ויקחו שני בני אהרן איש מחתתו, they thought that just as after the daily communal offering which was accompanied by the manifestation of G’d’s Presence as we know from Exodus 29,42 עולת תמיד לדורותיכם פתח אהל מועד לפני ה' אשר איועד לכם שמה, “the regular communal burnt offerings for your generations in the presence of the Lord, where I will manifest Myself there,” there would come the incense, so it would also be in order on this occasion to present a new incense offering honouring the manifestation of the Lord to the whole people and in honour of the heavenly fire having descended.

This is why they offered it in the sanctuary, i.e. 'לפני ה, on the golden altar. The Torah had stipulated that no foreign incense [nor other unauthorised offerings. Ed.] was to be offered on that altar (Exodus 30,9). Even assuming that the golden altar would qualify for additional incense offerings when a specific command to do so would be issued, the sons of Aaron sinned by doing this now and not having consulted with their mentors. This is why the Torah stresses

אשר לא צוה אותם, “which He had not commanded them (to do).”

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

בכתנותם אל מחוץ למחנה, they did not bother to remove their holy vestments from them seeing that these had already become ritually impure.

ראשיכם אל תפרעו, even though these dead belonged to the category of near relatives for whom even priests observe mourning rites, in this instance the law was applied in its entire severity seeing that these priests had been anointed with the holy oil of anointing. The Torah had spelled this out, writing כי שמם משחת ה' עליכם, “for you (pl) have been anointed with G’d’s holy oil.” (verse 7).

כל בית ישראל יבכו, for two outstanding righteous people had been removed from them. They would therefore not be denied the eulogies due to the deceased (Sanhedrin 46)

ולהבדיל..ולהורות. We know from Hoseah 4,11 that “wine and new wine destroy the minds of My people.” Issuing decrees, verdicts or religious rulings while intoxicated is therefore not tolerable. Solomon, in Proverbs 31,4-5 is similarly critical of such a practice writing: “wine is not for kings, O Lemuel; not for kings to drink, nor any strong drink for princes, lest they drink and forget what has been ordained.”

יביאו להניף...והיה לך ולבניך, you will not be able to claim these until after the waving has been performed. In other words, this is not a “kick back” from G’d’s “Table.”

ואת שעיר החטאת, the very he-goat which will be a permanent fixture, i.e. the one to be offered on the new moon, as long as there would be a Temple.

ואותה נתן לכם לשאת את עוון העדה, even though it had been given to you, personally, this did not mean that you are free to burn it. It was only given to you to eat, thereby לשאת את עוון העדה, to assume the burden of the guilt (sin) of the congregation.

הן היום הקריבו, a construction similar to Jeremiah 3,1 הן ישלח איש את אשתו, “if a man divorces his wife, etc.” Or, Chagai 2,12 הן ישא איש בשר קודש, “if a man is carrying sacrificial flesh…and his garment touches bread, will the latter become holy?” Aaron’s reasoning goes as follows: “if the subject matter had merely been that these sons of mine had offered mandatory sin offerings, and burnt offerings which were of a voluntary category, even though they would not constitute mandatory public offerings in the future, and we had consumed the meat of these sacrifices today being in the state of aninut pre-mourning, that we are in,

would this have been pleasing to the Lord?” Is it not an ironclad rule that the eating of sacrificial meat deliberately while in such a “hybrid” ritual state will not advance the atonement sought for? In Deuteronomy 26,14 we learn that it is forbidden to consume such sacrificial meat of offerings of the second degree of sanctity, קדשים קלים. Aaron argues that notwithstanding the fact that he was ordered to consume the remains of the minchah offering which was only a one time offering, such a rule did not apply to sacrifices which are part of the regular Temple service.

וייטב בעיניו, Moses enjoyed the reasoning Aaron presented explaining why he had acted as he did and he accepted his interpretation of the law. He complimented both him and his sons.