Parshas Shemini: Death with Meaning

This week’s parsha, Parshas Shemini, contains one of the most unsettling narratives in the Torah: The death of Aaron’s sons. The parsha describes the activities of the inauguration of the Mishkan on the eighth day after its completion. In the middle of the long inauguration service, Aaron’s sons, “Nadav and Abihu each took his fire pan, put fire in it, and laid incense on it; and they offered before Hashem foreign fire, which had not been enjoined upon them.” (Vayikara 10:1). Their motivation is examined and discussed by the sages and throughout the commentaries of all ages. There are those who condemn them for levity or intoxication, and there are those who focus on their misplaced inspiration. Whatever the reason for their bringing an offering that had not been required, the result was the same: “And fire came forth from Hashem and consumed them; thus they died before Hashem”(10:2).

It is obvious why this story is upsetting. Aaron’s sons died - publicly, dramatically, and in the middle of the most auspicious ceremony Klal Yisrael had endeavored upon. Even more discomforting for many people is the fact that Aaron and his two remaining sons could not stop the inauguration and absorb their shock. They had to go forward and complete the inauguration before reacting to the loss of their immediate family members, which is odd in itself because in Jewish tradition the death of an immediate relative puts one in a state of limbo until the burial of the body as soon as possible. 

Jewish tradition has one of the most comprehensive and compassionate rituals of mourning. From the period of aninus, when a person is not required in mitzvos until the burial of the dead and official start of mourning, through the staggered stages of shiva, shloshim and the annual yahrtzeit, the mourning is guided. While these practices seem to be primarily for the emotional benefit of the immediate family, they are understood to benefit the neshama as well. 

Surely, Nadav and Abihu had not erred to such a level that their deaths should be ignored. Surely, their father and brothers felt the pain of loss that is at the heart of the state of aninus. 

Beyond the fact that Aaron, Elazar, and Itamar were in the middle of invoking kedusha into Mishkan, there was something unique about Nadav and Abihu’s passing. Let us look again at the final phrase of 10:2 - “vayamootu lphnei Hashem - and they died before Hashem”(10:2).

Hashem sent a fire that consumed them, which is a pretty definite statement of their being killed. Why does it need to state that they “died before Hashem,” which is not common phraseology at all?

This question is mulled over by many commentators, as is what it meant exactly that they were consumed. For instance, Chizkuni notes:

וימותו לפני ה, “They died in the presence of the Lord. [This is an unusual expression. Are we not all, at any given moment, “in the Presence” of the Lord?] Rabbi Eliezer says this expression teaches that they did not die until having left the sacred precincts and being in the antechamber where Levites were permitted. We have proof of this from verse 4 where the cousins of these brothers, by the names of Mishael and Eltzafan were charge with removing their bodies from there for burial. But why did the Torah say that they died before the Lord (i.e. inside the Tabernacle)? Perhaps they did die there but later an angel pushed the bodies outside to where the Levites were permitted. Rabbi Akiva on the other hand said that they did die inside the Tabernacle. Since they were still wearing their garments which had not been burned by the heavenly fire, their cousins hooked their spears into the outer garments and dragged them until they were outside the sacred parts of the Tabernacle.

 

This is a very practical exploration of the language, but there is a spiritual side as well.  Nadav and Abihu were killed because they acted of their own accord. They brought incense when it wasn’t specifically called for during a very detailed inauguration. Their intention was to honor Hashem, to celebrate Hashem. There was no intention of disrespect or mockery or even vanity. They truly wished to draw closer to Hashem, as is understood by the majority of the commentaries. 

During the inauguration of the mishkan, it was incredibly important, however, that the nation not be shown a hefker observance, an anarchy of emotional reaction of set structure. The Mishkan, the place of ultimate holiness and service to Hashem, had to be respected completely, and on this first day of usage, the point needed to be driven home that their “inspiration” did not negate rules and order. 

On the other hand, their death was, perhaps, an embrace of Hashem. As Rabbeinu Bahya notes ”…The kind of death described here by the words ‘in the presence of the Lord’ means that their body and soul underwent a ‘surgical’ separation, the fire entering their bodies through their nostrils separating soul from body. We must be careful not to understand the verse as saying that their souls were burned, i.e. that they lost their claim to the hereafter. If that were so the words, “by those very close to Me I become sanctified,” which Moses told Aaron in G’d’s name, would not make any sense. Why should the souls of people G’d describes as close to Him be destroyed, burned?”

As humans, as survivors, as the ones who are left behind after a death, we have a hard time seeing the positive for the neshama. We are focussed on what we have lost. Protecting life is the ultimate goal - the primary instinct is, afterall, the survival instinct - because only in life can our neshama grow and flourish. The more our neshama can grow here in Olam Hazeh, the more it will be able to receive the Divine presence in Olam HaBah, and so we focus on the potential of life without, usually, remembering that death also frees the neshama from its battle, or better competition, with the goof, with one’s physical needs and desires. 

When reading parashas Shemini, our immediate reaction is based on our mindset of death as a complete negative. Perhaps, however, from the words that tell us that Nadav and Abihu died before Hashem we are reminded that death is the doorway to a higher plane of existence (when we are ready, ad mesh v’esrim for each of you who reads this!)

 

Wishing you all a good Shabbas.

 

Parshas Shemini: Avoiding Emotional Judgements

 When one studies Torah, one is not just learning about the history and laws of the Jewish nation. Studying Torah is about learning life skills on a range of levels. In Parasha Shemini, we have the opportunity to learn about the hazards of letting our emotions decide our judgement of other people’s actions, and we do this through Moshe.

Moshe had a temper. It's a fact that we don't often think about because… well because he is Moshe. He is the ultimate eved Hashem, and is even called out in the Torah for his great humility. And while that is true, it is also true that there are several references to him reacting in anger. Some people have, perhaps, read that statement and felt offended at the presumption of negative traits. On the contrary, the idea of Moshe having a temper attests to the fact that he had enough passion to lead our stiff necked ancestors. Even more importantly, in every case of anger that is expressed in the Torah, Moshe’s primary reaction is about the honor due Hashem or protecting the Jewish people (even from themselves).

In Parshas Shemini, Moshe's emotion are very complex. The Mishkan is finally ready to be inaugurated. In the midst of the elaborate santicifaction ceremony for which has prepared for days, Nadav and Abihu are struck down for bringing an unasked for offering. Their deaths must be overlooked so that the sanctification can be completed, so Moshe must help his brother and two nephews put off their reactions. Aaron and his sons go on to a series a specific offerings. But something seems to have gone wrong in the completion of the ceremony, at least according to Moshe, for the Torah suddenly states: "Moshe inquired insistently about the he-goat of the sin-offering for behold it had been burned! And he was wrathful with Elazar and Itamar, Aaron’s remaining sons" (10:16).

Hashem commanded very specific steps and sacrifices for the day that the Mishkan was sanctified. Several of the sacrifices were meant to be eaten by the kohanim, Aaron and his sons, including the he-goat of the sin offering. Why then, Moshe needed to know, did they burn it?

The Torah’s words that Moshe “inquired insistently” and “was wrathful” tell us that he was led by his emotions in his reaction. Perhaps Moshe saw this as the kohanim being unable to take and follow instruction, that they could not truly serve Hashem properly. More humanely, perhaps he was worried that Elazar and Itamar had also, like their brothers, performed the service improperly and that they too might die. However, as Hashem did not appear to react, as he had with Nadav and Abihu, Moshe’s strong actions speak of underlying emotion driving him forward.

To conclude the situation, Aaron stepped in and said: “Was it they who this day offered their sin offering and their elevation offering before Hashem? Now that such things befell me - were I to eat this day's sin offering would Hashem approve?" (Vayikra 10:19).

In stepping between Moshe and his sons, in declaring his role and responsibility, Aaron was also explaining to Moshe that the deaths of Nadav and Abihu had effected the inauguration, even without their stopping and reacting. Aaron, Elazar, and Itamar were all now in a state known as onen. It is the first stage of mourning - after the death but before the burial. An onen is very limited in the performance of mitzvot, even if they are kohanim performing a service in the Mishkan or Beis Hamikdash.

Being both onanim and kohanim, Elazar and Itamar could not participate in most of the offerings. As the Kohen Gadol (high priest), however, Aaron was allowed to perform the offerings. As for why two goats and the meal offering were eaten but one sacrificed goat was not, Aaron’s response implied enough to remind Moshe that the goats that were eaten were sacrifices ordered specifically for the inauguration and were therefore allowed to be consumed, whereas the he-goat of the sin offering was actually an offering of Rosh Chodesh and could not be consumed by an onen, even the Kohen Gadol. The first two could be offered by Aaron and eaten by the priests, the third had to be burnt whole since none of them were permitted to eat it.

When Moshe saw the sacrifices done differently than he had instructed, he reacts with emotion he grows irate with a holy passion to do Hashem’s will properly. He investigates and lays blame rather than asking questions. But in pasuk 10:20, after Aaron has defended his sons and explained the halachic nuances, Moshe is humbled - and here is the lesson to be learned. While the verse simply says "Moshe heard and it was good in his eyes," the Midrash tells us that Moshe declared that he had forgotten the law that Aaron had just retaught him.

Parshas Shemini is where Moshe recognizes the price of temper. Vayikra Raba points out that ''because Moshe became angry at Elazar and Itamar, he forgot the laws of mourning." It is interesting to note that we can know, from future incidents, that Moshe does not completely lose his temper. Indeed, according to many commentaries, he lost his ability to enter Eretz Yisrael because, in a moment of temper, he struck the rock rather than speaking to it to draw forth water.

Just as Moshe could have quietly apologized rather than declare that he had forgotten the law and thus humble himself before the people, the Torah did not have to include these details. But everything in the Torah is meant to help us grow as individuals. Right now, we are living in a time of great tension. People have many emotions quivering under the surface as they try to put on a good face. Let us remember to hold back out judgements on each others’ behavior because far too often there are facts we do not know and reasonings we may have forgotten.

Subtle Psychology (Shemini)

Parshat Shemini contains the details of the tragedy of the death of Nadav and Avihu. Commentator after commentator, including the sages of the Talmud, piece together details from the brief text in order to understand what the two sons of Aaron did wrong when they brought forth their fire pans during the first service in the Mishkan.

Before one can talk about the deaths of Nadav and Avihu or their father’s reaction to it, it is interesting to look at the underlying insights into Aaron that are subtly woven into Leviticus 9. On first reading the perek, it is easy to focus on “shemini,” on the fact that it was the eighth day and the day of the inauguration of the sacrificial service. But Moshe has to call Aaron forward, address him step by step until he is fully involved in the service, because, according to many commentaries, Aaron was still full of shame and insecurity after his involvement with the Chait Haegel (see Rashi on 9:7).

Any of us who have ever felt insecure or “unworthy” of an honor can relate to what occurred at the end of the first sacrificial ceremony. Moshe had instructed Aaron to inform the people that “today the Lord will appear to you” (9:4), and even explained that “This is what the Lord has commanded that you do, that the Presence of the Lord may appear to you” (9:6). But at the end of the service: “Aaron raised his hands toward the people and blessed them; then he descended from having performed the sin-offering, the elevation-offering, and the peace-offering” (9:22).  Where was the presence of the Lord? One can only imagine how shaken Aaron was, in his heart, that the entire service might have been invalidated by his lack of worthiness. But Moshe did not hesitate at all. “Moshe and Aaron came to the Tent of Meeting, and they went out and they blessed the people and the glory of Hashem appeared to the entire people” (22-23).

Leviticus 9 concludes with a Divine fire consuming the burnt offering and fat parts and the people falling upon their faces in awe.  Now think about what was going on with Aaron and his sons. The day, for them, had been an intense emotional roller coaster. But it worked! The sacrifice had been accepted and they had proven themselves in the role of the Kahuna. For Aaron, a man of peace and a man struggling with accepting the errors of the past, this was a great relief. His sons had watched his struggle, but it wasn’t their struggle. Once it was clear that the incident with the Golden Calf would not be held against their family, they became “intoxicated” with the headiness of the day and stopped thinking about each detail.

“Intoxicated” is an excellent segue to the fact that one of the most well-known commentaries on the deaths of Nadav and Avihu is that they brought their offering while they were intoxicated. The connection is the fact that, several verse later, God Himself instructs Aaron and his two remaining sons that they must never perform the service while under the influence, and yet, based on the verses in Vayikra 9 and their immediate action and death in Vayikra 10, there doesn’t appear to be enough time for them to have gotten drunk. It is possible, however, that Nadav and Avihu were drunk on their own egos, and thus feeling the exaltation and lack of inhibition that people feel when they’ve had a bit to drink.

The text of Vayikra 9, in which Moshe shepherds Aaron through the actions of the day, also influenced his role in Vayikra 10. One could read Moshe’s immediate act of telling Aaron to stay his reaction as being cold and unfeeling. Upon reading Vayikra 10, however, one might feel a sense of awe witnessing Moshe, the devoted brother, rushing around to make certain that his brother was taken care of. He jumps in:

Verse 3: Moshe comforts and restrains Aaron.

Verse 4: Moshe makes immediate arrangements for the bodies, and, in verse 5, they are carried out to his specifications.

Verse 6: Moshe instructs Aaron, Eleazar, and Itamar not to mourn publicly but to allow the kinsmen to do so for them…and, in verse 7, to stay in the entrance of the Tent of Meeting.

Verse 12: Moshe tells Aaron and his two sons to eat the meal offering, giving them very detailed instructions.

Verse 8-11, by the way, is God’s interjection of the prohibition of doing the service while intoxicated and the instruction that the children of Aaron would teach the laws to the Israelites.

Moshe kept Aaron and his two surviving sons busy and moving. This helped maintain the significance of the day for klal Yisrael. One interesting idea found in a book of the Chatam Sofer’s commentaries was that “If Aaron showed over signs of mourning, then any mourning on the part of Klal Yisrael would be interpreted as an indication of sympathy to Aaron, rather than genuine remorse on the passing of these tzaddikim.” 

The death of Nadav and Avihu was both shocking and tragic, all the more so because the idea of the inauguration of the sacrificial service in the Mishkan must remain a day we think about with joy-filled awe. Herein there are many small lessons: helping another person overcome their fears (Moshe and Aaron), the importance of humility (Aaron, Nadav and Avihu), the need of a public leader to be a leader in his family (Moshe), and the incredible strength one can muster in the service of the Divine (Aaron). May we each find the message that is right for us and be inspired by all of the words of the Torah.