By: Rav Alex Israel
Parshat Vayikra and Tzav IS IT A SACRIFICE? PART I - APPROACHING THE KORBANOT It is impossible to approach Sefer Vayikra seriously without confronting the topic of korbanot. Some Parsha courses / d'var Torah books manage to skirt the issue. They simply focus upon secondary topics or technical questions for all the parshiot Vayikra to Metzora but they don't attack the actual science of the korbanot themselves. My feeling is that this approach is mistaken. If the Torah took the care to explicitly list all the korbanot, they must have a message for us. Even though the notion of korbanot is, to the modern mind, a little repulsive, I think that if we are willing to open our minds just a little and not to look "down" at the system of animal offerings, we will actually find a very sophisticated system of emotions and religious expression, which can talk even to today's advanced, cultured, post-technological human being. Our aim in this (longer than usual) shiur is to begin understanding both the korbanot as a theological issue, and the parshiot that we are currently studying. ARE SACRIFICES A RELIGIOUS THING? Does God need our sacrifices? That is one of the focal questions that we frequently ask when approaching Sefer Vayikra. It is in our parshiot that the sacrifices are introduced: the details and procedures for a guilt offering, a sin offering and the like. But we often find it difficult to connect with the very idea of an animal sacrifice. Does God want us to offer up lambs and sheep in His honour? Is that what God is about? The mechanics and the metaphor of the sacrificial system are poorly understood in our times. There are a number of reasons why this is so. Firstly, a time lapse. Jews have not practiced the sacrificial rituals for over two thousand years. There is an enormous distance between our religious reality and the service of the sacrifices. After two millennia, Judaism has adapted itself to life without the Temple. Most Jews have no idea of what the Temple looked like or what went on there. Additionally, the whole idea of animal sacrifice strikes us Westerners as gross and cruel. We do not like to think about animals being slaughtered, even if we eat meat ourselves.  That it could be holy is nearly unthinkable. The sacrifices do not translate well into a twentieth century mindset. There have been those who have suggested that the institution of sacrifices harks back to a world of widespread Paganism where sacrifices were a part of every religion. Judaism had to worship their God in the customary manner, however these practices do not constitute the core of Jewish ritual.  This approach is certainly not the predominant view amongst Jewish thinkers. From the Bible to the Middle Ages to modern times, Judaism has seen the sacrifices as a positive phenomenon and the Mishna goes so far as to proclaim that “The entire world exists by virtue of ... the Temple service.” Indeed we still pray daily for the restoration of the Temple and its sacrifices. KAREV - DRAWING NEAR TO GOD Even before we begin an investigation into sacrifices themselves, it would be worthwhile to dwell for a few moments on the word for sacrifice in Hebrew. That word is “Korban”. It derives from the root K-R-V which means, an approach, a movement of coming closer. A Korban (sacrifice) then, is a means of drawing near. To whom? To what? To God. Here are the words of Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch  on this topic. “It is most regrettable that we have no word which really reproduces the idea which lies in the expression “Korban”. The unfortunate use of the term “sacrifice” implies the giving of something up that is of value to oneself for the benefit of another, or of having to do without something of value, ideas which are not only absent from the nature and idea of a Korban but are diametrically opposed to it.... KAREV means to approach, to come near, and so to get into a close relationship with somebody. This at once most positively gives the idea of the object and purpose of the process of KORBAN as the attainment of a higher sphere of life ... the (person) desires that something of himself should come closer to God, that is what his KORBAN is ...” (Commentary to 1:2) IN THE BIBLE If Korbanot are part of the mechanism for gaining greater closeness to God, then a good place to begin our investigation would be the Torah itself. In the Torah, korbanot are introduced to us as a most natural expression of the religious in man. Cain and Abel brought korbanot as an expression of their connection with God (Genesis 4:3). Noah, when he emerged from the ark spontaneously offered a Korban to God (8:18-21). The building of altars and the korbanot brought on them are standard practice for Abraham and the other Patriarchs. No command preceded these offerings. From the perspective of the Torah, the practice of animal offerings to God has been with us since the beginning of time. It is - in the mindset of the Torah - a natural expression of religious feeling, the act of a Korban is innate in man, it is a most basic religious action. To examine the issue of sacrifices from another angle, we must look into the writings of the Prophets. It has often been stated that the prophets opposed sacrifices. This is not a true representation of the message of the Prophets. What is correct is that if the Torah unreservedly relates to the bringing of korbanot as a positive act, the Prophets frequently criticize the rite of korbanot. Let us take one example: “Hear the word of the Lord, you chieftains of Sodom; Give ear to our God’s instruction, you folk of Gomorrah! ‘What need have I of your sacrifices?’ says the Lord. ‘I am sated with burnt offerings of rams, suet of fatlings, blood of bulls; And I have no delight in lambs and he-goats. You come before Me- Who asked this of you? You to trample my courtyards. Bring no more false offerings, your incense is offensive to me. New moon and Sabbaths, ... I cannot abide... When you lift up your hands, I will turn My eyes away from you; Though you pray at length, I will not listen. Your hands are stained with blood - Wash yourselves clean; purify yourselves, put away your evil doings from my sight. Cease to do evil; Learn to do good, devote yourselves to Justice; Aid the wronged, Uphold the cause of the orphan, defend the widow.” (Isaiah 1:10-17) Here, sacrifices are viewed in the a most negative light! They are rejected and resented by God. What has happened? Let us examine the passage. Isaiah talks of Sodom and Gomorrah, two cities who were destroyed by God for their inhospitality and sexual perversity. Here Israel are compared to those evil towns. Israel has become a cruel and oppressive society which has no regard for the downtrodden, the orphans and widows. But concurrently, while the evil and murder continue in the streets, the people of Israel still pray and raise their hands to God; they still bring sacrifices in the Temple. There is a disparity within the religious mindset of these people. Oppression and human suffering are not seen as God’s domain, but the Temple and the sacrificial rite are where one may please God. These people thought that a sacrifice would atone for one's actions , however evil they were. The Temple was like a spiritual laundry where one could absolve ones sins automatically. It is towards this warped philosophy that God shows his utter disdain. One cannot ignore the moral teachings of God and then expect that a sacrifice will appease God Himself. That is paganism. The Jewish God is a moral God, in every walk of life. The philosophy articulated here by Isaiah with fierce rhetoric, can be found in different forms in the writings of other prophets . Attitudes to sacrifices in the Bible range from utter revulsion to praise and adulation. Everything depends on the all-important thoughts and context in which they are offered. Sacrifices are not the feeding of animals to into the jaws of a blood-thirsty deity to keep him happy. As we have explained, korbanot are part of a system. If one is already involved in a relationship with God, a struggle of body and soul, a yearning for the spirit, a commitment to morality, then sacrifices sacrifice nothing. Rather, they assist and accelerate ones journey towards God. Korbanot are part of an intricate system of closeness to the word of God and the morality of God. Korbanot are not a replacement for morality or a substitute for correct ethical conduct. “This is one of the points in which Judaism and Paganism go in diametrically opposite directions. The Pagan brings his offering in an attempt to make the god subservient to his wishes. The Jew, with his offering, wishes to place himself in the service of God; by his offering he wishes himself subservient to the wishes of God.” (Commentary of Rabbi Hirsch to Lev. 10:1) PART II - THE SPIRITUAL CONTENT OF THE SACRIFICES 1. THE SIN OFFERING. Let us look at the Parsha of the Korbanot itself and attempt to demonstrate some of the spiritual messages that the sacrificial system teaches. Parshat Vayikra contains a straightforward listing of the details and procedures of five major types of Korban. Here is the list: I. OPTIONAL (self-motivated) KORBANOT ----------------------------------------------------- Chap 1 - OLAH : the burnt offering Chap 2 - MINCHA : a flour offering Chap 3 - SH’LAMIM : peace offering II. MANDATORY KORBANOT --------------------------------------- 4:1-5:13 - CHATAT : sin offering 5:14-5:26 - ASHAM : guilt offering We can see from the very simple division between the first and second section, that there are times when a person brings a Korban out of choice and there are other times when a person is obliged to do so. Let us begin with the second section. A person who committed an offence or a sin is allowed to bring a Korban. It is significant to note that one can never bring a Korban for a deliberate transgression. Korbanot are only an option for an unintentional sin. For example, if a person ate meat believing that it was kosher and later found out that it was pork, he would be required to bring a “sin offering” but an individual who deliberately denies Kashrut (the Jewish dietary regulations) is not given that option. This fact alone demonstrates that the sacrifice does not function as a carte blanche, allowing one to gain automatic allowance for human weakness. An individual who transgresses a law knowingly will receive his just desserts. But someone who sins through ignorance or negligence is a different story. As we shall see, the Korban aims to educate the person and jolt his consciousness. EMOTIONAL UPHEAVAL What does a Korban do to a person? What is the effect of bringing an animal to the Temple and offering it up to God? Rav Soloveitchik, in a highly forceful emotive passage, tries to explain the psychological impact of the experience: “The Torah forbade all human sacrifice. The example it uses to describe the abomination of idol-worship is "for even their sons and daughters they consume with fire on behalf of their gods” (Deut 12:31). Yet, although the Torah forbade human offerings, it did not invalidate the IDEA behind it that man sacrifice his own self - “that it is proper that (man) spill his blood and burn his flesh (cf. Nachmanides, Leviticus 1:9) - rather than just bring a bull or two pigeons ... God does not seek offerings from man, he seeks man himself. ... In a world of strict justice, the only acceptable way is for man to sacrifice himself. When man sins... he loses his most elementary right, the right to his own self. “For on the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die” (Genesis 2:17). Sin- means death. The quality of strict justice is never willing to concede... When a man brings a sacrifice after having sinned, he must imagine that it is he himself who is being offered upon the altar. When the blood of the animal is sprinkled, he must imagine that it is his own blood that is being sprinkled - that his own hot blood which in his passion drew him to sin, is being sprinkled upon the altar of his sin; that the fats which are consumed on the altar are not the animal’s, but his own fats, which congealed in his heart and gave him over to the hands of sin. Only by virtue of God’s august mercy is man redeemed from having to sacrifice himself, for it is God who arranged for a ram to take the place of Isaac. It is for this reason that it is always the Ineffable name of God (the Tetragramatton - indicating God’s attribute of mercy and forgiveness) that appears in the context of sacrifices - for the quality of divine mercy is revealed in the sacrificial rites.” (On Repentance. Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveichik pg.266-268) What Rav Soloveichik tells us is that sacrifices are not for the weak hearted. He informs us that sacrifices SHOULD be a raw, startling event. They are meant to disturb. They are designed to shake a person up and examine the very foundation of their existence on earth and their purpose on this planet. Korbanot begin a thought process of self-examination and self-scrutiny. By what right do I live? What drives the life force within me? BLOOD AND FAT It is not incidental that despite the differences between the animal Korbanot, they all share one thing; that two specific elements of the animal are brought to the altar. Some sacrifices are eaten; by the priests or the owners of the sacrifice; but still, these two essential elements of the animal will constitute the central ritual of the Korban. These elements are the blood of the animal and the fat of the animal. Why are these always the prime elements of a Korban? The blood is the life force. “For the blood is the soul” (Deut 1:23). Blood is perceived as that which drives a person forward, pumping through his veins, giving energy and life. Fat is the complete opposite. Fat slows us down. Fat is a store of energy that we carry with us, but in the meantime, it makes us more sluggish. Blood is the get up and go within us, the active, the single-minded goodness. Fat is the lazy, the compromising, the desire to be comfortable, secure. Both these primal elements of our being are dedicated to God. Interestingly enough, the section of the details of the korbanot is interrupted by a law which tells us that both of these parts of an animal are forbidden to a Jew (This week’s Parsha 7:22-27). We are forbidden to consume blood and fat even if they come from a kosher animal. The reason should be clear. These two parts of the animal represent the dialectic that is life. One must treat this capsule of what is life with due respect. OLAH AND SHELAMIM But what of the voluntary offerings? Sometimes a person is moved religiously. They wish to connect with God. They are not a sinner. They are simply a good Jew, a Jew looking for greater spirituality and meaning; Why do they have to undergo a traumatic experience? Why are they asked to go through this? In truth there are two basic models of voluntary Korban: 1. Olah - animal entirely consumed on the altar 2. Shelamim - eaten by the owners (after the blood and fat has been brought to the altar) Why are two models offered? Apparently, these two different offerings suggest two contrasting approaches (Korban) to God, two mindsets, two emotions. The OLAH is completely consumed. It is given over in its entirety to God. Olah means “raised up”, “elevation”. The Olah represents very similar emotions to those that we described regarding the sin offering, only that this offering is initiated by the giver, by the individual. To explain the concept of Olah, a historical Biblical example can be used . When Abraham is commanded to sacrifice his son (Genesis Ch. 22) he is commanded to offer Isaac as an OLAH. Later God tells him not to touch the child. Abraham, spotting a ram amidst the brush, offers up the ram in the place of his son. Does the ram replace his son? Could anything take his place? Of course not, but the ram was a symbol. It was a symbol of Abraham’s uncompromising and total commitment to God to the point where had God demanded it (He didn’t!), he would have even given to Him his own son. This strange incident represents the mindset of the OLAH. It is one of total dedication. Dedication which is motivated by the awe-inspiring grandeur and unequaled power of God. OLAH says that one wishes to devote oneself absolutely, exclusively, completely to God. SHELAMIM is from the word “shalom” - peace. It is eaten by the owners of the Korban, in Jerusalem. How can we have an offering to God which is eaten by human beings? The key to understanding the shelamim is a word which is used to describe this sacrifice throughout the Bible. It is described as “zevach” (3:1) - The “zevach shelamim”. What is the meaning of this terminology? A zevach is a feast of meat, a shared meal (See Genesis 31:44-46, I Samuel 28:24, I Kings 1:9). It is a banquet between two parties who are expressing their friendship and peace. If we can be so crude as to describe God in “human” terms, we might say that the Shelamim is a joint meal between man and God. It represents a feeling of calm and harmony between God and man - a “shelamim” - sense of peace. In this Korban we “share” a meal with God. The altar takes a part of the animal but the owners eat the other section in the shadow of God’s Temple in Jerusalem. Indeed, the shelamim was often brought to celebrate festive occasions (the “thanksgiving” offering - Korban todah- was a shelamim) and would invite friends and family to celebrate a marriage, a birth, and thank God for the goodness that he had bestowed upon them. The SHELAMIM is vastly different to the Olah. Here there is a togetherness with God, but there is no fear, no sacrifice. Instead there is overwhelming joy and gratitude. A feeling of a caring, close God. Maybe the most famous “shelamim” is the Paschal Lamb. It celebrates God’s gracious salvation of our entire nation. We celebrate as a nation, we recite the Hallel. We thank God for the kindness he has bestowed upon us. IN CONCLUSION, let us say that we have developed three models of sacrifices, or rather korbanot. I say “korbanot” for these three types, in truth, represent three prime religious emotions, three fundamental but very different approaches to God. The sin offering, with its introspection and alarming message of awakening. The Olah, brought out of personal religious initiation, suffused with awe and trembling and a feeling of absolute dedication and self-negation before God. The Shelamim, expressing harmony and thanks to God, amidst feasting and rejoicing. We have discovered that far from being a primitive pagan rite, the korbanot are aimed at highlighting key human religious emotions, often stressing the subtle nuances of our spiritual life. PART III - THE STRUCTURE AND CONTENT OF VAYIKRA/ TZAV Our Parsha (Tzav) continues the theme of the korbanot, begun last week (Vayikra), with more details and regulations concerning the sacrificial procedure. To give the Parsha some shape and meaning, we will begin by outlining the general “headings” of its content. We will demonstrate how the Parsha contains two distinct sections and we will explain the objective of each section. Our Parsha divides into two topics: I Ch. 6-7 : A delineation of the procedures for the five main types of sacrifice. II Ch. 8 : The “miluim” - the seven-day ceremonial inauguration of the tabernacle. A REPETITION? When approaching the first section of our Parsha, we need to understand why we are detailing the sacrifices for a second time. Let us explain. Last week in Parshat Vayikra, the Torah outlined in great detail, the appropriate animals, procedures, and restrictions of the five archetypes of Korban. All the legal requirements were spelled out. Now, as we read through Parshat Tzav this week, we read about those same korbanot. Why the repetition? This question lies at the root of understanding the purpose of the listing in our Parsha, for in essence, what we see here are two lists. If you pay close attention to structure, you will note that in both lists, all five classic sacrifices appear, only that the order of the five has been altered. Here are the two listings : VAYIKRA (Leviticus Ch.1-5): TZAV (Lev.Ch. 6-7) --------------- -------------- olah (burnt) olah mincha (flour) mincha shelamim (peace) chatat chatat (sin) asham asham (guilt) shelamim We need to understand two things. First, why the repetition of all five sacrifices. Even if the details are divided between Vayikra and Tzav, why could they not have been included in a single text. And second, why are the orders of the lists switched? To begin searching for an answer we turn to the HEADINGS given to each “listing”. PARSHAT VAYIKRA opens with the following introduction. “ The Lord called to Moses ... saying: ‘Speak to the Children of Israel and say to them: When any of you presents an offering to God ...’” (1:1-2) Note that the introduction addresses a particular group. Moses is talking to the people, the Children of Israel. This is in contrast to the opening line of PARSHAT TZAV. There God instructs Moses to talk to a more specific grouping: “The Lord spoke to Moses , saying ‘ Command Aaron and his children ...” (6:1) Parshat VAYIKRA talks to the person, the common individual who, motivated by religious stirrings, offers a sacrifice. Parshat TZAV is addressed to the officiaries of the Temple, Aaron and his sons, who must bring the sacrifices themselves. This is the key to understanding all the differences between the two “lists” and the two parshiot. In VAYIKRA, the ordering begins with sacrifices which are self- motivated (olah, mincha, shelamim) and then continues with obligatory sacrifices (chatat, asham). Why? Because the focus is the individual. We begin with a human motivation to come closer to God. Only after that do we move “down” to the person who is forced to bring a Korban by virtue of his sin. And in TZAV, the order is fixed differently. There we talk to the officiaries of the Temple. The first four classifications (olah, mincha, chatat, asham) are all grouped together in that they have a degree of sanctity which precludes taking the food of the sacrifice from the precincts of the Temple. They are “kodshei kodshim” - highly sanctified. But the shelamim sacrifice can be eaten by a non-priest anywhere in Jerusalem. It is “kodshim kalim” - lightly sanctified. Thus the order reflects the group being addressed. In both listings we move from higher levels to lower levels, but the lists have very different agendas. For the Israelites we talk about human motivation. For the priests we talk about what they are responsible for, degrees of sanctity, and what they will allow to leave the Temple grounds. If you check the two lists, you will discern that the details mentioned in VAYIKRA concern the procedure of the Korban as regards the person who brings it (and the acts of the priests on behalf of the owners) whereas the details in TZAV are concerned far more with matters which would fall under the jurisdiction of the priesthood. One example is that Parshat TZAV delineates the sections of each sacrifice which the priests may use for their own purposes. These details are noticeably absent in the VAYIKRA listing. TO SUMMARISE. Parshat TZAV returns to the five classifications of Korban described last week, however this time the focus is different. In Vayikra the laws of sacrifices are outlined as regards the individual Israelite. Now they are described as regards internal Temple procedures. THE MILUIM The final chapter of our Parsha gives the process whereby the Temple was dedicated. For seven days, a special order of sacrifices were offered. The priests were restricted from leaving the sanctuary for the entire seven days (8:33). This was all a lead up to the eighth day (next week’s Parsha) which was the day when “God will appear” (9:6) to the entire nation. WHY THE DETAIL? We often wonder why the Torah goes into such detailed descriptions of the sacrifices. Even if we identify fully with the korbanot and what they do for the I-Thou connection between man and God, we frequently read through all the detail wondering why the Torah could not have been more concise. This same is true for the detailed instructions of the Tab- the mishkan - which take up 12 chapters in Shemot (Exodus). Why the extensive “coverage”? Let me strengthen my question with a comparison to another fundamental area of Judaism: Shabbat. Shabbat gets only a few lines in the Torah. It never receives detailed treatment, no more than a few verses at a time are devoted to it, yet its laws are incredibly complex and massive in their scope. The Rabbis pictured the Laws of Shabbat as “a mountain suspended by a thread” (Chagiga 1:8). The “thread” is the minimal space devoted to Shabbat in the Torah. The “mountain” is the enormous volume of legal material which describes the obligations and restrictions of Shabbat. Why did the Torah choose to present Shabbat in such minimal terms and to become so verbose when talking about Temple and sacrifice? An answer that I heard from my teacher in Tanach, David Netiv, goes something like this. The Torah, despite its divine nature, was not born in a vacuum. Its messages are eternal, there are lessons for all time, but we must all agree that the written law was given over, at a particular point in history to a particular people who lived in a world with a strong, firmly established way in religious expression. At the time of the birth of Judaism, all cultures had temples and all religions were practiced through sacrifices of one type or another. This is the religious reality, the cultural background that Judaism had to contend with. Judaism arrived and introduced a revolution in many areas: the dignity of man, human freedom, ethical monotheism. Judaism introduced many new ideas. For the Jews, there were laws and regulations to follow, 613 commands which would shape the new way of life that God was introducing into the world. Certain ideas were unique to the new religion. Do not mix milk and meat, Shabbat for example. These could be mentioned in a sentence. There was no danger that any of the contemporary culture would pollute thee ideas because only the Jews were practicing them. But if God told them to build a temple, to bring sacrifices, they would have simply followed the contemporary pagan way! Instead, God had to spell it all out. To prevent possible osmosis from other cultures, the infiltration of alien ideas into the sanctum of the monotheistic mindset, the Torah had to define these spiritual tools in the most miniscule detail. A Jewish temple was to be exactly this way. Nothing was to be left to interpretation. But the Sabbath. There was no danger from the outside to that institution. Whoever Moses defined it would become its shape and form. And so, the detail in which the sacrifices are described was vital in ensuring a uniquely monotheistic, Jewish way of serving God. Shabbat Shalom _____________________ FOOTNOTES:  I have not dealt directly with the criticism of Korbanot from the direction of animal rights. I will simply comment here that most people in the civilised world eat meat, and if they do not eat meat, the vast majority wear leather shoes, clothing etc. As far as the moral argument is concerned, if we can put our culinary or clothing needs above the value of animal life, then by the same token at least, our religious demands should surely permit us to take the life of an animal!  Maimonides in his Guide to the Perplexed 3:46 . I frequently find that people grab onto the Rambam as if he were a life raft to a civilised way of thinking, as if to say: "Baruch Hashem , the Rambam did not really believe in korbanot either!" Let us remember that the Rambam himself is rather ambiguous. See Hilchot Me’ila 8:8. Maimonides in his halachik work, the Mishne Torah states, “The entire world exists by virtue of ... the Temple service" and he is talking about korbanot here. This would seem to contradict his explanation in Guide to the Perplexed. It is difficult to decipher Maimonides and to work out which view is more authoritative. Even on logical grounds, did the Rambam feel that chapters upon chapters of Torah were simply dedicated to a mistaken method of service? Even if we accept the Rambam, that animal sacrifice is not the ideal, we must still claim that God gave us a system that portrayed certain truths. We cannot suggest that the entire thing is a total sham. I frequently feel that we have this civilised veneer about us that looks to the sacrifices as some vestige of a brutal primitive world, and that somehow our avodat Hashem is more complete, more civilised and "higher". Maybe that is so, but I have two questions. 1: Does your davening have real impact? Is our connection with God so wonderful? or does modern living make much of our religious connection with God very artificial and difficult to connect with? Is our way so perfect? Would korbanot not shake us up to the very fundamentals of our being in a way that Tefilla rarely does? Question 2: Are we really so civilised that we cannot connect with blood and guts? When was the last time you saw a Schwarzenneger movie or some equivalent involving (human - not animal) torture, maiming death, blood and guts? And we pay for this and call it entertainment! Why does the human civilised culture - even in the year 2000 - engage in barbaric entertainment worthy of the Coliseum in Rome? Or maybe we are more brutish than we like to feel? Maybe we have something inside us that does "connect" to the death of an animal and blood and stuff. And is that is true, then maybe, korbanot are right on the button! Maybe.  This statement comes from the Avot 1:2.  Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch (1800-1888) was the predominant modern Orthodox Rabbi of 19th Century enlightened Germany. He was an unapologetic representative of Orthodox Judaism in the face of attacks from the critical academic world and the growing movement of Reform. His entire commentary to the Torah aims to demonstrate the intellectual and moral sophistication of the Torah, as opposed to the views of his detractors who saw it as an ancient relic of darker times. His commentary on the entire Temple ritual is especially significant in this respect and if you read his comments on the first chapter of Vayikra, it reads almost as a polemic against the “enlightened” critics of his age.  See : Samuel I 15:22, Jeremiah 7:21-23, Psalms 50:12-13, Hoseah 6:7.  See Joshua Berman. The Temple - Its symbolism and meaning. Chapter 6 and especially pg.123.
|Additional shiurim from this category can be found in:||Parshat Shavua (Tzav)|
|Uploaded:||Wednesday, March 26, 2008|