Комментарий к Вайикра 10:3

‎‎ '‏וגו‎‎‎ 'הוא אשר דבר ה‎ THIS IS WHAT THE LORD SPOKE, etc. — Where had He spoken this? In the statement (Exodus 29:43), “And there I will be met by the children of Israel and it (the Tabernacle) shall be sanctified by My glory (בכבודי).” Read not here בִכְבוֹדִי, “by My Glory” but בִּמְכֻבָּדַי, “through My honoured ones” (Zevachim 115b). Moses here said to Aaron: “My brother, Aaron! I knew that this House was to be sanctified by those who are beloved of the Omnipresent God and I thought it would be either through me or through thee; now I see that these (thy sons who have died) are greater than me and than thee!” (Leviticus Rabbah 12 2).

THIS IS THAT THE ETERNAL SPOKE, SAYING: ‘THROUGH THEM THAT ARE NIGH UNTO ME I WILL BE SANCTIFIED.’ “Where had He spoken this? In the verse, and [the Tent] shall be sanctified ‘bichvodi’ (by My Glory).⁶⁴Exodus 29:43. Do not read the word as bichvodi (by My Glory) but bimechubodai (through My honored ones). Moses said to Aaron: ‘My brother Aaron, I knew that this Sanctuary was to be hallowed by those who are beloved of the Holy One, blessed be He, and I thought that it would be either through me or through you. Now I see that your sons were holier⁶⁵In Rashi: “greater.” than I and you.’” Thus the language of Rashi, based on the interpretation of our Rabbis. But if so, the verse, and [the Tent] shall be sanctified ‘bichvodi’⁶⁴Exodus 29:43. means “that it will become holy in the eyes of all the people through my honored ones, and they will know that I dwell therein.”
Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra also wrote: “This is that the Eternal spoke, saying, means: G-d had already told me that He would show His sanctity through those that were near to Him. This is similar in meaning to the verse, You only have I known of all the families of the earth; therefore I will visit upon you all your iniquities.⁶⁶Amos 3:2. And when I will show them this holiness of Mine, then I will become glorified before all the people and they will fear Me.” But if this is so, then this is a statement not written [in the text], that G-d informed Moses of His ways and that such is the nature of His attribute!
In my opinion there is no need for all this. For by way of the plain meaning of Scripture, the expression “G-d spoke” refers to His decrees, His thought, and the manner of His ways, and the term “speaking” is used with reference to all these [in humans]. Thus: I spoke with my own heart,⁶⁷Ecclesiastes 1:16. means “I reflected on this thought.” And this is ‘hadavar’ that Joshua did circumcise,⁶⁸Joshua 5:4. means “this is ‘the cause’ why Joshua did so.” ‘Al d’var’ (because of) the money.⁶⁹Genesis 43:18. Similarly, And let her be thy master’s son’s wife, as the Eternal hath spoken,⁷⁰Ibid., 24:51. means “as He hath decreed.” Likewise: In his days did Hiel the Beth-elite built Jericho; with his firstborn he laid the foundation thereof, and with his youngest son Segub he set up the gates thereof; according to the word of the Eternal, which He spoke by the hand of Joshua the son of Nun.⁷¹I Kings 16:34. Here too, it does not mean “which G-d spoke,” since we nowhere find that He did say so, but “which He decreed.” Cf. the words of Joshua (Joshua 6:26). Thus Moses said here: “This incident is that which G-d decreed, ‘saying to His heart': Through them that are nigh unto Me I will be sanctified so that they should not break forth into My sanctity; and before all the people I will be glorified, so that they treat My dwelling-place with respect.”

וידום אהרן, seeing he consoled himself after having been told that the death of his sons represented a sanctification of the name of the Lord.

הוא אשר דבר השם, this is what G'd has said: etc. The word הוא needs further analysis. Another word which seems peculiar is the word לאמור. This word gives the impression that Moses had already been commanded to communicate this idea that G'd is most exacting with those near and dear to Him. If Moses had been instructed to communicate this concept, why had he not done so before? Perhaps this error of Moses was similar to the one we described in connection with Moses' failure to communicate to the people all the details about the manna on the Sabbath, as mentioned in Exodus 16,23 where we also find the expression הוא אשר דבר השם. We had supplied sufficient reasons why Moses at the time did not communicate the laws about the Sabbath to the Israelites in advance, basing ourselves on the absence of the word לאמור in that context. In this instance then, why had Moses not told Aaron of this concept sooner?

this is when Moses said to Aaron: “do not mourn nor weep, and do not desist from carrying on with your priestly duties; I am telling you what I am saying in the name of G’d Who has said: בקרובי אקדש, I want to be sanctified by the High Priests, the ones who are “near” to Me and who perform the service for Me. I do not want that they should desecrate My name and My holy service by letting their private concerns take precedence.” Moses added that G’d had specifically given him instructions concerning such events as had just happened by saying (Leviticus 21,10-12) “the priest who is exalted above his fellows, on whose head the anointment has been poured and who has been ordained to wear the vestments, shall not bare his head nor rend his vestments. He shall not go in where there is a dead body; he shall not defile himself even for his father or mother. He shall not go outside the sanctuary and profane the sanctuary of his G’d, for upon him is the distinction of the anointing oil of his G’d, Mine the Lord’s.” It follows that by not leaving the holy precincts at this time Aaron did in fact sanctify the name of the Lord. This is the meaning of בקרובי אקדש, “I will be sanctified by those close to Me.” The fact that the legislation we just quoted appears only in chapter 21 is no argument as the Torah is not bound to record its message to the Jewish people in chronological sequence. At any rate, Moses told Aaron not to abandon the service in the Tabernacle while in circumstances which imposed mourning on other priests, even.

הוא אשר דבר ה' לאמור, “of this did G’d speak, saying:” Rashi claims that G’d referred to Exodus 29,43 ונועדתי שמה לבני ישראל ונקדש בכבודי, “I shall set My meeting there with the Children of Israel, and I will be sanctified with My glory.” Some commentators hold that G’d referred to Exodus 19,22 וגם הכהנים הנגשים אל ה' יתקדשו, “even the priests who approach Hashem shall sanctify themselves lest He burst forth against them.” Nachmanides writes there is no need to search for relevant verses, for G’d can issue decrees at any time in any place, such as when the angel speaking through the mouth of Bethuel announced (Genesis 24,51) “let her become the wife of your master’s son.” [This is strange as Nachmanides does not offer this comment in his commentary on that verse. Presumably, the fact that a man such as Bethuel quoted G’d as having said this, showed that he was being manipulated by G’d. Ed,. The expression כאשר דבר ה' in the mouth of Bethuel means “as G’d has decreed.” Here too Moses means to tell Aaron that what happened was nothing else but a decree of Hashem. He softens the blow by saying that G’d, by killing the sons of Aaron at this stage, had tried to prevent them who are so near to Him by dint of being priests, i.e. בקרןבי, from becoming guilty of an unforgivable trespass, i.e. their ruining His sanctity.

הוא אשר דבר ה' לאמור בקרובי אקדש, “this is what the Lord had said, saying: ‘I will be sanctified by those nearest Me.’” Where had G’d ever made such a statement that Moses could now refer to it? The first time was in Exodus 19,22 at the time of the revelation at Mount Sinai, where G’d had warned the Priests not to look too much at supernatural phenomena. The Torah had written: “even the Priests who approach Hashem should sanctify themselves lest Hashem will burst forth against them.” [The expression יתקדשו used in this verse always implies imposing restrictions upon oneself. Ed.] This was a warning that the Priests are at greater risk than ordinary Israelites because they are in a preferred position, being closer to Hashem. The expression יפרוץ בהם, “He might burst forth against them,” describes precisely what happened to Nadav and Avihu who were killed immediately they committed this sin. The words used in Exodus 19,22 are that the Priests are coming close to Hashem, i.e. 'הנגשים אל ה, whereas in Leviticus 16,2 the word used by the Torah is בקרבתם לפני ה, “when they approached the presence of the Lord.” Proof that both expressions are more or less identical is found in Jeremiah 30,21 where the prophet uses both expressions in one breath, saying: והקרבתיו ונגש אלי, “I will bring him near that he may approach Me.”
The second time G’d indicated that He would be sanctified by those closest to Him was in Exodus 29,43 (compare Rashi) where the Torah writes (quoting G’d) ונועדתי שמה לבני ישראל ונקדש בכבודי, “and there I will meet with the Israelites, and it shall be sanctified by My glory.” The word ונקדש in that verse is an allusion to what would happen, i.e. a revelation of G’d’s Shechinah to the sons of Aaron. The word לכבודי is a further reference to what Moses told Aaron his brother that G’d had said ועל פני כל העם אכבד, “and I shall be glorified in the presence of the whole nation,” at the end of our verse. The expression בקרובי, “through those close to Me,” in the plural, hints at a variety of matters which could trigger such a sanctification of the Lord’s name. However, seeing that the Torah does not have vowels, it is possible to read this word as a singular i.e. be-kirbi, seeing the word has been spelled without the letter ו which is common to the spelling of the word karov, קרוב. The word would then be a reference to an angel (attribute) attached, within Hashem. We would then have an even more literal allusion in the words quoted from Exodus 29,43 ונקדש בכבודי, meaning ונקדש בקרבי,”I will be sanctified by means of this attribute (angel) within Me.” Similar constructions are found in Hoseah 11,9 בקרבך קדוש, “the Holy One in your midst.” Another similar expression is found in Deuteronomy 31,17 where the people suffering a lot of disasters blame the fact that אין אלו-הי בקרבי, “that it demonstrates that my G’d is not near me” (not “within” me). In that case also, Israel, instead of addressing itself to the essence of G’d, i.e. Hashem, addressed itself to a lesser attribute of G‘d, i.e. the attribute of Justice.” Failure to address one’s prayers or offerings to Hashem, the tetragram, results in retribution by the very attribute of Justice to which one addresses oneself. (Compare what we wrote on verse 1 under the heading “a kabbalistic approach”).

That they are greater than I or you. The difficulty is raised: Perhaps the sanctification needed to be with both of them [Nodov and Avihu], for one of them would not be sufficient, and the two of them together were greater. Thus, two were needed, and they were better than Moshe alone or Aharon alone. How does Rashi know they were greater than Moshe and Aharon together? Another difficulty: How could Moshe make such a big mistake in thinking that he and Aharon were greater than them, and yet [in truth] Nodov and Avihu were greater? It would be enough if Moshe thought that they were all equal, and he erred in [only] one level? It seems [that the answer is:] It is written: “בקרובי אקדש (through those that are near me I shall be sanctified),” and בקרובי with a pasach is in the plural form. Moshe thought that they were all equal in goodness, and he said: I had known that the Temple would be sanctified with those singled out as special (במיודעיו) by the Omnipresent, and במיודעיו is in the plural form. I.e., two pairs are in the matter of “בקרובי אקדש” which is plural. If so, I thought: either me, and one of them, or you, and one of them, since we are all equal. But now that He did not want any of us, I see that they are greater than me or you (Rav Yaakov Trivash).

בקרובי אקדש, “I will become sanctified by means of the people who had been close to Me.” The very death of these people is an event which sanctifies Me. How so? If the Israelites will internalise how strict I have been with these highly placed individuals, they will know how careful they have to be not to deviate from My commandments.

And that is what God meant in saying, by My close ones I will be sanctified. And an explanation is that God said this in the portion of the high priest, in Parashat Emor, where it is written concerning the high priest: (Leviticus 21:11) "neither shall he go in to any dead body, nor defile himself for his father, or for his mother;" and it is written, "[he] shall not suffer the hair of his head to grow long, nor rend his clothes;" (Leviticus 21:10). And this is, "by My close ones I will be sanctified." God is honoured by the high priests -- who are God's close ones -- that no mourning practices are found among them. And in this is "And gain glory before all the people" (Leviticus 10:3); "I will be glorified." And so for the children of Aharon, although they are ordinary priests, say then, since they are anointed first, behold they are like high priests today. And it is possible to explain, "this is what God meant in saying" as if to say, so thinks God: I will be revenged on these, since they are My close ones, and I will be sanctified and glorified in front of all the people, since they will learn from an a fortiori argument about themselves. Meaning, if God is so revenged on God's close ones when they transgress, how much more so should we fear the same. And when Aharon heard that they were the close ones of God, he was silent and was comforted. And our rabbis have explained that they taught halacha in the presence of their rabbi, or they were drunk on wine, "and that is what God meant in saying" when it said, "I will be sanctified in My honour" (Exodus 29:43).

הוא אשר דבר ה׳ לאמור: בקרובי אקדש, “this is what the Lord said: “I will be sanctified through those who are near Me.” Where had the Lord said this? In Exodus 19,22: ונועדתי שמה לבני ישראל ונקדש בכבודי, “this is where I will make Myself known to the Children of Israel, and where My glory will be sanctified.” (Exodus 29,43) An alternate interpretation: where is the verse proving this? (Exodus 19,2) וגם הכהנים הנגשים אל ה׳ יתקדשו פן יפרוץ בהם ה׳, “and also the priests who came close to the Lord have to sanctify themselves” [by not doing what they think is best, but by what G-d had thought best. Ed.], “so that the Lord will not break out against them.” This verse is addressed specifically to the High Priests whom G-d warns that they especially have to be on guard not to infringe on the rules laid down for them even in the slightest. Any deviation on their part would have to result in G-d becoming “sanctified” through His immediate, and for the priest in question fatal, punishment, as otherwise it would be seen as a desecration of the Lord’s name. Concerning the High Priest, the Torah had therefore written: in Leviticus 21,10: “and he must not let his hair grow loose, nor rend his clothes, and not leave the Temple in order to follow the bier of his father on the way to burial, etc.” (verse 12 there) The point that Moses is making to his brother in our verse is that the higher one’s rank, the more strictly G-d applies the rules laid down for their conduct. A High Priest, exactly by not leaving G-d’s Temple in order to attend his father or mother’s funeral, demonstrates that G-d’s honour comes first, and he cannot take time out for his personal concerns. There is no better way to demonstrate this than the example mentioned in the Torah. It is true that the subject has not been dealt with sequentially, but we must remember that the Author of the Torah[maybe because “Time” is subservient to Him and not vice versa, as it is to His creatures, deliberately demonstrated this by not revealing what He has to say to us in chronological order, on occasion. Ed.]

‎וידם אהרן AND AARON WAS SILENT — He received a reward for his silence. And what was the reward he received? That the subsequent Divine address was made to him alone and not to Moses also — for to him alone was spoken the section (vv. 9—11) dealing with those who are intoxicated by wine (see v. 8) (Zevachim 115b; Leviticus Rabbah 12 2).

ועל פני כל העם אכבד, this is the “honour” accorded to G’d’s Presence that even when one sees one’s sons dying one ignores one’s personal grief and continues with the service to one’s Creator.

ועל פני כל העם אכבד, “so that I will be honoured in full view of all the people.” In order that the people will treat My Residence with the proper reverence in future.

He received a reward. Rashi is answering the question: Why is it written, “and Aharon was silent”? What could he have said about the decrees of Hashem? Could he challenge Hashem? With regard to this Rashi explains: He received a reward for his silence, i.e., for this reason it is written, “and [Aharon] was silent,” because he received a reward for his silence, for this reason Scripture writes, “and [Aharon] was silent.” Rashi reverses the order and explains “and Aharon was silent” before “through those that are near Me” in order to inform why Aharon was silent. Because he heard that his sons were Heaven fearing, near to, and singled out as special by Hashem. Therefore, he was silent. So, too, it is in the Midrash Rabboh (Gur Aryeh). The reason Rashi reverses the order is to prove why Aharon received reward for his silence. This is because in the natural order of things one who consoles does not praise the departed person in the presence of his relatives. On the contrary, they say words that are not painful to the mourner, such as we find concerning the daughter of R. Shmuel bar Yehudah (Bava Metzia 38a), where they told him that if something good was destined to come from her she would not have died. But here Moshe praised the departed ones in front of Aharon, [saying] that they were closer to Hashem than them. Aharon, then, should have intensified his crying, nevertheless, he was silent. Therefore, he was worthy of good reward (Divrei Dovid).

Our sages in Torat Kohanim on our verse describe Aaron as in despair accusing both himself and his sons as having sinned and having been punished for it. When Moses heard this, he entered Aaron's tent and tried to put his mind at ease by telling him that G'd had told him when he was on Mount Sinai that in the future He, G'd, would sanctify the Tabernacle by means of persons of great stature. At the time, Moses said, he had thought that G'd referred either to himself or to Aaron. Now, in view of what had just occurred, it had become clear to him that both Nadav and Avihu were of greater stature than either he or Aaron seeing G'd had selected those two to sanctify His Tabernacle. Thus far Torat Kohanim. Another approach may be this: while it is true that Moses had been told about this concept at Sinai, he had not understood in which context this lesson would assume practical significance. Only now, when Nadav and Avihu had died under peculiar circumstances did he, Moses, realise what G'd had meant to tell him at that time when He said to him: בקרובי אקדש, "I will be sanctified by means of those who are close to Me." Moses told Aaron: "the only reason your sons had to die was to glorify the name of the Lord." This is how he suddenly understood the words in Exodus 29,43: ונועדתי שמה לבני ישראל ונקדש בכבודי, "there I will meet with the children of Israel and there My glory shall be sanctified." As soon as Aaron heard that the two sons of his who had died were ידועי השם, based on Exodus 29,43, he remained silent and did not utter a lament.

VAYIDOM AHARON’ (AND AARON WAS SILENT). This means that he had cried aloud, but then he became silent. Or perhaps the meaning thereof is as in the verse, let not the apple of thine eye ‘tidom’ (cease).⁷²Lamentations 2:18. Here then the meaning would be: “and Aaron ceased to shed tears.” According to the first interpretation, he was silent, not crying out aloud, but he still shed tears. But according to the second interpretation he was calmed completely.

Through those that are near me I shall be sanctified. Hashem keeps two extremes with the righteous: One is that He is more exact with the righteous than with their contemporaries, and the second is that He punishes them even for the slightest mistake. Thereby, when the righteous are punished, all those of lesser stature will formulate a kal vechomer — if they were punished, then we, of lesser stature, how much more so! If Hashem would punish an average man or if He would punish a righteous man only for a big sin, people would not be able to learn this kal vechomer. Moshe concluded that Hashem’s message could only reach everyone if Nodov and Avihu were greater than both Moshe and Aharon, as Rashi writes. For if not, those that were greater would say that no punishment will reach them, and only those of lesser stature would take the message to heart, and even those equal to them would not be reproved, as each one will mistakenly think he is greater than his fellow. Consequently, “in the presence of the entire people I will be glorified” can only be fulfilled through someone that everyone admits is the greatest of the generation.

ועל פני כל העם אכבד, “and I will be honoured in the presence of the whole nation.” They will all be witness to how and where and why Aaron’s sons had died.

בקרבי IN THEM THAT COME NEAR UNTO ME — i. e. in My chosen ones.

וידום אהרן, he desisted from his mourning, did not weep and did not perform rites of the mourning.

וידום אהרן, “Aaron remained silent.” Nachmaides writes that Aaron wept aloud, after which he remained silent. We find the same meaning of the word וידום in Lamentations 2,18 אל תדום בת עיניך, “give your eyes no rest (from weeping)!”

To him alone. I.e., [“To him, alone”] implies two [rewards]. Because of his silence he merited that he heard directly the Divine command which he had not been privileged until now. This is because: “[Rabbi Yehudah says:] Thirteen instances of ‘speaking’ are recorded in the Torah [directed] to Moshe and Aharon, and thirteen exclusions corresponding to them, [in order] to teach you that they were not said to Aharon but to Moshe, for him to tell Aharon” [see Rashi 1:1]. Furthermore, he merited that this section was said to him alone, and he did not share with Moshe, so that it would not seem that because of Moshe’s merit he heard the Divine command. Thus, it goes well even according to the Rabbis who disagree with Rabbi Yehudah, who is cited by Rashi above at the beginning of Vayikro.

According to the first approach the word הוא has to be understood thus: Seeing Aaron was saddened by his interpretation of the reason his sons had died, Moses corrected him by saying הוא "this is the reason your sons died," i.e. because they were too close to G'd not because they had become estranged from G'd. Accordingly, the word הוא refers to the cause. According to the second approach to our verse we have to understand the word הוא as a reference to the comment G'd had made to Moses without specifying His meaning. Moses said that now he understood הוא, i.e. "it," the "it" being what G'd had told him about being sanctified by men of stature. As to the meaning of the word לאמור, Moses now understood that when G'd had told him that He would be sanctified ונקדש בכבודי, you may understand this as לאמור, "to say," בקרובי אקדש. This takes care of the various problems in the text we have raised. There remains the difficulty why Moses had failed to communicate the concept of בקרובי אקדש sooner. We also need to understand the deeper meaning of why-according to Torat Kohanim -Moses did not practice his customary humility when saying to Aaron: "I thought G'd referred either to me or to you." We would have expected Moses to have said: "I thought G'd referred to either you or me." Why did he mention himself first?

וידום אהרן, “Aaron responded by accepting this silently.”This response is repeated by the prophet Ezekiel quoting G-d saying to him after the death of his wife (Ezekiel 24,17: האנק דום אבל מתים לא תעשה, “moan softly, do not observe the ritual of mourning for the dead.” (Rash’bam)

ועל פני כל העם אכבד AND BEFORE ALL THE PEOPLE I WILL BE HONOURED — When the Holy One, blessed be He, executes judgment upon the righteous He becomes feared, and exalted and praised. If this be so in the case of these (when He judges the righteous) how much more is it so in the case of the wicked (i. e. when He punishes the wicked)! And in a similar sense it says (Psalms 68:36) “Thou art feared, O god, ממקדשיך”. Read not here מִמִּקְדָשֶׁיךָ, “from out of Thy sanctuaries”, but ‎ ‏ מִמִּקֻדָּשֶׁיךָ“because of Thy sanctified ones” (Zevachim 115b).

We find a replay of this incident with variations in the Book of Ezekiel 24-16-17 [although Ezekiel a priest lived in Babylonia and had never had a chance to actively practice the priesthood, not to mention the chance of being a High Priest, Ed.]. We read there as follows: “o mortal, I am about to take away the delight of your eyes from you through pestilence; but you shall not lament or weep or let your tears flow. הענק דום מתים, Moan softly; observe no mourning for the dead. Put on your turban and put on your sandals on your feet; do not cover your upper lip, and do not eat the bread of comforters.” In our verse too, the meaning of וידום אהרן is that he abstained from voicing his anguish, his sorrow. There is, of course, an allegorical interpretation quoted in Zevachim 115 according to which Moses comforted Aaron in respect of G’d’s statement “it shall be sanctified by My Presence,” ונקדש בכבודי, (Exodus 29,43) Moses consoled Aaron by reading the word not as bichvodee, but as bichvuday, “by those whom I have honoured.” Moses continued that up until the recent bereavement he had thought that either he or Aaron would have to die in such a scenario. Now he had found out that Nadav and Avihu were the ones whom G’d had referred to as being so close to Him.

Exalted. See Kitzur Mizrachi as to why Rashi did not give this explanation on the phrase “בקרובי אקדש (through those that are near Me I shall be sanctified)” since he brings the proof from the verse (Tehillim 68:36): “נורא אלקים ממקדשיך (“You are awesome, O God, from Your Sanctuaries).”

We have to remember that we are dealing with an event which contained two vastly different elements. 1) The lesson that Nadav and Avihu were men of great stature. 2) The fact that they died while in the process of committing a sin. When Moses told Aaron that he had understood what G'd had meant when He spoke about being sanctified by men of great stature, men close to Him, he did not necessarily refer to the first element. If Moses had only related to G'd having spoken about people of great stature being the ones by means of whom He would be sanctified, the fact that he mentioned himself first would indeed have to be interpreted as somewhat presumptuous. However, seeing that Moses added that he had now become aware that G'd had considered Nadav and Avihu as greater than himself or even Aaron, it became clear that Moses had not meant to be presumptuous at all. Also, if the major aspect of Moses' new understanding had been who was supposed to be the victim in terms of giving up his life so that G'd would be glorified, it would hardly have been appropriate for Moses to volunteer this honour for Aaron. This is why he mentioned himself first. On the contrary, when one speaks of a possible tragedy befalling either oneself or the person with whom one discusses such an eventuality, good manners require that one mentions oneself as a possible victim first. Moses phrased the whole matter as something concerning which he had previously entertained some doubt.

There remains the difficulty that according to what Moses told Aaron only one person had to die in order to demonstrate to the people that G'd is sanctified by someone close to Him. Why did both sons die? After all, according to Moses' own words he had only been in doubt which one would be the victim. He never considered that there could be two or more victims to demonstrate the point G'd wanted to make. Besides, whence did Moses know that Nadav and Avihu were of greater stature than either Aaron or himself? Seeing that G'd had mentioned one person as dying, it is plausible that that one person was of greater stature than either Moses or Aaron. Why would I assume that both were greater? In fact it seems strange that two had to take the place of one, i.e. either Moses or Aaron? If so they were not greater than Moses or Aaron individually. One can certainly not argue that in this case Solomon's rule (Kohelet 4,9) applies that טובים השנים מן האחד, "that two are better than one?"

I believe what Torat Kohanim had in mind is that when G'd said to Moses ונקדש בכבודי that the Tabernacle would be sanctified by a person who is considered as of great stature by Me (G'd), Moses realised that one of the צדיקים, righteous persons, would die. However, he assumed that according to the plain meaning of the words that G'd referred to an outstandingly righteous person (singular). This was the reason he was not sure whether the victim would be either himself or Aaron. Now that he saw that two men had died he re-evaluated the meaning of what G'd had told him. He now realised that when G'd had spoken about ונקדש בכבודי, the meaning was not that it required a single person whose death would confer glory on G'd and the Taberncale, but that G'd had referred to something of a more comprehenive nature. This is why Moses re-phrased what G'd had told him and he said to Aaron בקרובי אקדש, "by means of those who are close to Me (plural) I will be sanctified." He added that G'd had said: ועל פני כל העם אקדש; "and I will be seen to have been glorified in front of all the nation." This meant that when G'd had previously spoken of כבודי, My Glory, the meaning was "on account of My Glory." If we accept this interpretation G'd never applied the singular as applying to the צדיקים. The word ונקדש is a collective term referring to whatever righteous will be the instrument by which G'd's Glory is sanctified. The proof that this had indeed been G'd's meaning was the fact that two people died. Moses said "this is what He had said" in order to console Aaron. The word לאמור means that Moses now understood that he had to communicate, i.e. explain G'd's meaning as being: "I will be sanctified by those who are close to Me." The principal reason for the word לאמור was to forestall any other erroneous interpretation of what G'd had in mind in Exodus 29,43.

It is also possible that Moses had already understood G'd correctly originally; he had realised that there were actually three possibilities. Either several people would die, or he himself or Aaron would die and thereby demonstrate G'd's principle of ונקדש בכבודי, i.e. the same as בקרובי אקדש. When Torat Kohanim quotes Moses as having said to Aaron that he had thought that either he or Aaron would be chosen to demonstrate the principle in question, Moses meant that originally he had entertained three doubts about who would be the people chosen for this kind of martyrdom. He had now learned which of the three possibilities was the correct one.

There still remains one difficulty. How could Moses have been certain that he had interpreted G'd's words correctly? Perhaps the combined merits of Nadav and Avihu equalled that of either Moses or Aaron and that is why both of them had to die to demonstrate the principle of בקרובי אקדש? This latter supposition is quite untenable. The whole purpose of G'd allowing those who were close to Him to become the victims of the principle בקרובי אקדש was to inspire sufficient reverence in the people not to treat the sanctity of the Tabernacle lightly. Once the people had observed that G'd had taken up residence in the Tabernacle, as it were, they would begin to take His presence for granted and not relate to it with the necessary degree of reverence. The more highly placed the individual Israelite, the more likely that he would feel so familiar with his G'd that he would become guilty of a trespass. The people most likely to make such an error were the spiritual elite of the people, among them Nadav and Avihu. As a result these people would enter the Sanctuary at will whereas the lesser individuals would keep their distance as required. The result of such considerations would be that the spiritual leaders would be less respectul towards the sanctity of the Tabernacle than their counterparts the ordinary Israelite. In order to prevent such a situation from developing, G'd had to demonstrate by what happened to Nadav and Avihu that He was especially mindful of His honour when it came to the elite in order for the common people not to ever lack in reverence for the Tabernacle. If we were to accept that Moses or Aaron individually were more outstanding than either Nadav or Avihu, G'd would have failed to demonstrate His principle seeing He had excluded both Moses and Aaron from the restriction the principle of ונקדש בכבודי was to teach the people. G'd demonstrated the principle of בקרובי אקדש by literally applying it to the people who represented the elite of the elite. The death of Nadav and Avihu demonstrated that nobody, Aaron and Moses included, could treat the Tabernacle as such familiar ground that they were allowed to enter it at will. The suggestion that only Nadav and Avihu combined represented greater stature than either Aaron or Moses is rejected by the author who explains that if you have a single diamond of ten carats, such a diamond does not become relatively inferior because someone else has two diamonds the combined weight of which is eleven carats.