Commento su Levitico 9:1

ויהי ביום השמיני AND IT CAME TO PASS ON THE EIGHTH DAY of the installation of the priests into their sacred office (cf. Sifra); this was the New Moon of Nisan on which the Tabernacle was finally erected (cf. Rashi on Exodus 40:29) and it (that day) received ten crowns (it was distinguished in ten different ways) which are enumerated in Seder Olam 7 (Sifra, Shemini, Mechilta d'Miluim 2 1; Shabbat 87b).

ויהי ביום השמיני, it was on the eighth day; We need to analyse why the Torah had to introduce this chapter with the word ויהי. We are told in Megillah 10 that Rabbi Levi claimed there was an ancient tradition that every time the word ויהי appears it has a connotation of something painful having occurred. This view was challenged by the questioner pointing to the word ויהי in our portion which introduces the joyous event of Aaron performing the rites in the Tabernacle; furthermore, we have a Baraitha according to which this day was as joyous an occasion as the day on which G'd created Heaven and Earth, a day which is also introduced in the Torah by the words ויהי ערב ויהי בקר, "it was evening it was morning, etc." The Talmud answers that the saddening event in our portion was the death of Nadav and Avihu. The questioner in the Talmud continues, wanting to know why the word ויהי is used in Kings I 6,1 when the building of Solomon's Temple is reported. He also points to Genesis 29,10 where Jacob's encounter with his bride-to-be Rachel is introduced by the word ויהי. The questioner mentions a further occurrence of that word every time G'd completed part of the creation of the universe and the Torah describes the completion of that portion with the words ויהי ערב ויהי בקר. What were the negative elements on those occasions which prompted the Bible to draw our attention to them by means of the word ויהי? Rav Ashi answers that the word ויהי by itself may have either positive or negative connotations. When the word ויהי is followed by the word בימי, "during the lifetime of, etc." it invariably has a negative connotation. The Talmud added that there are five occasions when the expression ויהי בימי occurs in the Bible. Thus far the discussion in Megillah 10.

ויהי ביום השמיני; the eighth day after the commencement of the consecration of the priests, the eighth day after the Tabernacle had been erected and Aaron and his sons had been consecrated to commence performing the service therein.

ויהי ביום השמיני ...ויאמר אל אהרן וגו', “It was on the eighth day…he said to Aaron, etc.” Up until now the Torah did not spell out which of the sacrifices mentioned had been commanded to Moses in which order, and the Torah contented itself with writing: זה הדבר אשר צוה ה' תעשו, “this is the matter which the Lord has commanded you are to do,” and the sacrifices mentioned here in our portion had not been recorded as being specifically commanded to Moses to command to Aaron and the Children of Israel respectively. Now- as opposed to the seven days previously when Moses had been offering the מילואים inaugural sacrifices,- Aaron and his sons, and subsequently he and his sons on behalf of the people at large, will perform these procedures. The sacrifices mentioned here served as consecration sacrifices for the people. The מנחה gift offering that Aaron was to bring with the sin offering and the burnt offering was the חביטים offering he was required to offer every single day of the year. The Midrash suggests that the calf that Aaron was instructed to offer here served as a sin offering for his share in the sin of the golden calf. Nachmanides writes that Aaron’s sacrifice here was no different in nature from his personal sin offering on the Day of Atonement, and the sin offering on behalf of the people also corresponded to the sin offering he brought on behalf of the people on the Day of Atonement, when he offered a he-goat as their sin offering. It would appear therefore that seeing that the reason for Aaron’s sin-offering corresponded to his sin offering on the Day of Atonement, he burned it, just as he burned the one on the Day of Atonement. This was so, in spite of the fact, that this sin offering was offered on the large altar in the courtyard of the Tabernacle, and part of such sin-offerings are usually consumed by the male priests within the holy precincts. (Zevachim, chapter 5) Though we do not hear that Moses had instructed him to burn this sin offering, it is possible that he had received such instructions and the Torah did not bother to inform us of this. There was no need for the Torah to mention the directive, as clearly, Aaron would not proceed on his own initiative to offer an offering he had not been told to offer. There is a further statement in the Midrash to the effect that the שור, bull, was intended as atonement for the Israelites’ share in the sin of the golden calf, and that the reason that here a male goat was added was to atone for the brothers having dipped Joseph’s coloured tunic in the blood of a male goat at the time, a sin which had not yet been atoned for. [According to an ancient version of the Tanchuma, this was to reassure the Israelites that the sin of the golden calf had been forgiven. Ed.]

Eighth [day] of the installation. Since it is written at the end of Parshas Tzav: “At the entrance of the Tent of Meeting you shall sit day and night... Aharon and his sons fulfilled...” after which it is written: “And it was on the eighth day,” it surely refers to what came precedes it, those seven days, for we expound the juxtaposition [of the verses]. Furthermore, we can say that Scripture comes to elucidate and not to be unclear. Why, then, does it not specify which day it was? Rather, it must have been the eighth day (Rosh Chodesh Nison) of the installation, and it does not need to specify since it was juxtaposed to that verse.

And on the Eighth day, Moses summoned. The numerical value of this phrase is equal to that of It was on the day of Rosh Chodesh Nissan. Moshe said, "Because I resisted for seven days at the [Burning] Bush, I merited to serve as a Kohen for only seven [days]

ויהי ביום השמיני קרא משה לאהרן ובניו, “it was on the eighth day when Moses called Aaron and his sons, etc.”; we find the expression קרא being used for inviting someone to eat in order to satiate himself, as in Ezekiel 36,29: וקראתי אל הדגן והרביתי אותו, “I will summon (call) the grain and make it abundant;” we find the same expression used in connection with famine, as in Kings II 8,1: כי קרא ה' לרעב, “for the Lord has decreed a seven year famine on the land.” We find that expression when someone is chosen for greatness, as when G–d chose Moses and Aaron for such positions, G–d having told Moses to call his brother Aaron in Exodus 4,14 and his telling him that he rejoices over his appointment. We now find it here where Moses is called upon to make the appointment of Aaron and his sons as priests public knowledge.

ויהי ביום השמיני קרא משה לאהרן ולבניו, “It came to pass on the eighth day that Moses called upon Aaron and his sons;” he intended to consecrate them as priests;

ולזקני ישראל AND TO THE ELDERS OF ISRAEL, to inform them that it was by the express command of God that Aaron was entering the Sanctuary and ministering in the high-priesthood, so that they might not say: “He is entering on his own authority, unbidden.”

That very day. Rashi is answering the question: The verse comes to tell us when this happened, when it says: “And it was on the eighth day,” but we still do not know in which month the eighth day of installation was, or the date of the month. Because of this Rashi explains that it was Rosh Chodesh Nison. And Rashi means to say: The verse does not need to tell us that, for surely it was Rosh Chodesh Nison, because the Mishkon was erected on that very day, as it clearly says in Parshas Pekudei (Shemos 40:2). Since we have found that there was holiness on Rosh Chodesh Nison, then this [the eighth day of installation] was surely on Rosh Chodesh Nison as well, for we should assume that holiness occurs on a holy day. The verse relied on [this rationale], and it therefore did not specify the date. Additionally, Rashi is answering the question: How do we know the rationale to assume holiness occurs on a holy day — that [we should say] the verse relies on this logic? Therefore Rashi explains: And it took ten crowns which are taught in Seder Olom, i.e., we say in Seder Olam that this day took ten crowns. Why, though, did Hashem let it have all these virtues more than the other months? Perforce, it must be: This day was sanctified beforehand for the sake of the erection of the Mishkon, and we assume holiness occurs on a holy day.

Why did the questioner address his question to what is written in our verse, when the real question is what is written in Genesis over and over again, i.e. ויהי ערב ויהי בקר, which enabled the query about our verse not having a negative connotation? I must assume that the questioner obviously had all these verses in mind when he challenged Rabbi Levi's tradition. The only reason he introduced our verse was to make his question even more powerful by suggesting there are many such verses which clearly point to a joyous event. Alternatively, the questioner wanted to draw the opposite conclusion of the one Rabbi Levi reported as originating with the men of the great assembly. He wanted to argue that the word ויהי always introduces something joyous. He reasoned that just as the Tanna had compared our verse to the verse in Genesis in which the expression occurs for the first time and which certainly spoke about a positive event, so every time that expression occurs it denotes something positive, a joyous occasion. Using the verse ויהי ערב ויהי בקר in Genesis makes it much harder to refute the questioner's argument seeing no specific event is mentioned in that verse the nature of which could be disputed. Rabbi Levi's answer that our verse describes a day on which Nadav and Avihu died is somewhat astounding. This answer is applicable to our verse, but certainly not to the verses commencing with ויהי ערב in Genesis? It would not do to say that Rabbi Levi felt that the words ויהי ערב in Genesis also referred to something negative [after all they were preceded by G'd saying that He approved of how His instructions had been carried out, וירא אלוקים כי טוב, Ed.]. More to the point, why did not Rabbi Levi himself address those verses which begin with the word ויהי and which clearly speak of joyful events? He himself should have known the answer given by Rav Ashi!

We also find this expression being used when the elders were being appointed to their respective positions, in order that this would become public knowledge.

ולזקני ישראל, “and the elders of Israel;” so that they could stand and watch them present their sacrificial offerings.” (B’chor shor)

Took ten. For this reason it uses the indicative ה, the special eighth day, because of the ten crowns that it took. And they are: 1) The first day of the act of Creation, 2) first of the [Roshei] Chodashim, 3) first day of the princes’ [sacrifices], 4) first day of kehunah, 5) first day of Temple service, 6) of the fire descending, 7) of eating the sacrifices, 8) for the prohibition of individual altars, 9) for the presence of the Shechinoh in Yisroel, 10) for blessing the people of Yisroel.

I believe that Rabbi Levi did not mean to teach us anything other than Rav Ashi. The Talmud alludes to this by not introducing Rav Ashi's words with the introductory: אלא אמר רב אשי, "however, Rav Ashi said, etc." Had the Talmud used that formula we would have been justified in understanding him as refuting Rabbi Levi. What Rav Ashi said is compatible with what Rabbi Levi said, i.e. that the word ויהי contains a negative connotation. There are indeed many verses when that word alludes to something saddening. He only answered the person who had challenged Rabbi Levi believing that Rabbi Levi had meant that the word ויהי without the addition בימי is employed by the Bible exclusively in a negative context. This is why the questioner chose our verse out of the many other verses he could have chosen. He wanted to show that the events described in our verse were exceptionally joyous. After all, what conceptual difference is there between ויהי ביום, and ויהי בימי? The answer given was that the reason the Torah wrote ויהי ביום instead of a formula which would have reflected the purely joyous nature of the occasion was that the two sons of Aaron died on that very day. [With all due respect to the author, if he had introduced the subject as it is introduced in the Talmud namely: ויהי בימי אחשורוש, followed by Rabbi Levi's statement that every place where the expression ויהי occurs it carries a negative connotation, his remarks would have been easier to follow. No doubt the author had his reasons and that is why I did not see fit to amend his quotation above. Ed.]

Entered and served. Rashi is answering the question: Why did he call the elders of Israel? We cannot say he wanted to speak to them so that they would tell the people of Israel to bring their offerings, because it is written afterwards (v. 3): “To Bnei Yisroel you [Aharon] shall speak, saying...” To the elders, however, Moshe said nothing! Therefore, Rashi explains: “To announce to them...” [You might ask:] Above, in the previous parshah, it is written (8:5): “Moshe said to the congregation, ‘This is the edict that Adonoy commanded,’” upon which Rashi explains: “You should not say that [it is] for my honor and for my brother’s honor [that] I do this.” If so, why does he need to announce to them a second time that it was by Divine command that Aharon entered to serve? The answer is: Here, Moshe came to let them know that it is by Divine command that Aharon entered to serve even as a kohein godol, which is a different service than the service of an ordinary kohein (Re’m). [Alternatively,] the answer is: There, it refers to what they did during the seven days of installation, but here it refers to what he did on the eighth day. This is why Moshe mentioned above: “[You should not say that it is] for my honor” and here he speaks on Aharon’s behalf alone (Nachalas Yaakov).

Subsequently the question about the meaning of the word ויהי when it is not followed by either the word בימי or ביום is dealt with. In that context Rav Ashi said that the word itself is neutral and that its meaning is modified by what follows, such as the word בימי, for instance. The questioner who quoted a number of verses in which the word ויהי is not modified by either the word ביום or בימי, refers to very joyous events and gave Rav Ashi cause to say that this need not lead us to the assumption that only the words בימי or ביום modify the meaning of the word ויהי to signal that something sad is being reported. There are other occasions when the word by itself may also introduce something sad. When we have the words בימי, however, what follows invariably contains a negative element. Incidentally, the negative element in Exodus 19,16 where the Torah states ויהי ביום השלישי and introduces the happy event of מתן תורה, was that all the Israelites died for a brief space of time when they found themselves unable to absorb G'd's revelation. According to Shabbat 88, G'd brought them back to life immediately.

Perhaps another element of pain asscociated with the words ויהי ביום השמיני is that Moses realised on that day that it had become Aaron and his sons who were the "heirs" of his own spiritual stature and not his own sons. The Talmud (Menachot 109) tells about the High Priest Shimon Ha-tzaddik who had appointed one of his sons Chonov to be his successor, something which aroused the jealousy of Chonov's brother Shimi. The results were terrible. At any rate, we see from there that aspiring to something noble may cause the finest person anguish if one's desire goes unfulfilled. At the time G'd had repeatedly urged Moses to accept the role of leader of the Jewish people and Moses had repeatedly declined, G'd had become angry, deciding to deny Moses the position of High Priest [a hereditary position provided the son was suitable. Ed.] Up until now Moses had not felt saddened by not having been accorded the rank of High Priest. Now when he saw that Aaron had been given this honour, he was saddened by having forfeited the chance to be the High Priest. Although we know that Moses was the most humble and fair person his heart was not made of stone, and he suffered some emotional distress about this, especially as the position denied him involved being the instrument of atonement for his people, etc. Perhaps the Torah alluded to Moses' feelings in the matter in Numbers 7,1 where we read ויהי ביום כלות משה להקים את המשכן, "it was on the day Moses completed erecting the Tabernacle;" this was the same date as the day which is described in our portion as "the eighth day," i. e. the first of Nissan. Our suggestion would account for the fact that the Torah introduced both paragraphs with the words ויהי ביום, seeing that in our verse the sad event was the death of Nadav and Avihu whereas in Numbers the sadness the Torah alluded to was Moses' distress at having forfeited the chance to be the High Priest.

ביום …קרא משה לאהרון, on that day Moses called Aaron, etc. Any psychologist realises that a person who is forced to give up a position of honour originally intended for himself to someone else, even if that someone is his own brother, may be expected to display his distress in three ways. 1) He is unlikely to carry out the command with dispatch; 2) he is unlikely to perform the command in the most effective manner; 3) he will try to avoid fulfilling this command publicly. The Torah here describes that Moses mastered all the inhibitions an ordinary individual would have displayed in carrying out this command. 1) He carried out the command on the first day it was possible, i.e. the eighth day. 2) He carried out the command with all its attendant subsidiary commands, i.e. he appointed Aaron's sons at the same time although there was no immediate need for Aaron's sons to substitute for their father and this was perhaps the hardest part for him to fulfil. 3) He called in the elders of the people and performed the command in public. Moses displayed an example of suppressing his personal feelings in order to fulfil G'd's command.

קרא משה לאהרן ולבניו, “Moses called out to Aaron and his sons.” Our sages (Tanchuma Shemini 3) comment that the word קרא ל.. means that Moses called upon Aaron to wear the mantle of the position of High Priest. When told that he was to be the High Priest, Aaron said to his brother: “seeing you have worked tirelessly to make the Tabernacle a reality, it does not seem fair that I should be the High Priest.” Moses answered him that although Aaron had been appointed to this position by G’d, He, Moses, was as happy for him as if he himself had been appointed to that position. He added that just as Aaron had rejoiced at the time when Moses was appointed the leader of the people, although he was the older of the two, now it was his turn to rejoice in Aaron’s promotion. The occasion when Aaron had rejoiced at Moses’ appointment is recorded in Exodus 4,14 where G’d told Moses that his brother Aaron would rejoice in his appointment. One of the reasons Moses had not wanted to accept the position was that he was afraid that Aaron who had been the people’s spokesman up until then would be offended. This is what Moses had meant when he said to G’d: “appoint (send) the one whom You are in the habit of sending on such missions” (Exodus 4,13).
Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai said that the heart which had been able to sincerely rejoice at the promotion of his younger brother was the most suitable one to wear the urim vetumim, as is written “he shall carry the judgment of the Children of Israel on his heart” (Exodus 25,30). This is why during the seven days that Moses performed the sprinkling of the blood on the Altar, offering incense, etc., G’d said to him: “Moses in case you think that you are going to be the High Priest, call in Aaron and appoint him to the position.” Why did Moses also have to call in the elders of the people? G’d told him to appoint Aaron in their presence in order that later on no one could claim that Aaron had appointed himself to this position.