Myśl Żydowska do Kapłańska 9:2

After these observations, we are entitled to view the sacrifices of the forefathers and kings of Israel in a similar light. All the sacrifices mentioned in the Torah,-other than those connected with atonement- express the desire of the donor to achieve a closeness with G'd. Creatures who have attained the level of articulate beings, are entitled to offer these animal sacrifices to G'd, and to perfect themselves by a variety of sacrificial rites so that their minds will be cleansed and their souls will be purified from slag. This is what our sages mean (Tossaphot Menachot 130 commencing with the word 'Michael') that the angel Michael, minister of the Interior at the celestial Court, presents the souls of the Just before the Almighty on the celestial altar. The consecration offering, which Aaron and his sons were commanded to bring, to enable them from then on to perform "holy service," combined the ingredients needed for atonement, namely the he-goat as well as the ram for the total offering. This was to express the priest's desire to achieve closeness with G'd. Add to that the commandment to the whole nation to bring offerings since "today the glory of G'd will appear," (Leviticus 9,4) and it is clear that when both considerations are present during the presentation of the sacrifices, the presence of the shechinah can be attained. Sometimes, due to faulty kavanot, thoughts or objectives, such a presence does not result. Only fools rush in without proper preparation. (Kohelet 4,17) Manoach, (Judges 13,15) invited the angel as if he were a human being to a meal on the one hand, and suggested that the nature of that meal be an offering. This combination of valid and invalid intent voids the value of the offering. The angel was quick to respond "if it is a meal, I cannot eat it, since angels do not eat in that sense of the word; if however, it is an offering, it should be addressed to G'd and to no one else." (compare Exodus 22,19, "he who sacrifices to elohim, another deity, even an agent of G'd, will be destroyed; only to the Lord exclusively.") It is interesting that in Parshat Ha-azinu, when quoting the sayings of our enemies. (Deut. 32,37-39) G'd responds to the erroneous impression of the gentiles that offerings are accepted by intermediaries, i.e. "elohim,” by saying "I, I am He." This means that there is no other elohim, agent with Me. The offerings must be addressed to "My holy name only."

Our Sages say that the offering for the eighth day of dedication was “a calf, a young bullock, for a sin-offering” (Lev. 11:2), in order to atone for the sin of the Israelites in making a golden calf. The sin-offering, which was brought on the Day of Atonement (ibid. 16:3), was likewise explained as being an atonement for that sin. From this argument of our Sages I deduce that he-goats were always brought as sin-offerings, by individual persons and also by the whole congregation, viz., on the Festivals, New-moon, Day of Atonement, and for idolatry, because most of the transgressions and sins of the Israelites were sacrifices to spirits (se‘irim, lit., goats), as is clearly stated, “They shall no more offer their sacrifices unto spirits” (Lev. 17:7). Our Sages, however, explained the fact that goats were always the sin-offerings of the congregation, as an allusion to the sin of the whole congregation of Israel: for in the account of the selling of the pious Joseph we read, “And they killed a kid of the goats” (Gen. 37:31). Do not consider this as a weak argument; for it is the object of all these ceremonies to impress on the mind of every sinner and transgressor the necessity of continually remembering and mentioning his sins. Thus the Psalmist says, “And my sin is ever before me” (Ps. 51:3). The above-mentioned sin-offerings further show us that when we commit a sin, we, our children, and the children of our children, require atonement for that sin by some kind of service analogous to the sin committed. If a person has sinned in respect to property he must liberally spend his property in the service of God; if he indulged in sinful bodily enjoyments he must weary his body and trouble it by a service of privation and fasting, and rising early before daybreak. If he went astray in respect to his moral conduct he must oppose his failings by keeping to the opposite extreme, as we have pointed out in Mishneh-torah Hilkot De‘ot (chap. ii.) et passim. If his intellectual faculties have been concerned in the sin, if he has believed something false on account of the insufficiency of his intellect, and his neglect of research and proper study, he must remedy his fault by turning his thoughts entirely away from worldly affairs, and directing them exclusively to intellectual exercise, and by carefully reflecting on that which ought to form the subject of his belief. Comp. “And my heart hath been secretly enticed, but my hand touched my mouth” (Job 31:27). These words express figuratively the lesson that we should pause and stop at that which appears doubtful, as has been pointed out by us in the beginning of this treatise. The same we notice in the case of Aaron. He had his share in the sin of the golden calf, and therefore a bullock and a calf were brought by him and his successors as an offering. Similarly, the sin connected with a kid of goats was atoned for by a kid of goats. When this theory has been well established in the minds of the people, they must certainly be led by it to consider disobedience to God as a disgraceful thing. Every one will then be careful that he should not sin, and require a protracted and burdensome atonement; he will be afraid he might not be able to complete it, and will therefore altogether abstain from sinning, and avoid it. This object [of the laws under discussion] is very clear, and note it likewise.