Midrash su Levitico 8:2

(Numb. 16:1:) “Now Korah betook himself.” This text is related (to Prov. 18:19), “A brother offended (rt.: psh') is more formidable than a fortified city; [such] contentions are like a castle bar.” The brother offended is Korah, in that he sided against Moses.¹Numb. R. 18:1, 14. So he rebelled and sank from whatever glory that he possessed. Now offended (rt: psh') can only imply rebellion, since it is stated (in II Kings 3:7), “The king of Moab has rebelled (psh') against me.” It also says (in II Kings 8:22), “then did Libnah rebel (rt.: psh').” (Prov. 18:19:) “[Such] contentions are like a castle bar.” [The earth raised its bars against him like a castle.] (Prov. 18:19:) “Like a castle bar.” [These words also refer to Korah,] who sided against Moses and against the Omnipresent.²See the commentary of Enoch Zundel on Tanh., Numb.5:1. This explanation is also given by Issachar Berman Ashkenazi in his commentary, Mattenot Kehunnah, on Numb. R. 18:1. (Numb. 16:1:) “[Now Korah …] took.”³In this and some of the following sections, the midrash is explaining the fact that the transitive verb, TOOK, has no object. Biblical translations offer solutions such as translating the verb intransitively, e.g., BETOOK HIMSELF, or by supplying an object, e.g., TOOK MEN. “Took” can only be a word for "attracting with persuasive words," in that he attracted all the leaders of Israel and the sanhedraot [to follow] after him.⁴Numb. R. 18:2. Concerning Moses it is written (in Numb. 1:17), “So Moses and Aaron took these men.” And similarly it is written (in Numb. 8:2), “Take Aaron and his sons with him.” And so does it say (in Hos. 14:3), “Take words with you and repent….” And so does it [also] say (in Genesis 12:15), “and the woman was taken to the house of Pharaoh.” Ergo (in Numb. 16:1) “Now Korah […] took,” in that he drew (i.e., took) their hearts with persuasive words. (Numb. 16:1:) “Now Korah […] betook himself.” Because of what did he dissent? Because of Elizaphan, the son of his father's brother, who had been appointed prince (nasi) over his clan. So it says (in Numb. 3:30), “And the prince of the ancestral house for the Kohathite clan was Elizaphan ben Uzziel.” Korah said, “Father had four brothers.” It is so stated (according to Exod. 6:18), “And the sons of Kohath were Amram, Izhar, Hebron, and Uzziel.” “As for Amram, the first-born; his son Aaron and his sons attained the high priesthood, and his brother Moses [attained] the kingship. So who deserves to get second [place]? Should it not be the second [son]? Now I am Izhar's son. I deserved to be prince of my clan, but he has appointed the son of Uzziel. Should the youngest of father's brothers become superior to me? See, I am dissenting and declaring everything invalid, whatever he had done.” Therefore, there was dissent.

1) (Vayikra 8:1) ("And the L–rd spoke to Moses, saying (Vayikra 8:2): "Take Aaron, and his sons with him, and the garments, and the oil of anointment, and the bullock of the sin-offering and the two rams and the basket of unleavened bread.") "Take Aaron and his sons with him": What is the intent of this? Because (Shemoth 32:35): "And the L–rd smote the people with plague because they had made the calf that Aaron had made" implies that Aaron was rejected, from "Take Aaron and his sons with him" all knew that he was (re-) accepted. Whence is it derived that Moses knew that Aaron was rejected? From (Devarim 9:20): "And against Aaron the L–rd was wroth to destroy him, and I prayed also on Aaron's behalf at that time," and it is not written there (as it is in the preceding verse in respect to Moses' prayer on behalf of Israel) "And the L–rd hearkened to me at that time too." From "Take Aaron and his sons with him," Moses knew that Aaron was (re-) accepted. Whence do we derive that it was in Aaron's heart that he had been rejected? It is written at the end of the episode (Vayikra 9:7) ("And Moses said to Aaron) draw near to the altar." (Why was this command necessary?) Had not Moses just presented to him the entire order of sacrifices? (We must say, then, that Moses saw Aaron hesitating, apparently feeling that his service would be rejected, and) to dispel this from his heart, he told him that the L–rd had said to him "Take Aaron and his sons with him," thus apprising Aaron that he had been (re-) accepted.

Another interpretation (of Lev. 21:1): SPEAK UNTO THE PRIESTS. What is written above of the matter (in Lev. 20:27)? WHEN A MAN OR A WOMAN HAS A GHOST OR A FAMILIAR SPIRIT…. This text is related (to Is. 8:19): AND WHEN THEY SAY UNTO YOU: INQUIRE OF GHOSTS AND FAMILIAR SPIRITS.⁴Tanh., Lev. 8:2; Lev. R. 6:6. The Holy One said to Israel: If they say unto you: INQUIRE OF GHOSTS, and forsake the God who is in the heavens, say to them (ibid. cont.): SHOULD NOT A PEOPLE INQUIRE OF ITS GOD? Just as Elijah said to Ahaziah (in II Kings 1:3): IS IT FOR LACK OF A GOD IN ISRAEL < THAT YOU ARE SENDING TO INQUIRE OF BAAL-ZEBUB >…? Why should we forsake the everlasting God? (Jer. 10:10:) BUT THE LORD IS A TRUE GOD; [HE IS A LIVING GOD AND AN EVERLASTING KING]. It is also written (in Deut. 4:4): BUT YOU WHO CLUNG TO THE LORD YOUR GOD ARE < ALL > ALIVE < TODAY >. We therefore seek a living God; however, [the god< s > of] the nations of the world are dead, < and > (according to Ps. 115:8:) THOSE WHO MAKE THEM SHALL BE LIKE THEM. What is written after < Is. 8:19 >, (in vs. 20)? FOR INSTRUCTION (Torah) AND FOR TESTIMONY: [IF THEY DO NOT SPEAK ACCORDING TO THIS WORD, SUCH A ONE SHALL HAVE NO DAWN].⁵Similarly in the 1985 JPS translation: FOR ONE WHO SPEAKS THUS THERE SHALL BE NO DAWN. So understood, the clause means that a necromancer will not live to see the dawn. Such a translation fits the immediate context of the midrash. The clause can also mean: SUCH A ONE HAS NO LIGHT, i.e., a necromancer cannot enlighten. This translation better fits the interpretations that follow. R. Johanan and R. Laqish differed. R. Johanan said: The Holy One said: IF THEY DO NOT SPEAK ACCORDING TO THIS WORD to the nations of the world THEY (sic) HAVE NO LIGHT;⁶See the previous note. [but R. Laqish says: IT (i.e., the word of a necromancer) HAS NO LIGHT.] The ghosts and the familiar spirits do not enlighten (literally: raise up the dawn) on their own, since they are < themselves > set in darkness; and all the more does this < principle > hold true for the nations of the world. So if you should say: Of whom shall we inquire? see, it says (in Deut. 17:9–11): AND YOU SHALL COME UNTO THE LEVITICAL PRIESTS AND UNTO THE JUDGE…. < YOU SHALL ACT > ACCORDING TO THE TORAH WHICH THEY SHALL TEACH YOU.

(Lev. 20:27:) WHEN A MAN OR A WOMAN HAS A GHOST OR A FAMILIAR SPIRIT. What is written after that (in Lev. 21:1)? SPEAK UNTO THE PRIESTS. What relation does the one have to the other? It is simply that the Holy One foresaw that Saul was going to be king over Israel and kill the priests; then inquire of a ghost and a familiar spirit. It is so stated (in I Sam. 28:7): THEN SAUL SAID {UNTO} [TO] HIS SERVANTS: SEEK ME OUT A WOMAN WHO CONTROLS A GHOST. Resh Laqish said: To what is Saul comparable?⁷Tanh., Lev. 8:2; Lev. R. 26:7; M. Sam. 24. To a king who entered a province and said: All the cocks in this province are to be slaughtered tonight. < When > he wished to depart on his way, he said: Is there no cock to crow here? They said to him: Did you not order them to be killed? Here also (in I Sam. 28:3) Saul had put away the ghosts and the familiar spirits; so Saul said (in vs. 7) SEEK ME OUT A WOMAN WHO CONTROLS A GHOST < …. > (Vs. 8:) THEN SAUL DISGUISED HIMSELF. What is the meaning of DISGUISED HIMSELF (rt.: HPSh)? That he had become divested (rt.: HPSh) of the kingship. (Ibid., cont.:) AND HE WENT WITH TWO MEN. WHO WERE THEY? Abner and Amasai.⁸The parallels in the traditional Tanh., Lev. 8:2, in Lev. R. 26:7, and in M. Sam. 24 all read, “Abner and Amasa.” Torah has taught proper protocol, that one does not leave on a journey (at night) by oneself; and our father Abraham acted accordingly (in Gen. 22:3): AND HE (i.e., Abraham) TOOK WITH HIM TWO OF HIS SERVANTS {AND HIS SON ISAAC}. And so (in I Sam. 28:8): AND HE (Saul) WENT WITH TWO OF HIS SERVANTS (sic). (Ibid., cont.:) AND THEY CAME UNTO THE WOMAN AT NIGHT. Was it at Night? It is simply that this time was for them as black as night. (Ibid., cont.:) THEN HE SAID: PLEASE DIVINE FOR ME THROUGH A GHOST…. (Vs. 9:) BUT SHE SAID UNTO {SAUL} [HIM]: SEE HERE, YOU KNOW WHAT SAUL HAS DONE, HOW HE HAS ROOTED OUT THE GHOSTS AND THE FAMILIAR {SPIRIT} [SPIRITS] < FROM THE LAND >. Immediately (in vs. 10): SAUL SWORE TO HER BY THE LORD, SAYING: [AS THE LORD LIVES,] NO PUNISHMENT SHALL BEFALL YOU OVER THIS MATTER. Resh Laqish said: To what is Saul comparable? To a woman who was situated with her lover and swore by the life of her husband. (Vs. 11:) THEN THE WOMAN SAID: WHOM (mi) SHALL I BRING UP FOR YOU? One of those who say (as in Exod. 15:11): WHO (mi) IS LIKE YOU < AMONG THE GODS, O LORD >?⁹Words spoken by Moses, typifying the righteous. The verse is suggested by the mi in Saul’s question. or one of those who say (as in Exod. 5:2:)¹⁰Words spoken by Pharaoh, typifying the wicked. WHO IS THE LORD? He said to her (in I Sam. 28:11, cont.:) BRING UP SAMUEL FOR ME. She did what she did and brought him up. (Vs. 12:) WHEN THE WOMAN SAW SAMUEL, SHE CRIED OUT [WITH] A LOUD VOICE, AND < THE WOMAN > SPOKE < UNTO SAUL, SAYING >: WHY HAVE YOU DECEIVED ME? FOR YOU ARE SAUL. How did she know? Our masters have said: < A ghost > does not come up for a king as it comes up for a commoner.¹¹Gk.: idiotes. For the king its face is up and its feet down, just like everyone < on earth >; but for the commoner its feet are up and its face down. (Vs. 13:) THEN THE KING SAID TO HER: [DO NOT BE AFRAID; FOR] WHAT DO YOU SEE? AND THE WOMAN SAID UNTO SAUL: I SEE A GOD COMING UP FROM THE EARTH. COMING UP (here in the plural form) implies two. So who were they? Moses and Samuel. When Saul heard this, he was afraid, because he had called one, but two had arisen. (Vs. 14:) THEN HE SAID TO HER: WHAT DOES HE LOOK LIKE? AND SHE SAID: AN OLD MAN IS COMING UP, AND HE IS WRAPPED IN A ROBE. They have said three things about bringing up a ghost. 1. The one bringing it up sees it but does not hear its voice. 2. The one asking for it hears its voice but does not see it. 3. Those standing there neither see it nor hear its voice. (Ibid.:) AN OLD MAN IS COMING UP, AND HE IS WRAPPED IN A ROBE. And elsewhere it says (in I Sam. 2:19): HIS MOTHER WOULD MAKE A LITTLE ROBE FOR HIM.¹²Cf. above, Gen. 11:9. < This verse > teaches that the robe grew on him. In it he was buried; in it he rose up. It has been taught in the name of R. Nathan: A garment which goes down to the grave with a person is going to rise on him in the resurrection of the dead.¹³yKil. 9:4 (32b). Thus it is stated (in Job 38:14): IT IS CHANGED LIKE CLAY UNDER A SEAL, AND THEY STAND FORTH AS IN A GARMENT. (I Sam. 28:14–15:) THEN SAUL KNEW THAT IT WAS SAMUEL; SO HE BOWED WITH HIS FACE TO THE GROUND AND DID HOMAGE. SAMUEL SAID UNTO SAUL: WHY HAVE YOU DISTURBED ME AND BROUGHT ME UP? Have you no way to disturb your creator except through me, in that you have made me an idol.¹⁴See Gen. R. 96:5 (6). Did we not teach the following? Just as one exacts punishment from the worshiper, so does one exact punishment from those worshiped. Some say: WHY HAVE YOU DISTURBED ME? What he said to him was: I was disturbed lest it be the day of judgment, and I was afraid. Now here is an argument a fortiori (qal wahomer); for if Samuel, [the greatest] of all the prophets, was afraid of the day of judgment, how much the more does the rest of humanity < have to fear >? (Vs. 15, cont.:) AND SAUL SAID {UNTO SAMUEL}: I AM VERY DISTRESSED….¹⁵Other midrashim add other vss., such as Amos 5:15, in this context. Apart from the parallels mentioned above, see Lam. R. 3:29f. (9); Eccl. R. 12:14:1. [HE (i.e., the Holy One) NO LONGER ANSWERS ME EITHER THROUGH PROPHETS OR IN DREAMS.] Why did he not < also > say to him: "< Or > by Urim and Thummim"?¹⁶According to vs. 6, the Holy One had also failed to answer Saul through this medium. R. Isaac said: (Prov. 14:10:) THE HEART KNOWS ITS OWN BITTERNESS, in that he had destroyed Nob, the city of priests.¹⁷Lev. R. explains further, that if Saul had brought up the matter of the high priest’s Urim and Thummim, Samuel would have replied that it was he, Saul, who had done away with them by killing the priests at Nob. Similarly, the parallel in Tanh., Lev. 8:2. (I Sam. 28:17:) MOREOVER, THE LORD HAS DONE TO YOU¹⁸The text here follows a reading that agrees with the Septuagint here rather than the Masoretic Text, which reads: FOR HIMSELF. ACCORDING TO WHAT HE SPOKE THROUGH ME; FOR THE LORD HAS TORN THE KINGSHIP OUT OF YOUR HAND AND GIVEN IT TO DAVID. He said to him: [When you were with us < in the flesh >, you said to me (in I Sam. 15:28): < THE LORD HAS TORN THE KINGSHIP OVER ISRAEL FROM YOU TODAY, > AND GIVEN IT TO A COMPANION OF YOURS WHO IS BETTER THAN YOU. He said to him:] When I was with you in the world of falsehood, I was telling you words of falsehood, because I was afraid of you, lest you kill me. Now, however, I am in the world of truth, you will only hear words of truth from me. He did not do this thing to you for no reason. Rather (according to I Sam. 28:18–19): BECAUSE YOU DID NOT HEARKEN TO THE VOICE OF THE LORD, AND DID NOT CARRY OUT HIS WRATH AGAINST AMALEK [….] MOREOVER, THE LORD WILL DELIVER ISRAEL ALONG WITH YOU INTO THE HAND OF THE PHILISTINES; AND TOMORROW YOU AND YOUR SONS WILL BE WITH ME. WITH ME < means >: In my section < of heaven >. When he heard this, (according to vs. 20): IMMEDIATELY SAUL FELL FULL LENGTH TO THE GROUND, FOR HE WAS TERRIFIED BECAUSE OF SAMUEL'S WORDS. Abner and Amasa said to him: What did Samuel say to you? He said to them: He said to me: Tomorrow you will go down to battle and be victorious. In addition, your sons will be appointed their superiors. Resh Laqish said: At that time the Holy One called the ministering angels. He said to them: Come and see the creature that I have created in my world. By universal custom when one goes to a banquet house, he does not take his children with him for fear of the evil eye; but this one, when he is going down to battle and knows that he will be killed, takes his sons with him, and is happy over the divine justice that is striking him.¹⁹M. Pss. 7:2. R. Joshua of Sikhnin said in the name of R. Levi: < Lev. 21:1: SPEAK UNTO THE PRIESTS. These words > teach that the Holy One showed Moses every generation and its expositors, every generation and its judges, every generation and its kings; and he showed him Saul and his sons falling by the sword.²⁰Tanna deve Eliyahu Zuta, 6; cf. Sanh. 38b; AZ 5a, according to both of which the expositors and other generational leaders were shown to Adam. He said to him: Sovereign of the World, will the first king to stand over your children be pierced by the sword? He said to him: Moses, < why > are you telling me? Tell the priests whom he killed. < They are the ones > who are denouncing²¹Gk.: kategorein. him. Our masters have taught: That righteous man (i.e., Saul) was killed for five sins. Thus it is stated (in I Chron. 10:13): SO SAUL DIED FOR HIS TRANSGRESSION WHICH HE COMMITTED AGAINST THE LORD:

Another interpretation (of Exod. 22:24 [25]:) IF YOU LEND MONEY <TO MY PEOPLE, TO THE POOR PERSON WITH YOU, YOU SHALL NOT ACT TOWARD HIM AS A CREDITOR. > What is the difference between a human act and an act of the Holy One? When someone human is in debt to a comrade, he says: Give me what you have on hand. He says to him: I have nothing now. They immediately have a quarrel and humiliate each other. But the Holy One is not like that. Thus you find that in the summer the day borrows from the night until the summer solstice.³¹Below, Lev. 8:2; Exod. R. 31:15. Then from the summer solstice until the winter solstice the night borrows from the day. Where is it shown? <Where> David said (in Ps. 19:3 [2]): ONE DAY POURS OUT SPEECH TO ANOTHER. The former is lending to the latter and the latter is lending to the former; but no one hears what the difference is between them, as stated (in vs. 4 [3]): THERE IS NO UTTERANCE; THERE ARE NO WORDS…. But when humans lend to each other, one hears quarreling. The Holy One said to Moses: Go and say to those Israelites: Although you lend to each other, you shall not treat <the borrower > with contempt.

(Lev. 8:2) “Take Aaron and his sons.” It is written (in Prov. 3:35), “The wise shall inherit glory, but fools take up shame.” This verse functioned from the beginning of the world until now. “The wise shall inherit glory.” This refers to Noah and his children. “But fools take up shame.” This refers to the generation of the flood. “The wise shall inherit glory. This refers to Shem of whom it is stated (in Gen. 9:26), “Blessed be the Lord, the God of Shem.” “But fools take up shame.” This refers to Ham of whom it is stated (in Gen. 9:25), “And he said, ‘Cursed be Canaan (the son of Ham).’” “The wise shall inherit glory.” This refers to Abraham. “But fools take up shame.” This refers to the kings whom he smote (in Gen. 14:15). “The wise shall inherit glory.” This refers to Isaac. “But fools take up shame.” These are the people of Gerar. “The wise shall inherit glory.” This refers to Jacob. “But fools take up shame.” This refers to Esau. “The wise shall inherit glory.” This refers to Joshua. “But fools take up shame.” These are the thirty-one kings whom he smote (according to Josh. 12:24). “The wise shall inherit glory.” This refers to David. “But fools take up shame.” This refers to Goliath. “The wise shall inherit glory.” This refers to Eli. “But fools take up shame.” These are his sons, of whom it is stated (in I Sam. 2:12), “Now Eli's sons were scoundrels.” “The wise shall inherit glory.” These are the sons of Aaron of whom it is stated (in Lev. 8:2), “Take Aaron and his sons….” Why is “take” mentioned here? The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses, “I am indebted in taking. Hence you are to arise and magnify him through taking.” And when did Aaron take (such that God was indebted to him for it)? When (in Numb. 17:11) wrath had gone forth upon ‘those who hate Israel’ (a euphemism for Israel), Moses said to him, “Why are you standing [here]? (At the beginning of the verse), ‘Take the fire pan, and put fire [from the altar] on it.’” Aaron said to him, “My Lord Moses, do you wish to kill me? Because my sons offered profane²⁶Hedyotut, from the Gk.: idioteia, i.e., “uncouthness.” fire to the Holy One, blessed be He, they were [destroyed by fire], as stated (in Lev. 10:1-2), ‘[Now Aaron's sons, Nadab and Abihu each took his fire pan…;] and they offered alien fire before the Lord…. So fire came forth from before the Lord and consumed them.’ Now you are saying, ‘Take the fire pan!’ My sons brought in strange fire and were destroyed by fire. So should I bring forth holy fire outside? Would I not die or be destroyed by fire?” Moses said to him, “Go and act quickly; for as you are talking, they are dying. Rather (according to Numb. 17:11, cont.), ‘Take it quickly unto the congregation and make atonement for them.’” When Aaron heard that, he said, “If I die for Israel, I would not be adequate (for such a great honor).” Immediately (in Numb. 17:12) “Aaron took it as Moses had said.” Therefore, the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses (in Lev. 8:2) “’Take Aaron.’ Magnify him through taking. Just as Aaron [is going to] save My children by taking, so you are to magnify him through taking.” Ergo (in Lev. 8:2:) “Take Aaron.”

(Lev. 8:2:) “Take Aaron and his sons.” This text is related (to Prov. 20:7), “The one who walks in his integrity is righteous; blessed are his children after him.” This refers to Aaron and his children. If this interpretation is so,²⁷Reading KN for MN, as suggested in Midrash Tanhuma (Jerusalem: Eshkol, n.d.), p. 500, n. 3. The Buber text is more awkward, but means essentially the same: “If [this interpretation results] from this saying.” Moses also was righteous, but his children were not like him. And Eli also was righteous, but his children were not like him. And Samuel [was] righteous, but his children were not like him, as stated (I Sam. 8:3), “But his sons did not walk in his ways.” So why do you say [of Aaron] (in Prov. 20:7), “The one who walks in his integrity is righteous; blessed are his children after him?” Because during his lifetime he saw his sons after him serving in the high priesthood. Therefore (in Lev. 8:2) “Take Aaron and his sons.” Another interpretation (of Lev. 8:2) “Take Aaron and his sons.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him (i.e., to Moses), “Entice him with words, because he is fleeing from [the priestly] office.” Take can only be a word [implying] persuasion, for so did Nebuchadnezzar²⁸The Masoretic Text throughout Jer. 39 reads “Nebuchadrezzar.” say to Nebuzaradan (concerning Jeremiah in Jer. 39:12), “Take him and look after him.”²⁹Since Jeremiah was being taken for his own good, he would not have been taken by force but by persuasion. So also it (i.e., Scripture) speaks of our mother Sarah (in Gen. 12:15), “and the woman was taken to Pharaoh's house,” as she did not seek to go. So also with Dinah, [it states] (Genesis 34:2), “and he took her and lay with her,” as she did not seek to go. And also (here in Lev. 8:2), “Take Aaron” is language [implying] persuasion because he was fleeing from office.

Rabbi Berachiyah said in the name of Rabbi Abbah Bar Kahana expounding on the verse about Aaron. At the time when the Israelites were about to commit the act [make the golden calf] they first came to Chur, and they said to him: "Make us a god!" Since he did not listen to them, they rose up and slew him. This is why it's later written in the prophets: "Also in your wings we find the blood of the souls of the innocent and the poor etc." This refers to the blood of Chur. . . . " Afterwards, they went to Aaron and said to him: "Make us a god." Aaaron had heard about what they did to Chur, and became afraid. It is therefore written: "Aaron was frightened and built an alter before them." Aaron was frightened that he might be the one who was going to be slaughtered. Aaron said, what should I do? They've already killed Chur, and he was was a prophet. Now if they kill me, the priest, they will fulfill the word later written in scripture: "Should priest and prophet be slain in the sanctuary of YHWH (Eicha 2:20)." If they kill me, they will all be exiled. Here is another interpretation (Davar Acher): Aaron saw this, and built an altar before it (Exodus 32:5). What did he see? He saw the situation playing out like this: If they build it, one will bring a pebble, another a larger stone, and they will finish the building of the idol in one day. If I build it, then I can delay and dally, and give time for our teacher Moses to come down the mountain and then destroy this idol worship. And if I build it, I can dedicate it to the name of the Holy one Blessed be God, therefore it is written: "Aaron called and said this shall be a festival for YHWH." It is not written a feast for the calf, but a feast to YHWH. Another interpretation: "And Aaron saw this, etc." What did he see? He saw the situation playing out as follows: "If they build it the sin will be upon them, but if it will be better if I build it, so that the sin should be upon me and not the people. Rabbi Abba Bar Yodan said in the name of Abbah, we can give a parable that demonstrates this. It's like the son of a king who became filled with pride in his heart and took a sword and rose up to try and cut his father. The son's tutor said to him: Don't trouble yourself, leave it to me and i'll do cut him for you." The king saw the tutor and said to him: "I know what your intention was, it was that you believed it better that the sin should be upon you than upon my son. As you live, you shall not leave my palace, and that which remains over from my table, you shall eat it, and you will receive twenty four perks. So too with Aaron: "You shall not leave my palace" is compared to "He shall not go out of the sanctuary Leviticus 21:12"And that which remains of the table, you shall eat it" is compared to: "That which is let of the meal-offering shall be Aaron's and his sons (Leviticus 2:3)." The twenty four perks is paralleled to the twenty four gifts of the priesthood assigned to Aaron and his sons. . . .

[(Lev. 8:2:) TAKE AARON AND HIS SONS.] It is written (in Prov. 3:35): THE WISE SHALL INHERIT GLORY, [BUT FOOLS TAKE UP SHAME.] This verse functioned in the beginning of the world.⁴⁰Cf. Tanh., Lev. 2:9: “from the beginning of the world until now.” THE WISE SHALL INHERIT GLORY. This refers to Noah and his children. BUT FOOLS TAKE UP SHAME. This refers to the generation of the flood. There is also this interpretation (of Prov. 3:35): THE WISE SHALL INHERIT GLORY. This refers to Shem of whom it is stated (in Gen. 9:26): BLESSED BE THE LORD, THE GOD OF SHEM. (Prov. 3:35, cont.): BUT FOOLS TAKE UP SHAME. This refers to Ham of whom it is stated (in Gen. 9:25): AND HE SAID: CURSED BE CANAAN (the son of Ham).

Another interpretation (of Prov. 3:35): THE WISE SHALL INHERIT GLORY. This refers to Abraham. BUT FOOLS TAKE UP SHAME. This refers to the kings whom he smote (in Gen. 14:15). THE WISE SHALL INHERIT GLORY. This refers to Isaac. BUT FOOLS TAKE UP SHAME. These are the people of Gerar. THE WISE SHALL INHERIT GLORY. This refers to Jacob. BUT FOOLS TAKE UP SHAME. This refers to Esau and his chiefs. THE WISE SHALL INHERIT GLORY. This refers to Joshua. BUT FOOLS TAKE UP SHAME. These are the thirty-one kings whom he smote (according to Josh. 12:24). THE WISE SHALL INHERIT GLORY. This refers to David. BUT FOOLS TAKE UP SHAME. This refers to Goliath. THE WISE SHALL INHERIT GLORY. This refers to Eli. BUT FOOLS TAKE UP SHAME. These are his sons, of whom it is stated (in I Sam. 2:12): NOW ELI'S SONS WERE SCOUNDRELS. THE WISE SHALL INHERIT GLORY. These are the sons of Aaron, of whom it is stated (in Lev. 8:2): TAKE AARON AND HIS SONS…. Why is TAKE mentioned here? The Holy One said to Moses: I am duty-bound to taking. You are to arise and magnify him through taking. And when did he take Aaron? When (in Numb. 17:11 [16:46]) WRATH HAS GONE FORTH upon those who hate Israel. Moses said to him (at the beginning of the verse): TAKE THE FIRE PAN, AND PUT FIRE < FROM THE ALTAR > ON IT. Aaron said to him: My Lord Moses, do you wish to kill me? Because my sons offered profane⁴¹Hedyotut, from the Gk.: idioteia, i.e., “uncouthness.” fire to the Holy One, they were destroyed by fire, [as stated (in Lev. 10:1–2): < NOW AARON'S SONS, NADAB AND ABIHU EACH TOOK HIS FIRE PAN…; > AND THEY OFFERED ALIEN FIRE BEFORE THE LORD…. SO FIRE CAME FORTH FROM BEFORE THE LORD AND CONSUMED THEM.] Now you are saying: TAKE THE FIRE PAN! My sons brought in strange fire and were destroyed by fire. So should I bring forth holy fire outside? Then I would die or be destroyed by fire. Moses said to him: Go and act quickly; for as you are talking, they are dying. Rather (according to Numb. 17:11 [16:46], cont.) TAKE IT QUICKLY UNTO THE CONGREGATION AND MAKE ATONEMENT FOR THEM. When Aaron heard that, he said: If I die for Israel, am I not adequate? Immediately (in Numb. 17:12 [16:47]) AARON TOOK IT AS MOSES HAD SAID. Therefore, the Holy One said to Moses (in Lev. 8:2:) TAKE AARON. He magnified him through taking. Just as Aaron is going to save his children by taking, so you are to magnify him through taking. Ergo (in Lev. 8:2:) TAKE AARON.

12) (Vayikra 8:14): ("And he presented the bullock of the sin-offering, and Aaron and his sons placed their hands on the head of the bullock of the sin-offering.") "And he presented the bullock of the sin-offering": In the beginning, it was not called "the bullock of the sin-offering," viz. (Shemoth 29:1): "And this is the thing that you shall do to them to sanctify them to minister unto Me: Take one young bullock and rams, etc." In its specific accounting it is called "the bullock of the sin-offering," viz. (Shemoth 29:14): "And the flesh of the bullock and its hide and its waste you shall burn in a fire outside the camp — it is a sin-offering." We do not know whether this refers to the sin-offering of Aaron and his sons or to the communal sin-offering. "Take Aaron and his sons with him … and the bullock of the sin-offering" (Vayikra 8:2) tells us that it is the sin-offering of Aaron and his sons and not the communal sin-offering.

[(Lev. 8:2:) TAKE AARON AND HIS SONS.] This text is related (to Prov. 20:7): THE ONE WHO WALKS IN HIS INTEGRITY IS RIGHTEOUS; BLESSED ARE HIS CHILDREN AFTER HIM. This refers to Aaron and his children.⁴²Tanh., Lev. 2:10. If this interpretation is so,⁴³Reading KN for MN, as suggested in Midrash Tanhuma (Jerusalem: Eshkol, n.d.), p. 500, n. 3. The Buber text is more awkward, but means essentially the same: “If < this interpretation results > from this saying.” Moses also was righteous, but his children were not like him. And Eli also was righteous, but his children were not like him. And Samuel [was] righteous, but his children were not like him. (I Sam. 8:3:) BUT HIS SONS DID NOT WALK IN HIS WAYS. Why do you say < of Aaron > (in Prov. 20:7): THE ONE WHO WALKS IN HIS INTEGRITY IS RIGHTEOUS; < BLESSED ARE HIS CHILDREN AFTER HIM >? Because during his lifetime he saw his sons after him serving in the High Priesthood. Therefore (in Lev. 8:2:) TAKE AARON AND HIS SONS ALONG WITH HIM.

Another interpretation (of Lev. 8:2:) TAKE AARON. The Holy One said to him (i.e., to Moses): Entice him with words, because he is fleeing from the < priestly > office. TAKE can only be a word < implying > persuasion, for so did Nebuchadnezzar (sic)⁴⁴The Masoretic Text throughout Jer. 39 reads “Nebuchadrezzar.” say to Nebuzaradan (concerning Jeremiah in Jer. 39:12): TAKE HIM AND LOOK AFTER HIM.⁴⁵Since Jeremiah was being taken for his own good, he would not have been taken by force but by persuasion. So also it (i.e., Scripture) speaks of our mother Sarah (in Gen. 12:15): < SO PHARAOH'S COURTIERS SAW HER AND PRAISED HER TO PHARAOH, > AND THE WOMAN WAS TAKEN TO PHARAOH'S HOUSE. And also (here in Lev. 8:2), TAKE AARON is language < implying > persuasion because he was fleeing from the office.

(Numb. 20:25-26:) “Take Aaron [and his son Elazar] […,] And strip Aaron.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses, “See, you may console him that he is bequeathing his crown to his sons. [This is] something that you are not bequeathing to your [own] children.” (Numb. 20:28:) “So Moses stripped Aaron of his vestments and put them [on his son Elazar].” But if the high priest leaves the Temple mount in priestly vestments, does he not receive forty lashes, since [these vestments] are [made of] wool and flax?¹¹⁷Cf. Deut. 22:11, which forbids the mixture, and Kil. 9:1, which allows robes of this mixture for priests when they minister in the Temple. Cf. also Yoma 72a, according to which the forty lashes are for one who tears a priestly garment. However, [Scripture serves] to inform you that, with the wording by which he inducted him into the priesthood, when [the Holy One, blessed be He,] said to [Moses] (in Lev. 8:2), “Take Aaron,” with this very wording He also said to him (in Numb. 20:25), “Take Aaron.” (Numb. 20:27:) “So Moses did as the Lord commanded....” [This verse serves] to teach you that, even though He had spoken a decree against his brother, he did not hesitate.¹¹⁸See below, Numb. 6a:2. (Numb. 20:29:) “Then all the congregation saw that Aaron had died.” When Moses and Elazar came down [from the mountain], the whole congregation assembled themselves against them and said, “Where is Aaron?”¹¹⁹Numb. R. 19:20. They said to them, “He is dead.” They said to them, “How could the angel of death hurt him, a man who has halted the angel of death and held him back?” It is so stated (in Numb. 17:13), “So he (i.e., Aaron) stood between the dead and the living, and the plague was halted.” They said to them, “If you bring him [back], well and good; but if not, we will stone you [to death].” At that time Moses rose in prayer. He said, “Master of the world, bring us out from [this] suspicion.” Immediately the Holy One, blessed be He, opened the [burial] cave and showed him to [the congregation] for them. It is so stated (in Numb. 20:29), “Then all the congregation saw that Aaron had died.”

2 (Numb. 16:1) “[Now Korah …] took”:²In this and some of the following sections, the midrash is explaining the fact that the transitive verb, TOOK, has no object. Biblical translations offer solutions such as translating the verb intransitively, e.g., BETOOK HIMSELF, or by supplying an object, e.g., TOOK MEN. “Took” can only be a word for "attracting with persuasive words," in that he attracted all the leaders of Israel and the sanhedraot [to follow] after him. Concerning Moses it is written (in Numb. 1:17), “So Moses and Aaron took these men.” And similarly it is written (in Numb. 8:2), “Take Aaron and his sons with him.” And so does it say (in Hos. 14:3), “Take words with you.” And so does it [also] say (in Genesis 12:15), “and the woman was taken to the house of Pharaoh.” Ergo (in Numb. 16:1) “Now Korah […] took,” in that he drew (i.e., took) their hearts with persuasive words. (Numb. 16:1) “Now Korah […] betook himself”: Because of what did he dissent? Because of Elizaphan, the son of his father's brother, who had been appointed prince (nasi) over his clan. So it says (in Numb. 3:30), “And the prince of the ancestral house for the Kohathite clan was Elizaphan ben Uzziel.” Korah said, “Father had four brothers.” It is so stated (according to Exod. 6:18), “And the sons of Kohath were Amram, Izhar, Hebron, and Uzziel.” “As for Amram, the first-born; his son Aaron attained greatness, and his brother Moses [attained] the kingship. So who deserves to get second [place]? Should it not be the second [son]? Now I am Izhar's son. I deserved to be prince of my clan, but he has appointed the son of Uzziel. Should the youngest of father's brothers become superior to me? See, I am dissenting and declaring everything invalid, whatever he had done.” Therefore, (in Numb. 16:1) “Now Korah […] took.”

19 (Numb. 20:25-26) “Take Aaron [and his son Elazar] […,] And strip [Aaron]”: The Holy One, blessed be He, said to [Moses], “See, you may console him that he is bequeathing his crown to his sons. [This is] something that you are not bequeathing to your [own] children.” (Numb. 20:28): “So Moses stripped Aaron of his vestments and put them [on his son Elazar].” But if the high priest leaves the Temple mount in priestly vestments, does he not receive forty lashes, since [these vestments] are [made of] wool and flax?⁶⁹Cf. Deut. 22:11, which forbids the mixture, and Kil. 9:1, which allows robes of this mixture for priests when they minister in the Temple. Cf. also Yoma 72a, according to which the forty lashes are for one who tears a priestly garment. However, [Scripture serves] to inform you that, with the wording by which he inducted him into the priesthood, when [the Holy One, blessed be He,] said to [Moses] (in Lev. 8:2), “Take Aaron,” with this very wording He also said to him (in Numb. 20:25), “Take Aaron.” (Numb. 20:27) “So Moses did as the Lord commanded”: [This verse serves] to teach you that, even though He had spoken a decree against Aaron, he did not hesitate.

19) (Vayikra 8:22): "And he presented the second ram": Now has Scripture not already mentioned the two rams, (viz. Vayikra 8:2: "and the two [connoting "identical"] rams")? Why, then, is it necessary to state "And he presented the second ram"? (To imply) that if he brought a bullock and (only) one of the rams, he has not effected the sanctification; two rams and no bullock, he has not effected the sanctification; two rams and a bullock and not the basket of unleavened bread, (viz. Vayikra 8:26) he has not effected the sanctification.

... Teach us o teacher: toward where should one who prays orient his heart? This is what our Rabbis taught: one should orient his heart toward the place of the Holy of Holies (Berachot 4:5). R’ Eliezer ben Yaakov says: if one is praying outside of the land, he should orient his heart to the land of Israel. If one is praying within the land of Israel, he should orient his heart to Jerusalem. If one is praying in Jerusalem, he should orient his heart to the Holy Temple. If one is praying in the Holy Temple, he should orient his heart to the Holy of Holies. R’ Avin the Levi said: “our neck is like the Tower of David, built as a model (talpiyot)…” (Song of Songs 4:4) What does talpiyot mean? The hill (tel) toward which all turns (peniyot) are directed. And after all this praise, it is written “Open your doors, O Lebanon, and let the fire consume your cedars.” (Zechariah 11:1) And so too they said “He has hurled fire into my bones…” (Lamentations 1:13) Israel said to Him: Master of the World! How long will it be like this? Did You not write in Your Torah “…the one who ignited the fire shall surely pay” (Exodus 22:5)? And You are the one who ignited the fire, as it says “From above He has hurled fire into my bones…” (Lamentations 1:13) You need to rebuild it and to console us, not at the hands of an angel but You in Your glory. The Holy One said to them: by your life, so I will do! As it says “The Lord is the builder of Jerusalem; He will gather the outcasts of Israel.” (Psalms 147:2) And I am the one who consoles you. From where do we learn this? From that which they read in the prophets “I, yea I am He Who consoles you…” (Isaiah 51:12)

(Numb. 20:28:) SO MOSES STRIPPED AARON OF HIS VESTMENTS AN PUT THEM ON HIS SON ELEAZAR. But if the High Priest leaves the Temple mount in priestly vestments, does he not receive forty lashes,¹⁶⁵Sofeg, which in this context means “receive lashes,” but which often has the meaning, “wipe with a sponge.” Cf. the Gk.: spoggizein, which also means “wipe with a sponge.” since <these vestments> are <made of> wool and flax?¹⁶⁶Cf. Deut. 22:11, which forbids the mixture, and Kil. 9:1, which allows robes of this mixture for priests when they minister in the Temple. Cf. also Yoma 72a, according to which the forty lashes are for one who tears a priestly garment. However, <Scripture serves> to inform you that, with the wording by which he inducted him into the priesthood, when <the Holy One> said to <Moses> (in Lev. 8:2): TAKE AARON, with this very wording he also said to him (in Numb. 20:25): TAKE AARON.