. Even though it is in order to use man made fire, as we have read specifically in Leviticus 1,7: ונתנו בני אהרן אש על המזבח, “the sons of Aaron are to put fire on the altar, this was in addition to the heavenly fire which had come down a single time. Before G–d had demonstrated acceptance of the Israelites’ offerings in the Temple precincts, they were not allowed to use man made fire, as it would have belittled the miracle G–d provided. People would have argued that their offerings had been consumed by man made fire. This is why G–d struck these two sons of Aaron with fire emanating in heaven. Our author has difficulty with this interpretation, as the Torah had written in Leviticus 9,24: ותצא אש מלפני ה' ותאכל על המזבח, “fire came forth from before the Lord and consumed the burnt offering and its fat parts.” How could the sons of Aaron therefore have belittled G–d’s fire by what they did? This is why the sages in the Talmud tractate Yuma folio 53, state that the sons of Aaron did not die because of this, but because they had dared to usurp the authority of Moses and Aaron by making halachic decisions without first having consulted with these leaders.

And they died in the presence of Adonoy. The Attribute of Justice immediately struck them down because they were before Hashem in the palace of the King, the King of kings, the Holy One, blessed be He.

ותצא אש, “Fire came forth;” the Torah first reports the fact that fire originated in heaven, before going into details, i.e. that this fire was triggered by actions taken by the two sons of Aaron mentioned here. The fire mentioned here is the fire mentioned in verse 24 of the previous chapter. The “details” commence with verse 1 in our chapter, i.e. “the two sons of Aaron, Nadav and Avihu each took his own censer and placed man made fire and incense on them, fire that G-d had forbidden to be put on these censers.” It was the custom of that heavenly fire to travel first to the Holy of Holies and from there to the golden altar in the Sanctuary and there to consume the incense offered. In this instance, the heavenly fire did not stop there, but travelled beyond the boundary of the Sanctuary to the copper altar in front of the Sanctuary and consumed these two sons of Aaron there.

And strange fire went out from before God and consumed them This is the same fire from and fire went out from before God and consumed on the altar (Vayikra 9:24 - the preceding verse) as it is said in Sifrei Zuta, and so explains the Rambam: that the fire didn't descend specifically to kill Nadav and Avihu. It was just that they weren't careful not to enter at that moment, and when the fire descended it killed them, and it was like an accident. But regardless, they sinned, since they should have paid attention to this since on that day they shouldn't have brought fire of their own accord, even though on other days this was one of their duties to bring it, as it is said above And the sons of Aharon the Priest put fire on the altar (Vayikra 1:7). And so said the Holy Blessed One: "In My close ones I will be made holy" (Vayikra 10:3) - for those who are accustomed to come near Them need to be careful and separated, so that they do not act out of custom, as it says in Yeshayahu 29:13, "[their fear of Me is like] the commandment of men learned by rote". And this is as it says in Sanhedrin 52a, "burning the soul but the body remains [intact]". Measure for measure, for Nadav and Avihu acted seemingly according to halacha, only they didn't pay attention to what the Holy Blessed One required of them at that moment. For this reason, they were burnt within (the seat of the intellect and reason), and their bodies remained externally whole.

At the time the heavenly fire emanated in order to consume the sacrificial meat on the altar in the courtyard of the Tabernacle, it consumed the two sons of Aaron on its way. This fire had meant to consume only the incense, but seeing that the sons of Aaron had been in its way it consumed them also and they died as a result. This is the meaning of

Intoxicated with wine they entered. [According to this] the explanation of “which He had not commanded them” is not the reason for their deaths. Rather, it only informs that they volunteered themselves to bring the incense, and not that He commanded them, as He had commanded Aharon (9:2): “Take, for yourself, a young calf...” And the explanation of (16:1): “[After the death of two sons of Aharon] in their coming close (בקרבתם),” is: At the time of their bringing an offering, and not that they had died because of [using] a strange fire. Rather, the main reason for their death was because they were intoxicated with wine. If it were not that Hashem wanted to be sanctified by means of Nodov and Avihu, they would not have died now, even though death had already been decreed upon them at the time they peered [See Shemos 24:11, Rashi there: “They envisioned Hashem.” They (Nodov and Avihu) gazed at Him insolently while engaged in eating and drinking]. Similarly, they would not have died on this day which was a joyous occasion for Israel, if they had not rendered a halachic decision on this day. (See more about this in the following). Gur Aryeh answers that [although death was already decreed at the time of Matan Torah] since Hashem’s anger passes, as it is written (Yishayahu 26:20): “Hide for almost a moment, until the anger passes,” and since that anger had passed, another cause was necessary to be liable for death. Re’m poses another difficulty: They were liable for death from the time of the Golden Calf, as punishment for Aharon, and Moshe’s prayer only helped for half the decree — that two [of Aharon’s four] sons would die [see Rashi 10:12]. Nachalas Yaakov answers: According to the assumption that Aharon’s sons would die solely for the sin of the Golden Calf, Elozor and Isomor should have died, for they were presumably less righteous than, and they did not have as much merit as, Nodov and Avihu. Gur Aryeh answers: We find concerning the wicked that if they continue the deeds of their forefathers, Hashem punishes them for their forefathers’ deeds, so too, concerning a completely righteous person. If his son does any sin, Hashem punishes him for the deeds of his father, and if the son does not sin at all, Hashem does not bring the sin of the righteous man upon the son. This [concept] necessitates that when the sons sin, it is added to the forefathers’ sins and then the sons are punished even for the sin of the forefathers. [Thus,] the sin of the sons together [with the sin of the forefathers] causes the punishment. See Kitzur Mizrachi where he brings additional views: Rabbi Yossi HaGelili said: For drawing close, in which they entered the innermost (Holy of Holies) they died. Rabbi Akiva said: For drawing close, in that they brought a strange fire they died. Rabbi Elazar ben Azaryah said: Because of both reasons they died. Bar Kappara said in the name of Rabbi Yirmeyah ben Eliezer: Because of four things they died: 1) For coming close, 2) for the offering that they brought without being commanded, 3) for the strange fire, a fire from the Beis HaKirayim (house of ovens), and 4) because they did not ask advice from one another.

'וימותו לפני ה, “as a result they died before the Lord.” We find a dispute recorded in the Torat Kohanim concerning the meaning of this phrase. According to Rabbi Eliezer, they died outside the Tabernacle in an area that the Levites were permitted to enter; he bases himself on the wording in verse five, in which the Torah describes how their bodies were removed from the spot where they died. The Torah describes the sons of Elitzafan, an uncle of Aaron as performing this task, with the words: ויקרבו וישאם בכתנתם אל מחוץ למחנה, ”they approached and lifted them up by their tunics and carried them out of the camp as they had been instructed to do by Moses.” If that is so, why did the Torah write that they died “before the Lord,” i.e. on sacred ground, not accessible to the Levites? This is why Rabbi Akiva disagreed and said that they had actually died inside sacred ground, and that the sons of Elitzafan had to use a long iron spear in order to pull placing that spear in their mouths and dragging their bodies to less sacred ground before they could lift them up, as they were only Levites and not priests. This presents us with a different problem, as in that event the Tabernacle itself would have become ritually impure as it formed a tent over the bodies of Nadav and Avihu, and it would have required purification rites which would last seven days. The Torah does not, however, report that the service in the Tabernacle had been interrupted for that length of time. Our author concludes that the subject needs further study. [Since the ash of the red heifer for cleansing oneself from impurity caused through contact with a dead body was not yet available, this editor does not see where the problem is.]

ותצא אש; according to Rashi, quoting Rabbi Eliezer, the reason why the sons of Aaron were killed was that they had arrogated to themselves the right to render halachic rulings while their mentor Moses was alive and well, to do this himself. What prompted them to do this? They reasoned that although the fire to burn up the incense was provided by heaven it was still a mitzvah to add manmade fire, seeing that the Torah has written in Leviticus 1,7, “the sons of Aaron are to put fire on the altar.” ונתנו בני אהרן הכהן אש על המזבח. They failed to confirm with their teacher Moses that they had correctly interpreted this verse. This is why the Torah wrote: “which He had not commanded them.” We have a clear statement in the Talmud, tractate Taanit folio 22, that the King Yoshiahu, [the most observant King the Kingdom of Yehudah ever ruled, was punished and killed by enemy troops for having failed to check with the prophet Jeremiah if to go to war against the Egyptians, who only wanted right of passage. Ed.] There is another opinion according to whom the sin of Nadav and Avihu was not the fact that they brought alien fire into the Sanctuary, but that they had done it on that day. As far as the verse we quoted from Leviticus 1,7, is concerned, the instructions of that verse were to become effective only after the first day on which the Tabernacle operated under the leadership of the High Priest, Aaron. They were also misled as heavenly fire on previous days when Moses performed the service in the Tabernacle had occurred earlier in the day. The reason why G-d had delayed was that He wished to be honoured by a large turnout of the people who would witness that event. This would then be the meaning of the words in verse 1: “that He had not commanded them.” G-d had waited, not as on the occasion of the revelation on Mount Sinai when in spite of having previously announced that He would manifest His glory on the Mountain, He had done so but the people had not bothered to rise early. (Compare Exodus19,11, 16, 1718) Nadav and Avihu meant to avoid G-d’s honour not being sufficiently appreciated by the people. We find something parallel in Kings I 18,25, where the prophet Elijah tells the priests of the Baal not to set fire to their offerings.

'וימותו לפני ה, “they died in the section of the Tabernacle described as ‘in the presence of the Lord.’” As soon as the news reached Aaron he wanted to interrupt performing the service in order to mourn his sons;

ותאכל אותם וימותו, “it consumed them so that they died (on the spot)”. The punishment fitted the crime. They were killed by heavenly fire as they had diminished the glory of the Lord which is described as being comparable to אש אוכלת “consuming fire.” (Exodus 24,17) Both Nadav and Avihu had been warned on that occasion not to look upon the G-d of Israel, as we know from verse 10 in the above quoted chapter, where the Torah added or hinted that on that joyful occasion G-d did not want to kill the happy mood of the people by punishing those who had transgressed the warning not feast their eyes on what they thought was the true image of G-d. They were warned again in Numbers 11,1 when badmouthing G-d and being killed by heavenly fire.

'וימותו לפני ה, “They died in the presence of the Lord. This is an unusual expression. Are we not all, at any given moment, “in the Presence” of the Lord? Rabbi Eliezer says this expression teaches that they did not die until having left the sacred precincts and being in the antechamber where Levites were permitted. We have proof of this from verse 4 where the cousins of these brothers, by the names of Mishael and Eltzafan were charge with removing their bodies from there for burial. Not only that. They were moved while still wearing their garments which had not been burned by the heavenly fire. Apparently, their cousins hooked their spears into the outer garments and dragged them until they were outside the sacred parts of the Tabernacle.