AND THIS IS THE THING THAT THOU SHALT DO UNTO THEM. To Aaron and his sons.

[TAKE.] There is no difference¹ between lekach (take)² imperativel form of the root lamed, kof, chet used in our verse. and kach (take).³ imperativel form of the root lamed, kof chet. We find the same to be true of tzak (pour out)⁴ imperativel form of the root yod, tzadi, kof. and yetzak (pour)⁵ imperativel form of the root yod, tzadi, kof. in Pour out (tzak) for the people, that they may eat (II Kings 4:41) and in And also pour (yetzak) water into it (Ezek. 24:3).

footnotes: ¹ In meaning. ² The kal ³ The usual kal ⁴ The usual kal ⁵ A lesser used kal

[ONE YOUNG BULLOCK.] The fact that Scripture notes that the par (bull) was a ben bakar (of the herd)⁶ indicates a young animal (Krinsky). indicates that the par (bull) was young. The same applies to the phrase bene yonah (turtle-doves)⁷ indicates young birds (Krinsky). (Lev. 1:14), and the phrase se’_ir izzim (a goat) (Lev. 4:23).⁸. A young goat is a se’ir izzim (Krinsky).

footnotes: ⁶ The term ben ⁷ The term bene ⁸ A mature goat is called a se’ir

[AND TWO RAMS.] An ayal (ram)⁹ (rams). Hence I.E.’s comment. is older than a keves (lamb). The fact that the drink offering for an ayal (ram) consists of a third of a hin¹⁰ and that of a keves (lamb) a quarter of a hin¹¹ proves this.¹²

footnotes: ⁹ Our verse speaks of elim ¹⁰ Num. 28:14. ¹¹ Num. 28:14. ¹² For the bigger the animal, the bigger the drink offering. See Num. 28:14.

AND UNLEAVENED…CAKES. They were thick, as wafers¹³. Rekike is connected to the word rek (empty, poor, or thin) (Krinsky). See rakkot basar (lean-fleshed) (Gen. 41:19). Thus rekike matzot (wafers unleavened) means thin unleavened bread. unleavened proves.¹⁴ are thin, the bread and cakes must be thick.

footnotes: ¹³ Hebrew, rekike ¹⁴ The wafers stand in contrast to the bread and cakes. Thus if the wafers

[WITH OIL.] Scripture reads ba-shemen (with oil).¹⁵. The reference is to the previously mentioned oil, i.e., the oil mentioned in Ex. 27:20. See note 17. The reference, in keeping with the rule,¹⁶. The rule referred to by I.E. is either the rule stated in Ex. 27:20 (Krinsky) or the rules of Hebrew referred to in note 17. It is also possible that what I.E. means by shemen zayit ka-mishpat is olive oil prepared according to the rule, that is, beaten olive oil. See Ex. 27:20 (Sarim). is to olive oil.¹⁷ beneath the bet indicates the definite article. Thus the meaning of ba-shemen is, with the oil, i.e., the earlier mentioned oil. [Of FINE WHEATEN FLOUR.] The word solet (fine flour) refers to flour made from wheat cleansed of all impurities. It is called samid in Arabic.¹⁸ It is produced in the land of the Ishmaelites. There is no better bread than bread made from it.¹⁹ Many connect the word solet to the word salita²⁰. (thou hast trodden)²¹ in Thou hast trodden light all them that err from Thy statutes (Ps. 119:118);²² and to sillah (trodden) in The Lord hath trodden All my mighty men in the midst of me (Lam. 1:15).²³ means trodden grain, that is, grain that has been broken up into pieces (Krinsky). Kimchi accepted this definition of solet. They say that makkolet (food) in food to your household (I Kings 5:25)²⁴. is similar.²⁵ is connected to salita and sillah, then where does the tav in solet come from? For both salita and sillah come from the root samekh, lamed, heh. These commentaries therefore point out that we find something similar with the word makkolet. Makkolet comes from the root kaf, lamed, heh (Meijler). However, a form tav is added to it in its normal form. The same is true of the tav in solet. See Weiser and Meijler. Others say that solet means ground.²⁶

footnotes: ¹⁵ Rather than be-shemen ¹⁶ Hebrew, ka-mishpat ¹⁷ The pattach ¹⁸ This type of flour, or bread made from it is still produced in Moslem countries. ¹⁹ Or there is no better bread than it. See note 18. ²⁰ From the root samekh, lamed, heh ²¹ This is the opinion of Jonah ibn Janach (Krinsky). ²² Translated according to I.E. ²³ Translated according to I.E. According to these commentaries the word solet ²⁴ I Kings 5:25 reads: food to his household ²⁵ The question arises: If solet ²⁶ Finely ground flour.

AND BRING THEM IN THE BASKET. You shall bring the bread, which is in the basket as the law requires,²⁷. to the door of the tent of meeting.²⁸ means: and bring them to the door of the tent of meeting. The same applies to the bullock and the rams.²⁹

footnotes: ²⁷ Namely, And thou shalt put them into one basket ²⁸ In other words, and bring them ²⁹ They too shall be brought to the door of the tent of meeting.

AND THOU SHALT TAKE THE GARMENTS. The breastplate (choshen) is called a garment³⁰ because it covers that part of the body which lies opposite the heart.

footnotes: ³⁰ Our verse includes it among the priestly garments. However, it was not really a garment. Hence I.E.’s comment.

AND THOU SHALT SET. It is also³¹ not beyond the realm of possibility that Moses placed the mitre on Aaron last.³² Scripture mentions the mitre before the girdle³³ at the opening of the Torah portion³⁴ because the mitre is more important than the girdle.³⁵

footnotes: ³¹ See note 32. ³² After placing all the other garments upon Aaron, for this is what the plain meaning of our text implies. This should be contrasted with I.E. ‘s comments on Ex. 28:4. There he wrote that Moses placed the mitre on Aaron’s head after dressing him in his tunic. I.E. was not sure what the procedure was. Hence he uses the expression, “It is also not beyond the realm of possibility.” ³³ Ex. 28:4. ³⁴ Even though the girdle was put on before the mitre, as the mitre was put on last. ³⁵ That is, according to this interpretation. Scripture mentions the mitre before the girdle, even though the girdle was put on first, because the mitre is more important.

HIS HEAD. Only on Aaron’s head,³⁶ as he was the anointed priest. Now Aaron was anointed before the mitre was placed on his head,³⁷] around and around the head, but left the middle of the head uncovered, and it was on that place that he poured the oil” (Ramban’s Commentary on the Torah, Chavel translation). for Moses poured the oil only upon the head.³⁸ We similarly read, It is like the precious oil upon the head, Coming down upon the beard; Even Aaron’s beard (Ps. 133:2).³⁹

footnotes: ³⁶ The anointing oil was poured only upon Aaron’s head. ³⁷ Even though Scripture mentions the donning of the mitre before it mentions the anointment. Nahmanides takes issue with I.E. He writes, “He wound [the mitznefet ³⁸ Not upon the mitre. Hence the oil had to be poured upon Aaron’s head before the mitre was placed upon it. ³⁹ We thus see that the oil was poured only over Aaron’s head. It was not poured upon the mitre.

AND THOU SHALT BRING HIS SONS. To the door of the tent of meeting.

AND THOU SHALT GIRD THEM WITH GIRDLES. Girdles takes in Aaron’s girdle and the girdle of his sons.⁴⁰ refers both to Aaron’s girdle and to the girdle of his sons even though their girdles differed. Similarly the breeches.⁴¹ After stating them, Scripture goes on to explain that the reference is to Aaron and his sons. It is similar to And she opened it, and saw it, even the child (Ex. 2:6).⁴²

footnotes: ⁴⁰ The term refers both to Aaron’s girdle and to that of his sons because they all wore the same type of girdle (Krinsky). Sarim is of the opinion that Aaron’s girdle differed from the girdle of his sons. According to Sarim, I.E. is explaining that the term girdles ⁴¹ Moses similarly placed breeches upon Aaron and his sons even though Scripture omits mentioning this. Nahmanides held that Moses did not put breeches on Aaron and his sons. He explains that they put on their breeches in private. Hence Scripture omits the donning of the breeches. ⁴² See I.E. on Ex. 2:6 and the notes thereto.

[AND BIND.] The word ve-chavashta (and bind) is similar to the word chovesh (healer) in I will not be a healer (Is. 3:7).⁴³

footnotes: ⁴³ Literally, a binder, that is, a binder of wounds.

AND THOU SHALT CONSECRATE. The one who translated the Torah into Aramaic⁴⁴ is of the opinion that u-milleta yad (and thou shalt consecrate)⁴⁵ is similar to u-milu yadav (so shall they consecrate it)⁴⁶ on this verse. (Ezek. 43:26).⁴⁷ as u-tekarev kurbana de-aharon ve-kurbana di-venohi (and you shall offer the sacrifice of Aaron and the sacrifice of his children). However, what shall we do with milu yedkhem ha-yom⁴⁸ (consecrate yourselves today to the Lord) (Ex. 32:29)?⁴⁹ Saadiah Gaon explains the word yad to mean obligation.⁵⁰ means: see to it that Aaron and his sons fulfill their obligation. Thus according to the Gaon, to fill the hand means to do one’s duty. Others say that the term melu’im (consecration)⁵¹ is used because it indicates that they are complete, full, and trained.⁵² the priest learned…to train his hands in the service.” However, what will they do with u-mile’u yadav (so shall they consecrate it⁵³) (Ezek. 43:26)?⁵⁴

footnotes: ⁴⁴ Onkelos. ⁴⁵ Literally, and you shall fill the hand. ⁴⁶ Literally, and they shall fill its (the altar’s) hands (Targum). See Targum Jonathan ⁴⁷ Onkelos similarly renders u-milleta yad aharon ve-yad banav ⁴⁸ Literally, fill your hands today. ⁴⁹ Ex. 32:29 speaks of killing those who worshipped the golden calf. Thus the term “fill your hand” cannot mean offer a sacrifice. ⁵⁰ According to Saadiah u-milleta yad aharon ve-yad banav ⁵¹ Literally, filled. ⁵² Thus the phrase to fill the hand means train the hand. See I.E.’s short commentary, “During the days of melu’im ⁵³ That is, the altar. ⁵⁴ According to their interpretation we should render it, so shall they train the altar. This makes no sense.

AND THOU SHALT BRING THE BULLOCK. This has already been mentioned.⁵⁵ Its meaning is as follows. When you shall bring the bullock,⁵⁶ (and thou shalt bring) is to be rendered, when thou shalt bring. Hence Scripture is not being redundant. See note 57. Aaron and his sons shall lay their hands upon it.⁵⁷ Some say that the meaning of and Aaron shall lay⁵⁸ (shall lay) is in the singular. Hence the interpretation quoted by I.E. is: Aaron alone shall first lay his hands upon the head of the bullock. His sons shall then do the same. Now with regard to the ram, Scripture later states, and Aaron and his sons shall lay their hands upon the head of the ram (v. 15). Scripture thus describes exactly what happened. They should lay their hands together, not one after the other.⁵⁹ (shall lay). Ve-samekhu is in the plural. The commentaries on I.E. differ over how to interpret this comment. Some take it to mean that I.E. indicates there was no difference in procedure between the laying of the hands upon the bullock and the laying of the hands upon the rams; in both cases Aaron and his sons put their hands upon the sacrificial animals in unison (Krinsky). Meijler is of the opinion that I.E. believes that in contrast to the laying of the hands upon the rams, Aaron first laid his hands upon the bullock and then his sons did the same. The difference of opinion revolves around how we interpret “Scripture thus describes exactly what happened.” Krinsky takes it to refer to both instances, while Meijler takes it to refer only to the second instance. For further elucidation, see Filwarg.

footnotes: ⁵⁵ In verse 3. The question thus arises, “Why repeat it?” ⁵⁶ In other words, ve-hikravta ⁵⁷ This is not mentioned in verse 3. ⁵⁸ The text literally reads: and Aaron shall lay and his sons their hands on the head of the bullock. Ve-samakh ⁵⁹ For the text reads, ve-samekhu

AND THOU SHALT KILL THE BULLOCK. Moses slaughtered the bullock.

[BEFORE THE LORD.] Scripture reads, before the Lord,⁶⁰ because the ark was in the center of the western side of the tabernacle. The incense altar was directly aligned with it. So was the altar of the burnt offerings.⁶¹

footnotes: ⁶⁰ Before the Lord seems to imply before the ark. However, the bullock was sacrificed before the altar which stood in the temple courtyard. ⁶¹ Which stood in the courtyard.

HE SHALL POUR OUT.⁶². In our text of the Pentateuch the reading is: Thou shalt pour out (tishpokh). Meijler and Krinsky believe that I.E.’s version of the Pentateuch reads yishpokh (he shall pour out). However, Weiser believes that the reading of yishpokh is due to a copyist’s error. According to Weiser, I.E. also reads tishpokh (thou shalt pour out), and I.E. commented thereupon: Yishpokh ha-kohen ha-shofekh (The priest who pours shall pour out). In other words, I.E. explained, that Thou shalt pour is not to be taken literally, for Moses was not commanded to personally pour out the blood. He was told to appoint a priest to carry out this task. Some copyist then dropped the word tishpokh from the heading and made yishpokh into a heading. Hence our reading. The priest who pours shall pour out.⁶³

footnotes: ⁶² Yishpokh ⁶³ All the remaining blood at the base of the altar. See note 63.

AND THOU SHALT TAKE. Bullock and goats do not have a fat tail (alyah).⁶⁴

footnotes: ⁶⁴ But rams do. See verse 22. Hence Scripture does not mention the fat tail here as it does when discussing the rams.

[KIDNEYS.] Some say that kelayot (kidneys) are so called because the word kelayot is related to the word kaletah (pineth) in My soul yearneth, yea even pineth for the courts of the Lord (Ps. 84:3). For the power of sexual desire is located in the kidneys.

BUT THE FLESH OF THE BULLOCK. Flesh takes in the head and the pieces of the bullock.

AND ITS DUNG.⁶⁵ 38. Also see Meijler. Logically speaking,⁶⁶ it⁶⁷ was to be washed and then it⁶⁸ is: and the place where the dung collected thou shalt burn. was to be burned.⁶⁹ (and its dung) to u-lefi. He interprets But the flesh of the bullock as follows: Flesh takes in the head and the pieces of the bullock. Now logically speaking, it was to be washed and then it was to be burned; i.e., the bullock was to be washed in the same manner that the ram (v. 17) was. See Weiser, Sarim, and Filwarg.. AND HE SHALL MAKE THEM SMOKE (ve-hiktir).⁷⁰ (and he shall make them smoke) does not appear in our verse. Weiser suggests that it has been transposed from verse 13. However, verse 13 reads ve-hiktarta (and make them smoke). Weiser explains that the original comment on verse 13 reads as follows: Ve-hiktarta (and [thou shalt] make them smoke). Commenting on this, I.E. writes: Ve-hiktir (and he shall make them smoke). That is, Moses himself was not commanded to personally place the organs on the fire; another priest would do as well. For some reason, a copyist left out the heading ve-hiktarta and the word ve-hiktir was transposed to verse 14. Meijler, on the other hand, claims that the word ve-hiktir should not be read as a heading but rather as the continuation of the previous sentence. The latter should read: Logically speaking, it was washed and then it was burned. After this, the priest smoked the enumerated organs. The reference is to the enumerated organs.⁷¹

footnotes: ⁶⁵ So Vat. Ebr. ⁶⁶ The dung was not burned. ⁶⁷ The place in the animal where the dung was collected shall be cleansed (Krinsky). For another interpretation, see note 69. ⁶⁸ Krinsky explains that the meaning of and its dung shalt thou burn ⁶⁹ Filwarg emends u-firsho ⁷⁰ The word ve-hiktir ⁷¹ The organs listed in verse 13.

[SIN-OFFERING.] A sin offering is called a chatat ⁷² because it is brought to atone for a sin. The same applies to the asham (guilt-offering).⁷³ Hence the meaning of ve-chitte’u et ha-mizbe’ach (they shall purify the altar)⁷⁴ is: they shall remove the sin from the altar.

footnotes: ⁷² A sin. ⁷³ Literally, guilt. The sacrifice is referred to as “guilt” because it is brought to atone for one’s guilt. ⁷⁴ Literally, and they shall sin the altar.

THOU SHALT ALSO TAKE THE ONE RAM. Any one of the two rams which you decide to choose.⁷⁵ (the one) is short for ha-echad me-hashenayim (one of the two). I.E. comments thus because the one ram seems to imply that Scripture has a specific ram in mind.

footnotes: ⁷⁵ In other words, the word ha-echad

AND THOU SHALT SLAY THE RAM, AND THOU SHALT TAKE ITS BLOOD AND DASH IT ROUND ABOUT AGAINST THE ALTAR. Not on the corners of the altar.⁷⁶ Look, he [Moses] shall dash all the blood round about against the altar and not upon the base of the altar.⁷⁷

footnotes: ⁷⁶ As was done with the blood of the bullock. See verse 12. ⁷⁷ As was done with the blood of the bullock. See verse 12.

AND THE RAM. Scripture does not mention that Moses was commanded to cut the bullock into pieces. It was therefore entirely burned. Hence Scripture does not mention the bullock’s legs.⁷⁸

footnotes: ⁷⁸ As it does with regard to the ram.

AND WASH.⁷⁹ By command.⁸⁰

footnotes: ⁷⁹ Literally, and thou shalt wash. ⁸⁰ Moses was to command someone to wash the ram. He did not personally have to do so, as implied by the literal meaning of the verse.

AND THOU SHALT MAKE THE WHOLE RAM SMOKE. Hence the fat tail and the fat⁸¹ are not mentioned.⁸².

footnotes: ⁸¹ Which are mentioned with regard to the second ram. See verse 22. ⁸² For they are included in the term the whole ram

AND THOU SHALT TAKE. This second ram served as the ram of consecration.⁸³

footnotes: ⁸³ See verse 31. Also see Lev. 8:22.

THEN THOU SHALT KILL…TIP. The word tenukh (tip) has no counterpart.⁸⁴. This usually indicates that the word appears nowhere else in Scripture. See I.E. on Num. 11:7. However, the word tenukh appears six times in the Book of Leviticus. Hence Krinsky interprets en lo chaver as meaning: it has no counterpart except with regard to the ear. Saadiah Gaon says that it refers to the soft tissue which is connected to the circle of the ear.⁸⁵

footnotes: ⁸⁴ Hebrew, en lo re’a ⁸⁵ The earlobe.

THE GREAT TOE. The plural of bohen (great toe) is behonot (Jud. 1:6). This is grammatically inconsistent.⁸⁶ is behanot, not behonot. Compare, goren, geranot. The singular of bahon is behonot (Weiser). This noun is thus vocalized according to two paradigms.⁸⁷ There are many such nouns.

footnotes: ⁸⁶ According to the rules of Hebrew grammar the plural of bohen ⁸⁷ The singular and plural follow different paradigms.

[AND DASH THE BLOOD.] The blood of the second ram shall be dashed⁸⁸ like the blood of the first ram.⁸⁹ The reference is only to the remaining blood.⁹⁰

footnotes: ⁸⁸ Against the altar round about. ⁸⁹ See verse 16. ⁹⁰ The blood that remains after some blood has first been placed on the tip of the right ear, the right thumb, and the great toe of Aaron and his sons.

AND THOU SHALT TAKE OF THE BLOOD THAT IS UPON THE ALTAR…AND SPRINKLE IT UPON AARON, AND UPON HIS GARMENTS. Beneath his garments⁹¹ and upon his garments.

footnotes: ⁹¹ That is, upon Aaron’s body. The blood and the anointing oil were first sprinkled upon Aaron’s body and then, when Aaron dressed, upon his garments (Krinsky).

AND THOU SHALT TAKE OF THE RAM THE FAT. The reference is to the fat that is upon the innards, as stated in the Torah portion Va-Yikra.⁹²

footnotes: ⁹² Lev. 3:3.

THE RIGHT THIGH. The thigh that is on the right side⁹³ (thigh) is feminine. Hence our verse should have read, shok ha-yeminit, rather than shok ha-yamin (the right side). Hence I.E. points out that shok ha-yamin is short for shok tzad ha-yamin (the thigh that is on the right side). Tzad is masculine. Hence the use of the masculine form yamin. and the breast were taken from the ram of consecration. From that day on, the thigh and the breast of peace offerings were to be given to Aaron and his sons.⁹⁴ However, Moses alone ate the breast of the ram of consecration because he was a high priest.⁹⁵

footnotes: ⁹³ The word shok ⁹⁴ See Lev. 7:34; 10:14,15. ⁹⁵ Moses served as high priest during the days of consecration.

AND ONE LOAF OF BREAD. The reference is to the unleavened bread (v. 2).

AND SHALT WAVE THEM. While they⁹⁶ are in the hands of Aaron and his sons.⁹⁷

footnotes: ⁹⁶ The organs and bread listed in verse 22 and 23. ⁹⁷ Moses placed his hand beneath the hands of Aaron and his sons and waved their hands along with their contents (Krinsky).

AND THOU SHALT TAKE THEM FROM THEIR HANDS. Our verse states, from their hands. Elsewhere Scripture states, from off their hands (Lev. 8:28). They mean the same thing.

A SWEET SAVOUR. The chet is doubled in nicho’ach (sweet savour).⁹⁸ is nun, vav, chet. There are two chets in nicho’ach. Hence I.E.’s comment. [A SWEET SAVOUR BEFORE THE LORD.] The one who understands the secret of man’s soul⁹⁹ will understand this.¹⁰⁰

footnotes: ⁹⁸ The root of nicho’ach ⁹⁹ Namely, that “A human being cannot speak of things above or below him without employing human terminology.” See I.E. on Gen. 1:26. ¹⁰⁰ Why the Torah must employ anthropomorphic language (Weiser).

AN OFFERING. The word issheh (offering) is an adjective. It is related to the word esh (fire). Scripture elsewhere states, from the fire (Num. 18:9).¹⁰¹ in place of the word issheh. We thus see that they are related.

footnotes: ¹⁰¹ In other words, Scripture uses the word esh

AND THOU SHALT TAKE. From Aaron’s ram. Aaron’s sons are not mentioned,¹⁰² as Aaron was the principal.

footnotes: ¹⁰² Even though the ram of sanctification was also theirs (Krinsky).

[PORTION.] The word manah means a portion.

AND THOU SHALT SANCTIFY. From this day and henceforth.¹⁰³ Waving and heaving are not identical.¹⁰⁴) and that which is heaved (huram). Hence I.E.’s comment. For what is heaved is lifted up. It is not waved.¹⁰⁵ The meaning of even their heave-offering (v. 28) is: the heave offerings which they will separate from peace offerings, shall be heaved in honor of God.¹⁰⁶. The phrase even their heave-offering unto the Lord appears to be redundant. Hence I.E.’s comment that the verse is to be understood as follows: For it is a heave offering; and it shall be a heave offering from the children of Israel of their sacrifices of peace offerings. Now these heave offerings which they will separate from their peace offerings shall be heaved in honor of God. See Krinsky and Meijler.

footnotes: ¹⁰³ So too Rashi, “Sanctify them for all time.” ¹⁰⁴ Our verse speaks of that which is waved (hunaf ¹⁰⁵ Heaving, literally lifting, refers to an up and down motion. Waving is a to and fro motion. See Rashi on verse 24. ¹⁰⁶ Verse 28 reads, for it is a heave-offering; and it shall be a heave-offering from the children of Israel of their sacrifices of peace-offerings, even their heave-offering unto the Lord

AND THE HOLY GARMENTS OF AARON SHALL BE FOR HIS SONS AFTER HIM. Shall be for his son who is anointed in his place.¹⁰⁷ means for those of his sons who are anointed in his place.

footnotes: ¹⁰⁷ In other words, for his sons

[AFTER HIM.] After his death.

SEVEN DAYS. The word yilbasham (put them on) is vocalized with a long rather than a short kamatz.¹⁰⁸. According to the rules of grammar the word should read yilbashem. Compare, yishlakhem. The word amilam (I will cut them off) in Verily, in the name of the Lord I will cut them off (Ps. 118:10) is similar.¹⁰⁹ in place of a tzere, as the word should have read amilem.

footnotes: ¹⁰⁸ A tzerah ¹⁰⁹ It too is vocalized with a kamatz

AND SEETHE. By command.¹¹⁰ It is similar to and thou shalt smite the rock (Ex. 17:6),¹¹¹ (Ex. 17:5). The commentaries believe this to be the correct reading because I.E. explicitly states that the latter was by Moses’ command. See I.E. on Ex. 17:5. and to So Solomon built the house (I Kings 6:14).¹¹²

footnotes: ¹¹⁰ Moses did not have to personally seethe the flesh of the ram of consecration. ¹¹¹ Nahmanides reads, and thy rod, wherewith thou smotest the river ¹¹² Solomon commanded the temple to be built. He obviously did not personally build it.

AND AARON AND HIS SONS SHALL EAT. The bread remaining in the basket.¹¹³

footnotes: ¹¹³ “After the rite described in verse 23 had been carried out” (Cohen). The bread that is in the basket might be taken to mean all the bread in the basket. Hence I.E.’s comment.

AND THEY SHALL EAT THOSE THINGS. The verse is abridged.¹¹⁴

footnotes: ¹¹⁴ The subject is missing. According to I.E.’s short commentary on Exodus our verse literally reads: And they shall eat those things who atoned by them. The latter is short for: And the men who atoned by them shall eat those things.

[THEM.] The word otam (them) also refers to something else.¹¹⁵ (them) in le-kadesh otam (to sanctify them) also applies to ve-zar lo yokhkal (but a stranger shall not eat). The latter is to be read as if written ve-zar lo yokhkal otam (but a stranger shall not eat them).

footnotes: ¹¹⁵ The word otam

BUT A STRANGER. Who is not of Aaron’s seed.

AND IF AUGHT. The ram of consecration is so called because they are consecrated by it.¹¹⁶

footnotes: ¹¹⁶ Literally, their hands become full by it. For the meaning of this expression, see I.E. on verse 9.

THEE. The word otakhah has an etnach¹¹⁷ beneath it.¹¹⁸ is vocalized with a kamatz rather than with a sheva, i.e., otakhah rather than otekha. Otakhah is a combination of otakh (thee) (Gen. 39:9), which is vocalized with a long kamatz beneath the tav, and otekha (thee)¹¹⁹ beneath the kaf. in for thee have I seen (Gen. 7:1).

footnotes: ¹¹⁷ A note indicating a pause. ¹¹⁸ Hence the tav ¹¹⁹ Which is vocalized with a kamatz

AND EVERY DAY SHALT THOU OFFER THE BULLOCK. Every day of the seven days of consecration.

[BESIDE THE OTHER OFFERINGS OF ATONEMENT.] Its meaning is, in addition to the two rams.¹²⁰ Scripture further states, As hath been done this day, so the Lord hath commanded to do,¹²¹ to make atonement for you (Lev. 8:34).

footnotes: ¹²⁰ Which were offered for atonement. See Nahmanides. ¹²¹ For seven days. See I.E. on Lev. 8:34.

MOST HOLY. The meaning of kodesh kodashim (most holy) is holy like any other holy object.¹²² does not indicate superholiness as most commentators assume. See I.E. on Gen. 9:25.

footnotes: ¹²² The repetition of the word kodesh

WHATSOEVER TOUCHES THE ALTAR SHALL BE HOLY. This is similar to Whatsoever shall touch the flesh thereof shall be holy (Lev. 6:20).¹²³ of the sin offering shall be holy to God; that is, only a priest may eat of it (I.E. on Lev. 6:20). Similarly, Scripture here teaches that any flesh that touches the altar shall be holy to God and only a priest may eat of it. Some say that the verse speaks only of the bread. Scripture is telling us that if the bread is not holy, that is, if the bread is unclean, then it shall not touch the altar.¹²⁴

footnotes: ¹²³ The meaning of which according to I.E. is: Whatsoever shall touch the flesh ¹²⁴ In other words, our verse may be paraphrased as: the bread that touches the altar must be in a state of purity. For another interpretation, see Sarim.

NOW THIS IS. Its meaning is: now this is the sacrifice.¹²⁵ (now this is) is short for ve-zeh ha-korban (now this is the sacrifice). Similarly, the meaning of This they shall give (Ex. 30:13) is: this amount they shall give.¹²⁶ is short for this amount. Similarly And this is that thou shalt make it ¹²⁷ (Gen. 6:15).¹²⁸ Moses shall do this¹²⁹ during the seven days of consecration. Afterwards¹³⁰ Aaron and his sons shall do likewise.

footnotes: ¹²⁵ So Meijler. In other words, ve-zeh ¹²⁶ This ¹²⁷ Translated literally. ¹²⁸ The meaning of which is: and this is the size that thou shalt make it. ¹²⁹ Offer two lambs daily on the altar. ¹³⁰ After the seven days of consecration. See Num. 28:4.

THE ONE LAMB. The heh prefixed to the word keves (lamb) also serves as a prefix to the word echad (one).¹³¹ is ungrammatical. Hence I.E.’s comment. The phrase is to be read as if written, et ha-keves ha-echad (the one lamb).¹³². There too I.E. comments that the heh prefixed to the word keves also serves as a prefix to the word echad and that the phrase is to be read as if written ha-keves ha-echad. I.E. might have been commenting from memory and confused the two sections. However, Shadal, Meijler, and Filwarg believe that I.E. had a version of the Pentateuch in which Ex. 29:39 read: et ha-keves echad. Rabbi Moses Ha-Kohen says that the meaning of et ha-keves echad is, the lamb, one lamb.¹³³ is to be read as if written twice, that is, et ha-keves, keves echad. This comment is also repeated in Num. 28:4.

footnotes: ¹³¹ Ha-keves echad ¹³² This is precisely the reading of our texts. However, the parallel reading in Num. 28:4 is ha-keves echad ¹³³ In other words, the word keves

A TENTH PART. A tenth part of an ephah.

[A HIN.] Also note that hin is an Egyptian measure.¹³⁴ are Egyptian words. See I.E. on Ex. 2:10 and 7:11.

footnotes: ¹³⁴ I.E. similarly believed that the name Moses and the word chartumim

AND. The word u-kheniskah (and according to the drink offering thereof)¹³⁵ is in the feminine. Hence it cannot refer to keves, which is masculine. refers to boker (morning).¹³⁶ (according to the meal-offering of the morning). Minchah is feminine. So Weiser. Filwarg believes that I.E. is of the opinion that boker here is feminine. Hence u-kheniskah refers to it rather than to keves.

footnotes: ¹³⁵ U-kheniskah ¹³⁶ That is, to ke-minchat ha-boker

IT SHALL BE A CONTINUAL BURNT-OFFERING THROUGHOUT YOUR GENERATIONS. They shall bring these offerings when they enter the land of Canaan. For the Israelites offered burnt offerings only for fifty days in the desert of Sinai. This is what Scripture means by It is a continual burnt-offering, which was offered in mount Sinai (Num. 28:6). The tabernacle was placed at the edge of the camp at the bottom of the mount,¹³⁷ as the tribes were intermingled.¹³⁸ On the first day of the second month¹³⁹ they began to know the number of each tribe and to make standards (Num. 1 and 2).¹⁴⁰ After they traveled a distance of a three-day journey from Mount Sinai, the ark journeyed¹⁴¹ in the midst of the camps (Num. 10:33).¹⁴² (Num. 10:33). After that, it journeyed in their midst. See I.E. on Num. 10:31. Be that as it may, I.E.’s point is that after 50 days at Sinai, the ark was no longer in the tabernacle and thus no sacrifices were offered. See Filwarg. Logically speaking, the Israelites offered burnt offerings and sacrifices only at Sinai and on Yom Kippur in the second year. This is what Scripture states regarding Aaron’s service.¹⁴³ The Torah there writes, And he [Aaron] did as the Lord commanded Moses (Lev. 16:34).¹⁴⁴ Scripture similarly states, Did ye bring unto Me sacrifices and offerings in the wilderness forty years, O house of Israel? (Amos 5:25). Israel spent about thirty-eight years in a wasteland, in a howling wilderness (Deut. 32:10). Where did they get half a hin of olive oil and a half hin of wine daily?¹⁴⁵ How could they carry almost fourteen thousand hin around with them?¹⁴⁶ Where did they get two lambs daily in the first year? Where did they get the animals for the additional sacrifices on the Sabbath and the festivals? The statement we and our cattle (Num. 20:4)¹⁴⁷ does not refute our contention, for Israel was then at Kadesh,¹⁴⁸ and they bought cattle from the settled population. Furthermore, they looted the Midianites and the lands of Sihon and Og in that year. They thus had an abundance of cattle.¹⁴⁹

footnotes: ¹³⁷ When it was first erected on the first day of Nisan (Ex. 40:17). Israel journeyed from Sinai on the 20th day of the second month (Num. 10:11,12). The tabernacle was thus at Sinai for 50 days. It was during these 50 days that Israel offered burnt offerings. ¹³⁸ The Israelites formed an amorphous mass. The only open space available for the tabernacle was at the edge of the camp. ¹³⁹ Of the second year following the Exodus. ¹⁴⁰ That is, it was only on the first day of the second month of the second year that the Israelites were organized into separate groups with their own place around standards, with the tabernacle in the center of the camp. ¹⁴¹ It is unlikely that Israel would offer sacrifices while the ark journeyed (Filwarg). ¹⁴² Of the 12 tribes of Israel. It is I.E.’s opinion that for the first three days of their journey from Sinai, the ark traveled before the camp ¹⁴³ That is, regarding the service which Aaron was to perform on Yom Kippur. ¹⁴⁴ That is, Aaron performed the Yom Kippur service. ¹⁴⁵ Necessary for the daily sacrifice. See verses 40 and 41. ¹⁴⁶ The total amount of olive oil necessary for the daily burnt offering during their sojourn in the desert of Sinai. ¹⁴⁷ Which shows that the Israelites had cattle. ¹⁴⁸ Num. 20:1. ¹⁴⁹ At that time, but not before.

[I WILL MEET.]¹⁵⁰. Scripture clearly explains the reason that the tabernacle is called the ohel mo’ed (the tent of meeting).¹⁵¹ and mo’ed come from the same root.

footnotes: ¹⁵⁰ Hebrew, ivva’ed ¹⁵¹ Ivva’ed

WITH YOU. Israel.¹⁵² (with you) is a plural. Hence I.E.’s comment. We find this to be the case when the congregation was called together.¹⁵³. So Meijler and Filwarg. According to Weiser its meaning is: Scripture uses the word ve-no’adu (shall gather themselves), which comes from the same root as mo’ed when it describes the gathering of the congregation. We thus see that the term mo’ed means gathering or meeting.

footnotes: ¹⁵² Lakhem ¹⁵³ God met with the congregation when Moses called them together by sounding trumpets. See Num. 10:3, And when they shall blow with them, all the congregation shall gather themselves unto thee at the door of the tent of meeting

TO SPEAK THERE UNTO THEE. To speak there alone to you.¹⁵⁴ (unto thee) is in the singular. Hence I.E.’s comment. However, Yefet says that the meaning of I will meet with you is: with Moses and occasionally with Aaron.¹⁵⁵ (with you). He maintains that to speak there unto thee¹⁵⁶ (unto thee) is in the singular. hints that God will continually speak there with Moses. He offers, And there I will meet with the children of Israel (v. 43) as proof.¹⁵⁷ refers to Israel, why would Scripture repeat itself in verse 43?

footnotes: ¹⁵⁴ Elekha ¹⁵⁵ Hence the use of the plural lakhem ¹⁵⁶ Hence elekha ¹⁵⁷ If lakhem

AND [THE TENT] SHALL BE SANCTIFIED BY MY GLORY. I believe that the tent of meeting was the place of meeting because it took in everything, namely, the tabernacle and all its utensils, the ark, and the three objects.¹⁵⁸ The tent will be sanctified by My glory, which will rest on the cherubim.¹⁵⁹

footnotes: ¹⁵⁸ The table of showbread, the menorah, and the incense altar. ¹⁵⁹ According to I.E., verse 43 should be paraphrased as follows: I will meet with the children of Israel in the tent of meeeting because the tent of meeting takes in the tabernacle and all of its utensils, the ark, the table of showbread, the menorah, and the incense altar. The tent of meeting shall be sanctified by My glory, which will rest on the cherubim. It should be noted that I.E.’s comment is difficult to unravel, and the various commentaries offer differing interpretations and emendations. However, the above seems to be the correct interpretation.

AND I WILL SANCTIFY THE TENT OF MEETING. It is because of the glory that the tent is holy, for it was sanctified by the glory.¹⁶⁰ The altar that stood¹⁶¹ before the opening of the tent of meeting was similarly sanctified.¹⁶²

footnotes: ¹⁶⁰ Mentioned in verse 33. ¹⁶¹ In the temple courtyard. ¹⁶² By God’s glory.

AARON ALSO AND HIS SONS WILL I SANCTIFY. I will sanctify Aaron and his sons, who minister in the tent of meeting and upon the altar.

AND I WILL DWELL. Scripture describes how God’s glory will dwell among the children of Israel when the standards will be set up.¹⁶³ Four standards were set up on the four sides.¹⁶⁴ Additionally, there was a separation between the camp of the Levites and the camp of the Israelites¹⁶⁵ because they too camped on all four sides,¹⁶⁶ There was another barrier beyond this barrier where the tent of meeting was placed amidst the children of Israel. Now a person who experienced a seminal emission did not have to leave the camp of Israel.¹⁶⁷ Neither was there a place set aside beyond the border of the camp for a person to sit down [and relieve himself].¹⁶⁸ The commandment for a person who experienced a seminal emission to leave the camp¹⁶⁹ applied only to the camp of Israel when it went to war against the enemy.¹⁷⁰ The commandment When thou goest forth in camp against thine enemies (Deut. 23:10) similarly does not speak of the entire camp of Israel, men, women, and children. It is only males, and then only a small number of them, who sally out to wage war. Now when the soldiers of Israel carried the ark with them as Phineas did,¹⁷¹ they were unable to set up a barrier between themselves and the place of the ark.¹⁷²

footnotes: ¹⁶³ In other words, our verse adverts to the time when the camp of Israel will be set up in the form of a square with the tent of meeting in its center. Hence our verse speaks of God dwelling among the children of Israel. See Num. 2-4. ¹⁶⁴ Num. 2-4. ¹⁶⁵ I.E. assumed this, as Scripture does not explicitly so state. See I.E. on Deut. 23:10. According to Meijler, I.E. considers the space between the camp of the Levites and that of the Israelites as a barrier. ¹⁶⁶ The tribe of Levi camped around the four sides of the tent of meeting. ¹⁶⁷ For there was a separation between the camp of Israel and the tent of meeting. See Deut. 23:11. ¹⁶⁸ See Deut. 13 and 14. ¹⁶⁹ Deut. 23:11. ¹⁷⁰ Deut. 23:10. ¹⁷¹ See Num. 31:6 along with I.E.’s comment. ¹⁷² Hence all who experienced emissions and all those who had to relieve themselves had to leave the camp.

AND THEY SHALL KNOW. Its meaning is, then they shall know that the only reason that I took them out of Egypt was so that they would make a sanctuary for Me that I may dwell among them. This is what Scripture means by ye shall serve God upon this mountain (Ex. 3:12).¹⁷³

footnotes: ¹⁷³ The verse refers to the tabernacle which Israel would build at the foot of Mount Sinai.