Vayikra 9:22,23 - The double blessings on the ceremony of the eighth day

Vayikra 9:22 records that towards the end of the ceremony on the eighth day, Aharon blessed the people. After Aharon blessed the people, the end of 9:22 records that he finished the sacrifices of the eighth day. According to 9:6, once the sacrifices were finished, then the glory of G-d was to appear. However, the beginning of 9:23 does not record the appearance of the glory of G-d, but that Moshe and Aharon went into the ohel moed, which is usually understood to be the mishkan proper, but I think also means the courtyard of the mishkan, see our discussion above on 1:1, “The terms mishkan and ohel moed in the book of Vayikra.” The remainder of 9:23 records that Moshe and Aharon came out from where they were, and blessed the people and then the glory of G-d appeared to the people.

Various suggestions have been made as to what were these blessings (see Rashi and the Ramban on 9:22,23), but a more basic question is why were the blessings said altogether? 9:1-7 records Moshe’s instructions to Aharon, his sons and the elders for what they were to do at the ceremony of the eighth day, and Moshe did not mention that any blessing was supposed to be said. Furthermore, why did Moshe and Aharon go into the ohel moed? And, why did they bless the people a second time after Aharon had already blessed the people?

Rashi (on 9:23) records two suggestions for why Moshe and Aharon entered the mishkan, as he follows the common approach that the ohel moed and the mishkan are synonyms. One, Moshe wanted to teach Aharon how to offer the spice offering (ketoret), but this is difficult since why at this point would this be important? The glory of G-d was supposed to appear and Moshe was taking time out to teach a lesson concerning the ketoret? It was not recorded in the Torah that the spice offering was to be offered as part of the ceremony of the eighth day, and after the ceremony of the eighth day, Moshe could have taught this lesson. Rashi's second answer (see also Ibn Ezra and Hizkuni on 9:23) is that Moshe and Aharon went inside the mishkan to pray for the appearance of the glory of the G-d. Yet, why was there a need for any prayer given that Moshe had already stated that the glory of G-d would appear due to the bringing of the sacrifices (9:6)? Furthermore, why could they not have prayed outside the mishkan, as the events of the day were focused on the outer altar? It seems that Moshe and Aharon’s entrance into the ohel moed relates to the two blessings since one blessing occurred before they entered the ohel moed and one occurred after they left the mishkan/ ohel moed, but what could be the connection?

In order to understand 9:23, we need to understand why Aharon blessed the people in 9:22. It seems that Aharon decided on his own to state the blessings, as it is not recorded that Moshe had told him to bless the people. While many people would think that giving a blessing is a nice idea, this action was problematic since when one worships G-d one must do what one is commanded and not add extras. A few minutes later this would be the sin of his sons, Nadav and Avihu, who attempted to serve G-d in a way that was not commanded and they were killed for this sin, 10:1,2, see our discussion below on 10:1,2, "Nadav and Avihu" https://lobashamayim.blogspot.com/2010/04/vayikra-1012-shemini-nadav-and-avihu.html.

If Aharon's blessing was a mistake, then Moshe and Aharon went into the mishkan or in the courtyard of the ohel moed to talk. When they were alone, Moshe told Aharon that he is only to do what is commanded and not to add on extras. This rebuke might explain why the Torah did not mention what was said in the ohel moed.

The second blessing when they left the area where they had their brief discussion was an attempt to rectify Aharon's mistake. Aharon had blessed the people even though he had not been commanded to do so, but when Moshe and Aharon blessed the people, the people would think that they had been commanded by G-d when they conversed alone, and then the people would also think that Aharon had acted appropriately when he had had blessed the people in 9:22. (Maybe G-d spoke to them in the ohel moed but this cannot be known since it is not recorded.) The important idea was that the people would learn that one can only do what commanded, even though in this case the people were possibly being fooled. After this rectification of Aharon's mistake, then the glory of G-d appeared in the end of 9:23.

A possible proof for this approach is that immediately prior to Aharon's first blessing, in the end of 9:21, the Torah records that Aharon did exactly as he was commanded by Moshe. (This idea to do as commanded also appears in 9:5,6,7,10.) The statement in 9:21 is referring to Aharon's work with the sacrifices, and the implication is that while this work was commanded, Aharon's blessing that followed this statement was not commanded by G-d or Moshe.

Yet, if Aharon acted inappropriately when he first blessed the people, why was he not punished immediately like his sons were? Maybe his sin was not grievous enough to warrant his death. Or, maybe had he been killed, the ceremony would have stopped without the appearance of G-d's glory. This could not happen after Moshe had announced that G-d's glory would appear, 9:6. With this understanding, G-d delayed the appearance of the glory of G-d until Moshe was able to rectify Aharon's mistake, and then maybe Aharon was not punished later since he already suffered greatly when his sons were killed, though they died for their own sins.

Independent of the question of whether Aharon should have been punished for blessing the people on his own, Aharon, Nadav and Avihu all attempted to serve G-d in a way that was not commanded. Possibly this was the effect of the seven day consecration process in the previous chapter (chapter 8) that it prompted them with a desire to serve G-d more than what was commanded. This is a very common desire with the religious personality that one wants to do "more," and the seven day consecration process was an intense religious experience that could very likely have inspired this feeling.

After discussing this idea in my synagogue, a friend, Paul Kloot made the interesting point that Aharon's action might have influenced his sons Nadav and Avihu since undoubtedly they were in close vicinity to Moshe and Aharon. Paul wondered that if they had not realized that Moshe had to rectify their father's actions, then Aharon’s action might have led them to think that it was ok for a person to serve G-d based on one's own ideas.

Vayikra 9:1-4 – The ceremony of the eighth day of the consecration of the priests in the desert

Vayikra 9:1-4 records that on the eighth day, Moshe called Aharon, Aharon's sons and the elders of the people. The eighth day was the day after the seven day ceremony to initiate Aharon and his sons as priests, which was recorded in chapter 8. (The number eight in reference to a previous set of seven is a common phenomenon in the Torah, as for example by shemitta and yovel, Shavuot, Sukkot and Shemini Azaret, and possibly by the brit milah. In each case, there are some connections and some differences between the set of seven and the eighth day or year.) 

What was the purpose of the ceremony of the eighth day if the priests had already been initiated in the seven day ceremony? And, what was its connection with the previous seven days?

From the fact that Moshe called the elders, 9:1, we see that the purpose of the ceremony of the eighth day was not limited to the priests but also included the people. Furthermore, while both the priests and the people had to bring sacrifices the people brought more sacrifices. (The people brought double the types of sacrifices, and 150% more animals.) In addition, one of the sacrifices of the people was an ox, 9:4, and this is only time in the whole Torah that an ox was brought as part of the public cult. (This excludes the firstborn ox, which was a private sacrifice, Shemot 34:19, and Bemidbar 18:17.). This ox was surely the significant sacrifice of the day, and this indicates that the people were the primary participants of the day while the priests were secondary.

The ceremony of the eighth day ended when the people saw the glory of G-d and a fire consumed the sacrifices, 9:23,24. The appearance of the glory of G-d and the fire consecrated the outer altar, and since the outer altar was for the people to enable them to offer sacrifices, they were the primary participants of the ceremony of the eighth day. The consecration of the outer altar on the eighth day is what joins the ceremony of the eighth day with the seven day initiation of the priests that occurred beforehand since both processes were part of the establishment of the public cult of the mishkan/ ohel moed.

With this consecration, there were two consecrations of the mishkan/ ohel moed by the glory of G-d. In Shemot 40:35, the appearance of the glory of G-d consecrated the mishkan proper, while here the appearance of the glory of G-d consecrated the outer altar where the sacrifices were performed. This dual consecration accords with Shemot 29:44, which records that G-d would consecrate both the mishkan and the outer altar.

Why is Purim celebrated in Adar Sheni?

The Mishnah (Megillah 1:4) states that Megillat Esther is to be read in the second Adar, but the Talmud (Megillah 6b) records an argument concerning this question. R. Elazar says to read the Megillah in the first month of Adar, while R. Shimon ben Gamaliel says to read it in the second month of Adar. The Talmud explains that R. Elazar says to read it in the first month since we do not pass over the opportunity to fulfill commandments, while R. Shimon ben Gamaliel says to read it in the second month to connect the two redemptions, the redemption of Purim with the redemption of Pesach. Of these two arguments, R. Elazar's reason appears to be stronger since we try not to pass over the opportunity to fulfill a commandment. (For some exceptions to this rule, see Mishnah Megillah 1:3 and Talmud Megillah 5a.) Why do we not follow R. Elazar's ruling and read the Megillah and celebrate Purim in the first Adar?

I believe the answer is due to the reading of the four parashiyot: Shekalim, zachor, parah and chodesh, see Mishnah Megillah 3:4 and Talmud, Megillah 29a. The Talmud (Megillah 6b) notes that R. Shimon ben Gamaliel also asserts that the four parashiyot must be read in the second Adar. Adin Steinsaltz (footnotes on his commentary on Talmud Megillah 6b) quotes from the Ritva that it is obvious that the four parashiyot have to be read by the second Adar since three of the four (except zachor) relate to Pesach.

Maybe, the "obviousness" that the four parashiyot are to be read in the second Adar, is the real reason why we read Megillat Esther and celebrate Purim in the second month of Adar. The reading of zachor is the second of the four parashiyot, and it is intrinsically connected with Purim. For example, the Mishnah (Megillah 3:4) notes that zachor cannot be read on Shabbat if the Shabbat is more than one week from Purim. However, zachor is also part of the four parashiyot. 

Accordingly, due to the principle of transitivity, once three of the parashiyot are connected to Pesach and are read in the second month of Adar, then the reading of zachor also must be read in the second Adar. Furthermore, once zachor is read in the second Adar, then as Purim is connected with the reading of zachor, it is also celebrated in the second Adar. Thus, Purim is connected to Pesach through the four parashiyot. This transitivity is strong enough to overcome the argument that we do not pass over the opportunity to fulfill a commandment, and hence the ruling is like R. Shimon ben Gamaliel who maintained that both the four parashiyot and Megillat Esther are to be read in the second month of Adar.  This connection of the four parshiyot to both Purim and Pesach is then the basis for R. Shimon ben Gamaliel’s rationale that the goal is to connect the two redemptions togethers, which is through the four parshiyot.              

Megillat Esther 3:6,13 - The wealth factor

3:6 records that Haman decided to attempt to kill all the Jewish people because Mordechai would not bow down to him. This decision is illogical since Haman should just have wanted to kill Mordechai, as in fact Zeresh later suggests, 5:14. Yet, it could be that Haman always wanted to kill the Jewish people, and then Haman's anger at Mordechai's stubbornness not to bow down to him was just the final straw that stirred Haman to act.

Haman planned to kill the Jews on the 13th of Adar, 3:13. Why did Haman only plan to attack the Jews on one day? The Malbim (on 9:21) suggests that the permission was not limited to one day as really the 13th of Adar was to be the start of the campaign against the Jews and it was open-ended. Yet, if this was true then the Jews should have been worried about their lives after the 13th of Adar (or after the 14th of Adar in Shushan) since Haman's decree was never rescinded. Also, if the decree was open-ended, why did Haman wait for the 13th of Adar, he should have begun immediately after he had permission from Achashverosh?

Another problem with an open-ended decree is that the country would have descended into anarchy. If the decree was just limited to one day, then there would be anarchy for only one day, but afterwards the country would resume again as a normal country. Thus, the most Haman was able to get from Achashverosh was one day of mayhem. This concern for order in the realm is also evident when Vashti disobeyed Achashverosh, and Achashverosh was advised to banish/ kill her because otherwise all the women would not listen to their husbands, 1:17.

Once Haman was only able to get permission to kill the Jews on one day, did he really think that all the Jews could be killed on one day? The Crusaders, Chmielnicki and Nazis did their best to kill the Jewish people but still they were unable to kill everybody in one day. I doubt that Haman really thought he could kill all the Jews on one day. What was to be with the Jews who survived by hiding on the 13th? Could they have continued living afterwards as if nothing happened?

My guess is that Haman's real goal was to reduce the Jewish people's wealth and hence influence in the country. This could occur due to the deaths of the people, but because the decree was limited to one day, most of the people would survive by hiding. Thus, there was a second aspect to the decree that the general population was allowed to plunder the Jewish people's homes (end of 3:13). While this aspect seems to be secondary it really was the crucial aspect of his plan. Even if the people hid on the 13th, they would be impoverished when they returned from hiding, and this impoverishment would reduce their influence in the country.

This goal of impoverishing the Jews is evident when Haman offered Achashverosh 10,000 silver talents, 3:9. This was a colossal sum of money. (Goldman, 1946, p.212, quotes from Herodotus that this was approximately the income of the entire Persian empire for a year.) How would Haman have been able to get such a large sum of money? It seems that this money was to come from the Jews who would be plundered, see Amos Chacham, 1990 on 3:9 and Hazony, 2000, p.229.

Megillat Esther 8:11 - The counter decree

8:11 records that Achashverosh made a second decree that the Jews could defend themselves and plunder their enemies. Why was the second decree necessary? Were the Jewish people so beaten down that they could not envision fighting back without the decree? This would not accord with their later actions that when given the chance they were able to kill 75,000 people in one day (9:16). Also, if the Jews were able to defeat their enemies, why were they worried after Haman's decree?

I used to think that it was the army that changed sides after the second decree, as initially the army was prepared to attack the Jews but in the end the army defended the Jews. Yet, the second decree only allowed the Jews to defend themselves and nothing is mentioned about a change in the role of the army.

One answer is that most of the people were not rabid anti-Semites. R. Moshe Alshich (16th century) argues that the allowance for the population to plunder the Jewish people's homes in Haman's decree was an incentive for the people to murder. According to this idea, Haman realized that not everybody was a rabid anti-Semite and then the permission to plunder the Jew's wealth was to obtain the general population's acquiescence to his decree. The second decree that allowed the Jews to defend themselves was then crucial not to the Jews but for the general population who were not rabid anti-Semites. After the second decree most of the general population who were not rabid anti-Semites decided not to attack the Jews since they could have been killed and lost their possessions if they attacked the Jews because the Jews were now allowed to defend themselves. The Jews could not have defended themselves against the entire population, but after the second decree, only the true anti-Semites attacked the Jews, and against this smaller number, the Jewish people were able to organize and defend themselves, 9:2.

Another possible answer is based on the peculiar nature of the decree that it was limited to one day, which meant that the Jews had the option of hiding on the 13th and surviving with a loss of their possessions. Prior to the second decree, had the Jews successfully defended themselves against their attackers, then they would have been tried for murder. Accordingly, if the Jewish people attempted to protect their property then they could not have won since either they would be killed or they would be considered murderers. Their only option was to escape and forgo their possession. However, the second decree allowed the Jewish people to legally kill anybody who attacked their property, and hence only with the second decree were they willing to fight back.