Komentarz do Kapłańska 8:2

קח את אהרן TAKE AARON — This section was spoken seven days before the final erection of the Tabernacle and so should have been placed before Exodus XL., but a transposition of this kind is quite customary in the Bible, because there is no “earlier” or “later” (no chronological order) in the Torah.

TAKE AARON. “This section [concerning the seven days of consecration of the priests] was said seven days before the [final] erection of the Tabernacle [which took place on the first day of Nisan],¹⁶⁷During each of the seven days of consecration Moses set the Tabernacle up and then dismantled it. But on the eighth day [which was the first of Nisan] the final erection took place, and it was no longer dismantled until they journeyed from Mount Sinai. for there is no strict chronological order in the narrative of the Torah.”¹⁶⁸Since the final erection of the Tabernacle is already mentioned at the end of the Book of Exodus (40:17), and the section before us, according to Rashi, was said seven days before the final erection, we must perforce say that there is no strict chronological order in the narrative of the Torah. In other words, chronologically the proper place of this section here in the Book of Leviticus is before Exodus, Chapter 40! Ramban will strongly dissent to this interpretation of Rashi. Thus the language of Rashi. But why should we invert the words of the living G-d! Moreover, in the section of On the first day of the first month,¹⁶⁹Exodus 40:2. He commanded concerning the erection of the whole Tabernacle, the clothing of Aaron and his sons and the anointing of all of them, and there He narrated Moses’ deeds in the matter of the erection of the Tabernacle,¹⁷⁰Ibid., Verse 17-33. but did not mention anything concerning Aaron and his sons till here. And how could it be that He separated one subject into two sections, [as follows from Rashi], placing the later one [i.e., the final erection of the Tabernacle which took place on the first of Nisan, as recorded in the Book of Exodus], before the earlier one [i.e., the seven days of consecration that began on the twenty-third of Adar which He placed here in the Book of Leviticus]!
Rather, the correct interpretation is that we say that Moses was commanded about the erection of the Tabernacle on the twenty-third day of Adar, and he erected it [on that day]. As soon as the Tabernacle stood in its position G-d, blessed be He, Who sitteth upon the cherubim¹⁷¹I Samuel 4:4. called Moses and commanded him about the actions involved in the bringing of the offerings — all those sections from the beginning of the Book of Vayikra until here. [This was because] He wanted to teach him the actions and statutes of all the offerings before he offered up any of them, since among the initiation-offerings were the sin-offering, burnt-offering and peace-offering, and they could only know all their laws from these sections with which He preceded [to command him]. Afterwards He said to him, Take Aaron and his sons with him etc., to urge him on when the time came for performing what He had told him at first — And this is the thing that thou shalt do unto them to hallow them, to minister unto Me etc.,¹⁷²Exodus 29:1. adding here, And assemble thou all the congregation at the door of the Tent of Meeting,¹⁷³Verse 3 here. so that it should be done in the presence of all of them, that they should know that G-d, blessed be He, chose Aaron and his sons [to minister unto Him].
By way of the proper interpretation of Scripture, Moses was commanded about the building of the Tabernacle prior to the incident of the golden calf [as is the order of these chapters in the Book of Exodus],¹⁷⁴The commandment concerning the building of the Tabernacle is in Seder Terumah (Chapters 25-27), and the story of the golden calf is in Seder Ki Thisa (Chapter 32). — This is unlike Rashi’s statement (ibid., 31:18) that the incident of the golden calf happened a considerable time before the command regarding the work of the Tabernacle. Hence Ramban preceded this discussion with the expression, “by way of the proper interpretation …” in order to indicate that his view is different than that stated elsewhere in Rashi’s commentary. and when the Holy One, blessed be He, became reconciled to him and promised him that He would cause His Divine Glory to dwell among them, Moses understood of his own accord that the command concerning the Tabernacle remained valid as before, and he then commanded Israel regarding it, as I have explained in the section of Vayakheil.¹⁷⁵Ibid., 35:1. After they had completed the work, he was then told the section of On the first day of the first month shalt thou set up the Tabernacle of the Tent of Meeting,¹⁷⁶Ibid., 40:2. and he was then told, And thou shalt bring Aaron and his sons unto the door of the Tent of Meeting etc.¹⁷⁷Ibid., Verse 12. Thus Moses knew that Aaron and his sons also remained in their esteemed and beloved position before G-d. Here He urged them again on the first day of the consecration, at the time of performing the command [And thou shalt bring Aaron and his sons etc.]¹⁷⁷Ibid., Verse 12. Thus all the sections of the Torah are in chronological order, except that He placed before its sequence the verse, And the cloud covered the Tent of Meeting,¹⁷⁸Ibid., Verse 34. which in the opinion of our Rabbis¹⁷⁹Torath Kohanim, at the beginning of Seder Shemini. was on the eighth day of the initiation, in order to arrange in order the whole matter of the erection of the Tabernacle, it being the customary way of Scripture in all places to finish a subject that it has started to explain.¹⁸⁰See Vol. I, p. 431, for a similar instance.

ואת פר החטאת ואת שני האילים, the bull as a sin offering is mentioned first, in accordance with the statement of our sages that whenever both a sin offering and a burnt offering have to be brought the sin offering is brought first. (Pessachim 59) The reason is simple; how could the person offering the burnt offering expect it to be welcome in the eyes of G’d if he still required atonement for a sin in order to be in G’d’s good graces? David paraphrases this in Psalms 40,7 עולה וחטאת לא שאלת, “You do not ask for burnt offerings and sin offerings.” This bull became a “sin offering” after having been anointed, a procedure similar to the anointing of the High Priest for his office. However, in this instance the blood of this sin offering was not brought into the sanctuary, seeing that the sin of Aaron and his sons had not been of such a severity as would require this additional procedure. Severe errors by the High Priest are the ones listed in Leviticus 4,3 or 4,13 by the Supreme Court. Such errors require that the blood of their sin offerings be brought into the sanctuary itself. We explained all this at the appropriate place in chapter 16. The reason why the Torah first deals with the burnt-offering before dealing with the consecration offerings, is that there was an element of sin, i.e. need for forgiveness in connection with the burnt offering, as is evident from the Torah’s concluding remark ונרצה לו לכפר עליו, “and it shall become acceptable for him to atone for him.” (1,4). The reason why the Torah first deals with the burnt-offering before dealing with the consecration offerings, is that there was an element of sin, i.e. need for forgiveness in connection with the burnt offering, as is evident from the Torah’s concluding remark ונרצה לו לכפר עליו, “and it shall become acceptable for him to atone for him.” (1,4) whereas in all other שלמים offerings the priest receives the right thigh, in the case of the mandatory שלמים offering of the Nazir at the end of his term, the priest received both the right thigh and the foreleg, זרוע. As to the ram of the consecration offering שלמים, even the thigh is offered on the altar. When a non priest offers a שלמים, generally speaking, he will donate the thigh together with the lower leg, to the priest who enters inside the holy domain out of bounds to the owner of the sacrifice. The Nazir donates also the יד, i.e. the foreleg, symbolically handing the priest the work of his hands, which until the termination of the period of his vow as Nazir had all been dedicated to G’d. On the other hand, the rites of the consecration offerings required that the offering itself was a preparatory offering enabling the priest henceforth to enter the holy domains of the Temple. To symbolise this the thigh was presented on the altar.