From the Archives....Parshas Tazria

Parshas Tazria - The End is Near: "Game Over" or "Level Cleared"? (2013/5773)

Parshas Tazria - Be Kind Too! You're a Web-Rooted Friend (2012/5772)

Parshas Shemini - Same But Different

Thoughts on The Parsha

Parshas Shemini

Same But Different

By: Daniel Listhaus

וַיִּקְחוּ בְנֵי אַהֲרֹן נָדָב וַאֲבִיהוּא אִישׁ מַחְתָּתוֹ וַיִּתְּנוּ בָהֵן אֵשׁ וַיָּשִׂימוּ עָלֶיהָ קְטֹרֶת וַיַּקְרִיבוּ לִפְנֵי ה' אֵשׁ זָרָה אֲשֶׁר לֹא צִוָּה אֹתָם: וַתֵּצֵא אֵשׁ מִלִּפְנֵי ה' וַתֹּאכַל אוֹתָם וַיָּמֻתוּ לִפְנֵי ה'י

“The sons of Aharon, Nadav and Avihu, each took his pan, they put fire in them and placed incense upon it and they brought before Hashem an alien fire that He had not commanded them. A fire came forth from before Hashem and consumed them and they died before Hashem.”

-Shemini 10:1-2

Throughout the Torah we are constantly reminded that there are many levels on which one could perform mitzvos. On a basic level, one could simply be doing mitzvos without realizing he is doing mitzvos; whether that be because he has the wrong intentions or because he has personal reasons to be doing the mitzvos he does. In our parsha we find such an example along with an even higher level of performing mitzvos incorrectly despite doing the right action and having the right intention. 

The Torah¹ warns that the kohanim are not allowed to be intoxicated when they come to do the avodah (work in beis ha'mikdash). Rashi² comments that even if the kohen would perform the avodah correctly while intoxicated, his service would nevertheless be invalid. Indeed, here we have an example where someone could be doing the right thing, but with the wrong intentions, and therefore the avodah becomes unacceptable. There could be two kohanim – one drunk and one not – doing the exact same thing, one copying perfectly what the other is doing, and yet, one's avodah will be valid while the intoxicated one's will not. It is more than the action alone which is meaningful, but also the mindset and intention behind it.

Interestingly, we also find in our parsha an example where not only was the action correct, but the intention was as well, and yet a tragic result demonstrated that there was still an important element missing.

The passuk³ tells us, “The sons of Aharon – Nadav and Avihu – each took a fire-pan and they put fire in them and placed incense upon it; and they brought before Hashem an alien fire that He had not commanded them. A fire came forth from before Hashem and consumed them, and they died before Hashem.” There are several explanations which the meforshim (commentaries) offer as to what they did wrong. Rashi,⁴ in his first explanation, brings from the Gemara⁵ the opinion of Rebbe Eliezer who says that the reason why Nadav and Avihu died was because they rendered a halachik decision in the presence of their teacher, Moshe.

The Maharal⁶ points out that it is not so obvious that Nadav and Avihu did an incorrect thing. They thought that they were supposed to light a fire on the mizbe'ach (alter) despite there already being a fire on it which had descended from shamayim (Heaven). However, because they did not consult with Moshe rabbeinu before doing so, their actions were taken very seriously and they received a very harsh punishment of death from heaven.

Here we have an example of tzadikkim (righteous people) who did not merely do the right thing, but they even did it with correct intentions. They had thought their actions through and everything checked out. They did it only l'shem shamayim (for Heaven's sake). Yet, there was still an essential piece missing: they did not consult with their Rebbe, Moshe.

This concept is quite hard to understand. Nadav and Avihu were the sons of Aharon Ha'kohen and were also righteous in their own right. They were not only doing the proper thing, but even had the right intentions. Why should it matter that they did not consult with Moshe rabbeinu first? According to the opinions that they did the right thing, Moshe would have told them to do the same thing anyway. How could it be that Nadav and Avihu be punished for doing something with the right intentions just for not asking Moshe, if had they asked Moshe there would have been nothing different? They would have done the same exact action with the same righteous intentions? What was so bad about not asking Moshe in this case? They had it all worked out?

We could perhaps learn from the tragic death of Nadav and Avihu that merely doing the right thing, even with completely the right intentions, is still not enough. There must be a basis for it, and that foundation must be from our mesorah (tradition). If it is not part of the accepted mesorah passed down from rebbe to talmid (student), then as good as it seems and as much as it “fits” within the Torah, it still does not belong. Our Torah is defined by our mesorah and the guidelines and rules built into it in terms of how to rule, passed down from Moshe at Har Sinai. Tzadikim such as Nadav and Avihu should have been more conscientious regarding the security of our mesorah especially that early on. Therefore, they were severely punished.

Unfortunately, within Judaism there are many groups which attempt to make various movements. Some find obscure textual references and others offer what they believe are blatant proofs. However, the lesson to keep in mind is that even if their actions would be good and even if they were doing so with absolute pure intentions, there is still the most vital element missing which is that it must fit into our mesorah, and if it does not, then it does not belong. Shlomo ha'melech writes in Koheles,⁷ “Do not be overly righteous, and do not be overly wise; why should you bring desolation upon yourself?” Sometimes we are too smart for our own good. We come up with good reasons and fantastic proofs, but as real as they are and as right as they may be, if they are ruled without asking a rebbe to be absolutely sure that it is part of our mesorah, then it does not belong. It is deemed as an “alien fire” even though it looks perfectly in the right place with the right intentions.

May Hashem help us realize that our success as a nation comes from our adherence to our pure mesorah, and that it is this linkage to our past which guarantees our future.

1Vayikra 10:8

2Vayikra 10:10

3Vayikra 10:1-2

4Rashi Vayikra 10:2

5Eiruvin 63a

6See Gur Aryeh Vayikra 10:2

7Koheles 7:16

Photo Credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ilovedoodle/5866036142/

From the Archives....

Parshas Shemini 2012 / 5772 - Half and Half: You Are What You Eat

Parshas Tzav and Purim - Defense or De-fence?

Thoughts on The Parsha

Parshas Tzav

and

Purim

Defense or De-fence?

By: Daniel Listhaus

וּבְשַׂר זֶבַח תּוֹדַת שְׁלָמָיו בְּיוֹם קָרְבָּנוֹ יֵאָכֵל לֹא יַנִּיחַ מִמֶּנּוּ עַד בֹּקֶר

“And the flesh of the sacrifice of his thanksgiving peace-offering must be eaten on the day of its offering: he may not leave any of it until morning.”

-Tzav 7:15

Continuing with the theme of karbanos (sacrifices) and their respective halachos (laws), the Torah¹ commands that the karbanos must be eaten on the day of their offering and cannot be left over to be eaten the next morning. Rashi² points out that the passuk (verse) uses many adjectives to describe the karbon being discussed. He explains that it is from these words that we learn out that the Torah is coming to include many karbanos, such as the chatas (sin-offering), asham (guilt offering), the a'yil nazir (ram of the nazir offering), and the chagiga (festival-offering) brought together with the karbon pesach, under the umbrella of this prohibition not to leave over the meat to be eaten the next day.

Despite the fact that the Torah only limits us to not wait until the morning, Rashi brings from a mishna³ that in reality, chazal (our rabbis) only allow us to eat it until midnight. Let us explore this mishna.

The first mishna in all of shas⁴ discuses when the proper time to recite kriyas shema at night. The passuk in the Torah which we read as part of shema, alludes vaguely to the times of “u'v'shach'be'cha uv'ku'me'cha” - “when you lie down and when you arise”.⁵ This is where we derive the obligation to recite shema twice a day – once in the morning and once in the evening. In terms of the exact parameters of what “when you lay down to sleep” means, however, is a matter of dispute. The Gemara⁶ states the two possible explanations. Either it could mean specifically the time which people go to sleep, which would be only the first few hours of the night, or it could refer to the entire time people are sleeping, which would extend all the way until the morning. The problem with this, as the Gemara itself points out, is that although indeed those are the only two possible explanations, the mishna offers three opinions The first opinion is that of Rebbe Eliezer who divides the night into segments⁷ and explains that one could fulfill his obligation of shema at night during the first segment, clearly interpreting the passuk to mean that the obligation of shema only extends to the time which people are actually climbing into bed and going to sleep. Rabban Gamliel argues and holds that one has until dawn in the morning, clearly holding that the passuk is allowing the night-time shema to be read during the entire period of time it is normal for people to be sleeping. However, the third opinion is that of the Rabanan (majority of Rabbis) who maintain that shema could only be read until chatzos (midnight). Being that there are only two possible explanations for the passuk, and the Rabanan do not seem to be using either one of them, what is their opinion based on? The Gemara asks this and answers that really the Rabanan agree with Raban Gamliel that the Torah allows shema to be read all night. However, the Rabbis were concerned that people would come home after a long day at work and tell themselves that they just need to eat a little and rest a little and that they would take care of kriyas shema later. However, with such an attitude there would be no doubt that people would quite easily forget to say shema. Therefore, the Rabbis set a stricter limit allowing the mitzva only to be done before chatzos, in order to distance people from coming to sin by forgetting to recite kriyas shema.

The aforementioned mishna in Berachos continues to describe that this concept of only having until chatzos to do a mitzva when really the Torah allows for it to be done all night is a common restriction for the Rabbis to put in place. The mishna then offers a few examples, including the one which Rashi in our parsha quotes – that one who brings a karbon is really allowed to eat it any time during the night, but the Rabbis decreed that it must be eaten before chatzos.

However, if we take a moment to think about the differences between kriyas shema and karbanos, it is hard to understand why the same decree would be necessary by karbanos. First, kriyas shema is a small routine thing which is quite easy to lose excitement about and come to be lazy about it or forget a night here and there. However, for most people, bringing a karbon in the Beis Hamikdash was not an every day activity. This was someone who had sinned and realized that he needed to bring a karbon as part of his teshuva (repentance) and kapparah (atonement) process, or during a time of the shalosh regalim (festivals), or after completing his period of being a nazir. Certainly, in these cases, a person would be much more careful and more religious in ensuring that everything be done properly. If so how could we understand the same necessity of a limit to only have until chatzos to eat as we have regarding reciting shema?

Furthermore, although all mitzvos are serious as they are direct commandments from Hashem and we must treat a light mitzva like a heavy mitzva,⁸ the reality is that obligations with a heavier price of them – whether it be the greatness of the reward or the magnitude of the punishment – we tend to take more seriously. One who does not recite shema has “merely” passively neglected to do something which he should have done. He lost out. Whereas one who waits and eats the meat of a karbon past its time has not only actively done something which outright transgresses the Torah's commandment, but is also not in for a punishment of kareis – something which is taken extremely seriously. Is it really necessary to have the added restriction not to allow the karbon be eaten past chatzos? It would seem that even without that extra push, people would already be careful because of the uniqueness of bringing a karbon and zealousness associated with it, together with the frightening consequences of not doing so correctly.

Third, more practically speaking, although we could definitely imagine ourselves plopping down on an armchair and wanting dinner or some relaxing time first and saying that we will worry about kriyas shema later on the night, it is harder to picture such a scenario regarding eating the meat of a karbon. Who would come home after a day of work and say I just need some sleep, I will rest now and wake up 4am to eat this cow?

The first mishna in Pirkei Avos relates the beginning of our mesorah (tradition) from Moshe receiving the Torah on Har Sinai to passing it down to Yehoshua, then to the zekainim (elders), then the elders to the nevi'im (prophets), and then the nevi'im to the anshei k'neses ha'gedolah (men of the great assembly). The entire Pirkei Avos goes through our mesorah from generation to generation along with the mantras and lessons of each leader. However, the very first mantras of the first mishna no doubt contain a special element of being the foundation of it all. Indeed, the first mishna teaches that the anshei k'neses ha'gedolah used to say three things: Be deliberate in judgment, develop many disciples, and make a fence for the Torah. The meforshim (commentaries)⁹ point out that these three things are crucial for the Torah to be taken seriously and make it through a mesorah of generations. This is why they were the chosen lessons of the anshei k'neses ha'gedolah who were charged with ensuring that the mesorah would stay strong. First, one must approach Torah differently than any other subject. It is something which requires thought and evaluation to the point that even if you know the answer to the question which is being asked to you, you must take the time to rethink it. This is because it is so precious and important that it is worthy of being checked over and over to make sure that only truth is being told, as opposed to perhaps circling answers to hard questions on a test where one may take the approach of “your first guess is often the right one”.

The second lesson of the anshei k'neses ha'gedolah is equally important. Being a part of the mesorah does not merely mean being privileged as a recipient, but rather means also being responsible as a deliverer to others. We are obligated to not just learn, but to teach what we know to others.¹⁰ In order to ensure that the mesorah continues, besides for needing the high quality, which is represented by being deliberate in judgment, a level of quantity is also necessary. One should teach many, for who knows who will be the one who will end up carrying the mesorah to the next generation.

The third teaching of the anshei k'neses ha'gedolah is to make a fence for the Torah. The meforshim explain that this refers to the Rabbis' power to make decrees in order to prevent us from doing aveiros (sins). The way of the Torah is not a cult, a religion, or a set of rules; it is the blueprint of the world which, if utilized properly, is a manual with the perfect instructions to navigate this world correctly. The Torah means so much to us, as it is literally our life. Therefore, the Rabbis instituted many decrees to prevent us from getting too close to this line of “life-and-death”.

Perhaps you have seen some cars with the bumper sticker which reads, “This car climbed Mt. Washington.” What this bumper sticker represents is that someone drove their car up the 7.6 mile trail, which the attraction itself boasts of being so narrow that you would think it is only one lane wide, though there needs to be room for two cars to pass as the same road is the way down. They further boast that the road is very windy (in terms of curves, though it is also windy [breezy] at the top), and that right at the edge of the road along the side is a cliff. There are no guardrails of any kind to stop one's vehicle from going off the road and tumbling down the mountain. No margin of error of any sort. Despite this insanity, they claim that the Mount Washington Auto Road has an exceptionally good safety record. As a matter of fact, the reason for having no guard rails is because they are sure that people will drive much more carefully knowing that the consequence is rolling down the side of a mountain in their car.

When one reads the description of this common activity for family trips, one of two things comes to mind. Either that it sort of makes sense that without guard rails people will drive much more carefully and that with such a dramatic consequence for making a mistake, there will be no mistakes. However, the other school of thought is obviously that it is all fun and games and theories until someone gets hurt. Is risking one human life not worth the investment of a barrier even if it means that people may feel more confident driving the mountain-side?

What this brings out for us is two-fold. First of all, unfortunately we have such a hard time instilling in ourselves that indeed sliding from the Torah means tumbling off a cliff. However, even if we did understand this would that mean that we should not invest in a guard rail? The decrees of the Rabbis are the guard rails which are not set arbitrarily, but rather at places with tremendous consideration, thought, and level of ruach ha'kodesh (divine spirit).

Rabbeinu Yonah¹¹ writes that it is a great, praiseworthy thing to create a fence for mitzvos in order not to accidentally stumble. He further writes that in a real way, those who create fences and are meticulous about keeping the guards that the Rabbis set up, are much greater than those who run around doing many mitzvos. After all, someone doing a mitzva could be doing so for ulterior motives. Perhaps the mitzva is something he would want to do anyway, or something he is only doing as to not get excommunicated. However, the one who is meticulous about keeping the rabbinic decrees demonstrates a true level of fear of Hashem as he is willing to go the extra mile to ensure that he will be far from making a mistake.

The mishna in Avos¹² references in more than one mishna the concept that sometimes even things we do accidentally could be treated as serious as if we did them on purpose. On the surface, this is something which is difficult to understand, but perhaps with what we have just mentioned, we could explain this concept in the following way. If indeed we really cared so much about something, we would be so careful that we would not come close to crossing the line even by accident. For example, no person in their right mind would totally degrade himself publicly because it could cost him his job, family, and the rest of his life. So too when it comes to things like Torah and kiddush Hashem, if we were really as sensitive to these things as we should be, we would not allow ourselves to overstep the boundaries even by accident.

Of course, we do not appreciate these areas as much as we should. However, we must realize that and admit that although it may be true, it is also unacceptable and therefore calls for proper measures to guard ourselves from falling.

This is the lesson of the mishna in Berachos and its application to karbanos. Granted that it may be more unlikely and the punishment may be far worse than missing kriyas shema, however the Rabbis still saw room for being concerned. In viewing it as life or death situation, they deemed it fit to create a barrier on this particular cliff as well, despite the path being slightly wider.

The decrees that the Rabbanan instituted are for the community and for the nation as a whole. However, each one of us knows ourselves best and the specific things with which perhaps we have more difficulty. We must be honest and objective with ourselves to take a step back and analyze what we could personally do in setting up our own small boundaries. This is what demonstrates on the highest level that we are serious about growing and becoming better and closer to Hashem. Otherwise, it is just talk.

The first Purim was a time which the Megilla¹³ describes as kimu v'kiblu – that we as a nation re-accepted the Torah out of love for Hashem. This re-acceptance was in many ways greater than receiving the Torah on Har Sinai, because during Purim we did so out of pure self-motivation and love for Hashem. Additionally, the Gemara¹⁴ tells us that starting thirty days before a chag, one must start preparing for it. Purim (Shushan Purim) is the thirty day warning mark for Pesach, but more important than starting to clean the house is to start preparing ourselves for the time of Yetziyas Metzrayim, which is itself the first book end of Kabbas Ha'Torah (receiving the Torah). Therefore what better time is there than Purim when the atmosphere itself lends to personal growth and success and is the ultimate preparation for Pesach which ultimately culminates by Shavuos when we reach the time of receiving the Torah.

Certainly, the way to achieve this is by instead of continuing our daily lives “de-fenced”, to rather take a moment to reflect and analyze where we are at and where we could be and what defense systems we could put up to help us get there. That would be the ultimate kimu v'kiblu as a demonstration that we do in fact love and care about the mitzvos we perform, and that we are indeed sensitive about the aveiros we would like to stop. After all, that is why Yom Kippur is called Yom Kippurim. It is a day “like Purim”, only secondary to Purim in comparison to what could be accomplished.

May Hashem help us use this Purim to introspect and accept upon ourselves to be extra careful regarding the decrees that the Rabbis have established for us, and to take the time to evaluate for ourselves personally what defensive measures could be taken to protect ourselves in the areas we remain to be most vulnerable. In this zechus (merit) may Hashem bring upon K'lal Yisroel the full force of mazal of the month of Adar and ultimately that this Purim should be a preparation for the real geulah (redemption) of yetziyas ha'galus and bring us back to Eretz Yisroel with Mashiach.

1Vayikra 7:15

2Rashi ibid.

3Mishna Berachos 1:1, Gemara Berachos 2a

4An acronym alluding to the six orders of mishnayos

5Devarim 6:7

6Berachos 4a-4b

7The Gemara Berachos 3a which brings a machlokes (dispute) whether Rebbe Eliezer splits the night into three or four segments, which would result in a difference of each segment being either four hours long or three if we assume a perfect twelve hour night from sunset to sunrise.

8See Avos 2:1

9See Rashi, Rambam and Rabbeinu Yonah as well as R' Ovadiah M'Bartenura

10See Avos 4:6. The basic level of learning is one who learns to teach others.

11Rabbeinu Yonah Avos 1:1

12For example 4:5 and 4:16

13Megillas Esther 9:27

14See Sanhedrin 12b
Cover Photo Credit: http://visitingnewengland.com/blog-photo-tour/2012/01/29/what-its-like-to-drive-the-mt-washington-auto-road/

Parshas Vayikra - Proper Prayer

Thoughts on The Parsha

Parshas Vayikra

Proper Prayer

By: Daniel Listhaus

דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאָמַרְתָּ אֲלֵהֶם אָדָם כִּי יַקְרִיב מִכֶּם קָרְבָּן לַה' מִן הַבְּהֵמָה מִן הַבָּקָר וּמִן הַצֹּאן תַּקְרִיבוּ 



אֶת קָרְבַּנְכֶם

“Speak to the B'nei Yisroel and say to them: When a person from among you will bring an offering to Hashem: from the animals – from the cattle and from the flocks you shall bring your offering.”

-Vayikra 1:2

After getting used to the continuing story of the Torah starting from the beginning of time and going through the generations of Avraham, Yitzchak, Yaakov, and the shevatim in Sefer Beraishis, followed by the relaying of the Jews as slaves in Mitzrayim, their miraculous redemption, the receiving of the Torah, and the beginnings of their story of their travels through the midbar (desert) in Sefer Shemos, we leave the realm of being used to the weekly “story” portion and enter Sefer Vayikra into a world of obscure laws and difficult concepts. With this mentality, there is no doubt that we are reminded that the Torah is more than a history book and more than a book of laws, rather an instruction manual which gives us insight into the mind of Hashem, thereby teaching us how to live most productively in the world He created.

The parsha begins discussing some of the halachos (laws) regarding various karbanos (sacrifices). The passuk¹ states, “When a person from among you will bring an offering to Hashem...”. Rashi² is bothered why as to why the Torah writes “Adam” (a person) as opposed to the more conventional terminology of “ish” (a man). Rashi answers that the Torah is teaching us that just as Adam, the first man, did not bring a karbon from that which was stolen, since everything was his, so too 'you' must not bring an offering from that which was stolen.

Although this Rashi seems quite simple and logical, it is difficult to understand why it is necessary. After all, even without this Rashi, we certainly know that it is forbidden to steal and logic would dictate that if Hashem does not want us to steal, He most probably would not want us to use stolen goods to serve Him. Even if this would not be convincing enough, for perhaps one would argue that everything belongs to Hashem anyway so maybe He would be willing to accept a stolen karbon,³ the Gemara tells us otherwise. The Mishna⁴ states that one who brings a stolen lulav on Succos does not fulfill his obligation. The Gemara⁵ asks that from the fact that the Mishna does not specify which days of Succos it is referring to, it must be that it is a blanket rule for all the days of Succos. The problem with that is that the passuk (verse)⁶ states, “And you should take for yourself on the first day...”. From this passuk we learn that the Torah would forbid someone from using a stolen or borrowed lulav on the first day of Succos. After all, the Torah commands that the first day it must be yours: not one that you borrowed, and not one that you have stolen. We therefore learn that a stolen lulav is only problematic on the first day of Succos. However, the Mishna does not differentiate between the first and remaining days of Succos and yet still rules that a stolen lulav is passul (no good to use for the mitzva). What is the reason behind it being passul? Rebbe Shimon ben Yochai answers by introducing a concept called mitzva ha'ba'ah b'aveirah (a mitzva coming about through doing an aveirah). In other words, Hashem is never interested in the mitzvos which we achieve by doing aveiros (sins). The Gemara proceeds to bring the source for this concept from a passuk,⁷ which says, “...And you brought a stolen one [karbon] and a lame one, and a sick one as an offering – will I accept it from your hand?...” The Gemara learns from here that we see Hashem equates a stolen animal with a lame animal. Just as a lame animal is lame for life, so too a stolen animal cannot be 'fixed' – even if the original owner completely gives up hope on it, the thief still cannot offer it as a karbon. The Gemara then continues to say that we could understand why before the original owner completely relinquished his ownership from it that it cannot be used, because the passuk in our parsha says, “When a person from among you will bring an offering...”, where we learn that it has to be an animal that belongs to you (i.e – the person who is bringing it). However, as the Gemara asks, what reason is there that a person not be allowed to bring a stolen animal even after the original owner relinquishes all rights to it? The Gemara answers that the reason must be because of mitzva ha'ba'ah b'aveirah.

We see from this Gemara that even without Rashi's understanding of the passuk that the reason it used the word “Adam” is to teach that the karbon cannot be a stolen animal just as Adam never brought anything stolen because everything was his, it is still pretty clear in the passuk that one cannot offer a stolen karbon.⁸ So why is this Rashi necessary?

There is another halacha (law) which Rashi stresses a couple of times when it comes to karbanos, and specifically the karbon chatas (sin-offering), and that is the fact that the karbon must be brought for its own sake – with the the right intentions in mind.⁹ Why is it that the Torah hints to this numerous times and that Rashi keeps pointing them out?

If we zoom out and think about the general idea of karbanos, it is certainly a concept that is difficult to understand. After all, why are we offering physical animals to Hashem Who has no body or form and Who certainly has no need to eat? The answer is that like all the mitzvos, they are not for Hashem but rather for us to connect to Him. The way we, as humans, were created – part physical with a body, but also part spiritual with a neshama (soul) requires a physical world with means of connecting in a spiritual way. Karbanos serve as a direct telephone line to Hashem as a means of communicating to him whether it be to express thanks, guilt, or any of the other purposes the karbanos represent. When we utilize this communication system, there could be absolutely no flaws on our end or the call will be ignored. Don't steal a cookie and make a beracha (blessing) on it, don't steal an animal and offer it as a karbon. It is worthless, it is is not wanted, and it is a slap in the face, so to speak.

However, what exactly constitutes a “stolen” item? We oftentimes rationalize so many things that the definition of stealing gets a bit blurry. “I only borrowed without permission, but I would never steal”, “I know he lets me take”, and “I know he won't care as long as I pay him back” are only some of the ways we rationalize to help ourselves to things which do not belong to us. Perhaps this is precisely what Rashi is coming to teach us. There is a simple formula to test if something belongs to you and that is to see if there are any doubts. If there are excuses that need to be made, rationalizations to be thought up, or doubts that need to be explained, it is not yours. Just like by Adam ha'rishon, there were no doubts or rationalizations or excuses, because there was no one else in the picture, also when it comes to the honesty of our own things and what we help ourselves to, it must be with the same approach. We should only be calling ours and using that which no one else is in the picture of. This is the lesson Rashi is teaching here. If the Torah would have just written, “take from that which is yours” it would be insufficient because people tend to think that they have more rights to things than they really do. This is why the Torah adds in “Adam”, to teach us that the only things we should consider ours are those things which there is no doubt about.

Similarly if one tries to bring a karbon with the wrong intention, it is like dialing a number with the wrong area code, and will never arrive at the right destination. Attempting to bring a karbon which is even slightly not our own, or offering a karbon with the wrong intentions will definitely get the operator telling us, “I'm sorry but your call cannot be completed as dialed, please hang up and dial again”.

Perhaps we could suggest that this is a lesson which not only applies to karbanos and to everyday items, but even extends to tefillah (prayer). Nowadays, while we are in galus (exile) we do not merit to have access to the mizbe'ach (alter) or bring karbanos, but in their place we do have tefillah. When we daven, we have the same ability to ask Hashem for things, thank him, and apologize for what we may have done. However, when we daven we must keep in mind that the same two essential elements that are necessary by karbanos, are vital to davening as well. A tefillah is not allowed to be “stolen” or have the wrong intentions. We must pay careful attention to the way we daven. Are we davening that Hashem should help us succeed, or are we davening that our friends fail? Are we davening that Hashem help raise us up, or that he should push everyone else down so we appear higher? A stolen tefillah is when one tries to use this powerful tool as a means of communicating messages which are bad in the eyes of Hashem. We must make sure that when we are davening we are doing so as an “Adam” – that we are only asking for things which cannot bring any harm to others.

Additionally, when we daven we must be honest with ourselves as to what our intentions are. Why are we asking for such and such? Is it really for the reasons we say or are there underlying reasons and motivations driving it? Also, are we really davening for Hashem to step in and help us, or are we really saying to Him to stay out of the way?

Theses are the two important factors we could learn from these Rashis by karbanos to apply to our everyday lives and to our tefillos as well.

May Hashem help us fix our motivations and intentions in order that the communication lines be fully open for Him to accept and answer our proper prayers.

1Vayikra 1:2

2Ibid.

3See Rashi Gemara Succah 30a

4Mishnayos Succah 3:1 ; Gemara Succah 29b

5Succah 29b-30a

6Vayikra 23:40

7Malachi 1:13

8See Tosfos 30a where based on his question it is clear that indeed the limud of the Gemara that the karbon cannot be stolen is in fact from the word “me'kem” and not from “adam”.

9See for example Rashi Vayikra 4:24 and 5:9

Photo Credits: Compiled and Edited based on http://www.ahavastorah.org/davening-schedule.html and www.templeinstitute.org/illustrated/crimson_line_description.htm