Vayikra 26
Parshat HaShavua
Yeshivat Har Etzion
This parasha series is dedicated
in memory of Michael Jotkowitz, z"l.
********************************************************
PARASHAT BEHAR-BECHUKOTAI
*********************************************************
Dedicated in memory of Chaim Meyer Naftali ben Sara
z"l.
May the family know no more sorrow.
*********************************************************
Vayikra
26
By Rav
Tamir Granot
Note to readers:
This shiur may be read as a continuation of the shiur on Parashat
Mishpatim.
Part 1: Parashat
Bechukotai as the Conclusion of a Covenant
Parashat
Bechukotai opens with the following general formulation:
"If
you will follow My statutes and observe My commandments, and perform
them
."
The text goes on to
warn:
"But
if you will despise My statutes and your soul abhor My judgments, such that you
will not perform all of My commandments, thereby violating My covenant
."
This is a
two-sided formulation whose general character is typical of a covenant. In
other words, following the enumeration of several commandments, there are some
verses of summary which define the reward that awaits the nation if it fulfills
the commandments - i.e., uphold the covenant - and the punishment that will
befall them if they violate it. As the second verse quoted above explicitly
states, observance of the statutes and the judgments itself represents
upholding the covenant, and the opposite is likewise true failure to observe
them represents a violation of the covenant.
Chapter
26 lists God's promises to the nation if they will uphold the covenant:
"I shall give your rains at their proper time, and the land will
give its produce
."
It also
presents a lengthy list of punishments for violation of the covenant:
"I
shall do this, too, to you: I shall appoint over you terror, consumption, and
fever
."
And the parashiyot
preceding Bechukotai are indeed crammed with statutes and commandments,
and it is these that the Torah refers to here as the substance of the covenant.
Thus, there can be no doubt that what we have here, at the beginning of Bechukotai,
is a general formulation of conclusion of the covenant. Proof of the extent to
which this form is typical of a covenant may be found in the covenant in Sefer
Devarim, where once again we find promises of reward and punishment at the
end of the covenant, as part of the conditions (chapter 28), preceded by a long
list of commandments.
But a
comparison with Sefer Devarim also serves to show what is missing in Sefer
Vayikra. In Sefer Devarim, the blessings and curses follow a
description of a covenantal ceremony that is destined to take place upon Mount
Gerizim and Mount Eval. In other words, first there is the actual ceremony of
the forging of the covenant, which is set out in the text after the chapters
containing the commandments over which the covenant is forged, and only afterwards
is there the appendix, as it were, with the blessings and curses.
The order in Sefer
Devarim, then, may be summarized as follows:
1. Declaration of the future covenant:
"Behold, I set before you this day a blessing and a curse
." (Devarim
11:26)
2. The substance of the covenant,
including chapters of commandments: "These are the statutes and the
judgments which you shall observe to perform." (12:1)
3. The covenant ceremony, including its
summary: "This day the Lord your God commands you to perform these
statutes and the judgments
" (26:16), and later; "These shall stand
to bless the nation upon Mount Gerizim
" (27:12)
4. Appendix: Reward if the covenant is
upheld; punishments for its violation: "And it shall be, if you will
diligently listen
to observe to perform all of His commandments
"
(chapter 28).
If we
compare the covenant presented in Sefer Vayikra with that described in Sefer
Devarim, we find that two elements appear in both: number 2 (the substance
of the covenant), and number 4 (the appendix of reward and punishment). The
other two elements that appear in Sefer Devarim are missing:
number 1 (the introductory declaration that what follows is a covenant), and
number 3 (the ceremony of the covenant itself). These omissions are starkly
apparent from the structure of Sefer Vayikra itself. How can the sefer
conclude with the verses of the covenant if there is no preceding announcement
of it, nor any actual event in which the covenant is forged?
Chapter
26 of Sefer Vayikra therefore appears to be wedged in the wrong place,
because it is the conclusion of a covenant that has no beginning anywhere in
the sefer.
Part 2: Problem of
the Status and Location of the Covenant in Parashat Bechukotai
Let us
try to examine the location of this covenant in chapter 26 from a more general
perspective. The beginning of Parashat Bechukotai is not, in fact, a
real introduction; it is a continuation of a speech whose beginning and end we
need to find. A quick review leads us to the verse at the beginning of chapter 25,
and to the end of chapter 26.
The beginning of the
speech reads as follows:
"God
spoke to Moshe at Mount Sinai, saying: Speak to Bnei Yisrael and say to them,
When you come to the land
then the land shall lie fallow
." This is
followed by the laws of Shemitta (the Sabbatical year) and Yovel
(the Jubilee year).
The end of the
speech, following all of the curses, reads:
"These
are the statutes and the judgments and the teachings that God set down between
Himself and Bnei Yisrael at Mount Sinai, by the hand of Moshe."
Rashi
questions why specific mention is made of Mount Sinai in this regard, while the
other commandments in Sefer Vayikra are recorded as having been
given in the Tent of Meeting. He deduces that just as these laws (concerning Shemitta
and Yovel) were given in all their details at Sinai - so were all the
others; they were merely repeated in the Tent of Meeting. But this way of
putting the question distracts our attention from a different perhaps more
important question on the verse: Why is Mount Sinai mentioned in connection
with the Tent of Meeting at all? Let us explain: our problem and Rashi's
problem is not one of location. After all, the Tent of Meeting stood at the
foot of Mount Sinai. The problem concerns chronology. As we know, God promised
Moshe, in Sefer Shemot, that if Bnei Yisrael would build a
Mishkan, He would dwell in their midst and would speak with Moshe from above
the covering of the Ark, from between the two keruvim (Shemot
25). The building of the Mishkan was completed, and as the beginning of Sefer
Vayikra indeed testifies, "God spoke to him in the Tent of Meeting,
saying
." From that point onwards, God speaks to Moshe only in the Tent of
Meeting; it is a metaphysical fact that the Divine Presence rests in the Mishkan.
The
introduction to Parashat Behar is most surprising, therefore, because
what it means is that this parasha actually preceded the commands given
in the Tent of Meeting; it was given while Moshe stood atop Mount Sinai. From a
literary perspective, the significance of this is that this parasha
actually belongs to Sefer Shemot, which records commandments given at
Sinai, rather than to Sefer Vayikra, which records commands given in the
Tent of Meeting. Why does this parasha, which by all appearances was
conveyed to Moshe long ago (some time between the first Sivan, when the Torah
was given, and the following Nissan, when the Mishkan was inaugurated), appear
here, at the end of Sefer Vayikra, as though forgotten and only now
inserted as an afterthought?
We
encountered a similar problem concerning chapters 5-6 of Sefer Vayikra,
which conclude with the following sentence:
"This
is the teaching of the burnt offering, of the meal offering, and of the sin offering
and of the guilt offering, and of the consecration offering, and of the
sacrifice of the peace offering, which God commanded Moshe at Mount Sinai, on
the day he commanded Bnei Yisrael to offer their sacrifices to the Lord, in the
wilderness of Sinai" (Vayikra 7:37-38).
Here,
too, the Torah testifies that the laws that are about to be recorded were given
to Moshe at Sinai, before God started talking to him in the Tent of Meeting.
Chronologically, these verses come first, but their literary expression comes
later. The question in each case is identical: if the unit, in terms of subject
matter and content, belongs to Sefer Vayikra and the revelation in the
Tent of Meeting, why was it uttered by God at Sinai? And if, in terms of
subject and content, it pertains to what was said at Mount Sinai, why does it
appear only in Sefer Vayikra, which records God's revelations in the
Tent of Meeting? [1]
Part 3: Connection
Between Chapter 25 (Behar) and Chapter 26 (Bechukotai)
Rashi's
question emphasizes the fact that the laws of Shemitta (chapter 25) were
given at Sinai, and he explores the significance of this fact. But, as we have
concluded above, not only the unit on Shemitta but in fact the entire
section on the covenant and particularly its blessings and curses was also
given at Sinai. In other words, what we have is an organic unit comprising two
main parts:
a. chapter 25 laws of Shemitta
and Yovel
b. chapter 26 promise of reward and
punishment for upholding the covenant.
This unit as a whole
was given at Sinai.
What is
the connection between these two parts, causing them to appear here as a single
unit?
The
answer or, at least, the beginning of an answer appears explicitly in the
verses of the curses:
(26:34)
"Then the land will enjoy its Shabbats, so long as it lies desolate and
you are in the land of your enemies; then the land will rest and enjoy its
Shabbats. So long as it lies desolate it shall rest, for not having rested
during your Shabbats while you dwelled upon it
(43) Then the land shall be
forsaken by them and shall enjoy its Shabbats while lying desolate from them,
and they will make amends for their sin, because truly because they have
despised My judgments and their soul has abhorred my statutes".
The Torah
establishes here that key to the number of years to be spent in exile i.e.,
the punishment for violating the covenant is the number of Shemitta
years during which the land did not lie fallow as it should have. In fact,
Israel's exile is presented as a process of making amends, whereby the land
receives that which is owed to it. It must lie desolate as compensation for the
years during which Israel desecrated its sanctity. This may perhaps be the
reason why the curse also mentions that "it shall be desolate for your enemies
who dwell upon it." What kind of a curse is this? Chazal explain
that this curse contains a measure of blessing, and in practical terms this is
certainly the case. But the reason for this peculiar "blessing" is
that exile is described here as a process that takes place for the sake of the
land, as if to restore it spiritual strength.
The
symbolic and inherent connection to the matter of Shemitta which is
actually not referred to as "Shemitta" but rather "the
Shabbat of the land" is clear. The Shabbat of the land is an expression
of its sanctity; the fact that it is God's land: "For the land is
Mine." The fact that we live in the land and that it is given to us is
part of the fulfillment of the covenant "For you are strangers and
residents with Me." The Jubilee year turns this metaphysical ideal into an
all-embracing legal principle: everything returns to its original place, there
is no absolute acquisition. This metaphysical and legal perception lies at the
foundation of the covenant. The land does not belong to us. It is given to us,
as part of the covenant. It may not be taken for granted. Violation of the
covenant is a reflection of the perception that the land is ours no matter
what. Exile returns everything to its natural state: the land returns to its
original Owner, and then, obviously, it rests i.e., it is not worked by any
human hand, and we live outside of it, so that we may be able to receive it as
reward for the covenant when we become worthy of it.
This
leads us to the understanding that the crux of this unit, given at
Part 4: Location of
the Unit on Shemitta and the Covenant at
In our shiur
on Parashat Mishpatim, we noted the sense of a sort of jump from Parashat
Mishpatim to Teruma. This impression arises both from the sudden
preoccupation with the Mishkan, which was never mentioned in any of the
previous parashiyot, and from the fact that the covenantal ceremony of the
giving of the Torah at Sinai lacks the usual conclusion in the form of promised
reward for those who uphold it and punishment for those who violate it.
If we
take the presentation of the covenant in Sefer Devarim as the
complete model, and compare the covenants in Shemot and Vayikra
to it, we make an interesting discovery:
Complete model in Devarim:
a. Declaration of establishment of
covenant (Re'eh)
b. Commandments substance of the
covenant
c. Ceremony of the covenant (Mount Gerizim
etc.)
d. Reward and punishment (blessing and
curse)
Model in Sefer
Shemot (Giving of the Torah)
a. Declaration "And now, if you
will diligently listen
and observe My covenant" (Shemot 19)
b. Commandments Shemot 20-23,
"And these are the judgments
"
c. Ceremony Shemot
24, "And he took the book of the covenant
"
d. Reward and punishment omitted
Model in Sefer
Vayikra (25-26)
a. Declaration omitted
b. Commandments section
on Shemitta and Yovel, and perhaps also the preceding laws
c. Ceremony omitted
d. Reward and punishment Parashat
Bechukotai
We see
that the elements of the covenant in Shemot and Vayikra actually
complement each other. Since the Torah tells us explicitly that the element of
the covenant in Vayikra came from Sinai, we need only take one further
step to conclude that in fact it is the same covenant, with a literary division
into two parts. We propose the following structure:
a. Declaration of establishment of
covenant "And now, if you will diligently listen
and observe My
covenant" (Shemot 19)
b. Commandments substance of the
covenant Shemot 20-23, "And these are the judgments
" [2].
c. Ceremony Shemot 24 "He
took the book of the covenant
"
d. Reward and punishment (blessing and
curse) Parashat Bechukotai (perhaps introduced by Parashat Behar,
including the laws of Shemitta and Yovel)
In other
words, the covenant known as the Covenant of Sinai or the Covenant of Chorev
(as, for example, in Devarim 28:69 "Aside from the covenant which
He forged with them at Chorev") includes the text in Sefer Shemot
from chapter 19 onwards, as well as chapters 25-26 of Sefer Vayikra.
Theoretically, this proposition seems logical. But is there any indication, in
the course of the description in Sefer Shemot, hinting at the
missing portion which we find later in Sefer Vayikra?
The answer would
appear to be in the affirmative:
"God
said to Moshe: Come up to Me to the mountain, and be there, and I shall give
you the tablets of stone and the Torah (teaching) and the commandments which I
have written, to instruct them" (Shemot 24:12).
The Holy
One promises Moshe that He will convey to him, on the mountain, in addition to
the tablets of stone also the "Torah and the commandments." But the
continuation of the text contains no "teaching" nor commandments;
there is only the command to build the Mishkan, which is clearly not what was
referred to. Where, then, are the promised "Torah and commandments"?
The commentators offer various explanations:
Targum
Yonatan suggests that the reference was only to the Ten Commandments, which
hint to (or represent general categories that include) all of the other
commandments.
But the
literal reading of the text clearly indicates that the "teaching and the
commandments" means more than just the Ten Commandments (as Rav Sa'adya
Gaon and Rashi point out).
The Ibn
Ezra proposes a different interpretation:
"'The
Torah' this refers to the Written Law; 'And the commandments' this refers
to the Oral Law, for all of the commandments were given to Moshe at Sinai
during the days when he stood atop the mountain."
The Ibn
Ezra adopts the view of Chazal that the reference here is general rather
than pointing to any specific list of commandments. Essentially, this
interpretation represents a declaration of faith that the entire Torah
originated at Sinai.
In his
Introduction to the Mishneh Torah, the Rambam treats this rabbinic
teaching as the source for the principle that the Oral Law was conveyed at
Sinai. But on the literal level the text gives no indication of this.
Let us
try to understand what is being referred to here by analyzing the terms
"Torah" and "commandments."
First,
let us go back to Vayikra. The first verse of the curses reads, "If
you will not listen to Me, and not perform all of these commandments, and if
you despise My statutes and your soul abhor My judgments so as not to fulfill
all My commandments, thereby violating My covenant" (26:14-15).
An
examination of these verses shows that the term "commandments" is
meant in the general sense, and is used as a generic term ("all of these
commandments") which is then defined as "My statutes" and
"My judgments."
Hence,
"My commandments" = "My statutes" + "My
judgments."
Attention
should also be paid to the fact that in many verses, the term
"commandment" or "commandments" appears alone as a general
concept, while the terms "statutes" and "judgments" appear
together, as a complementary pair of categories of commandments.
In light
of the above, let us now examine the closing verses of the curses:
"These
are the statutes and the judgments and the teachings which God set forth
between Himself and Bnei Yisrael at
Now that
we have established that "statutes and judgments" may be summarized
in a word as "commandments," we may say that the Torah is telling us
here, "These are the commandments and the teachings
." Appearing here
as a summary of the unit describing the curses, the reference is obviously also
to all of the commandments and teachings that preceded this unit i.e., the
covenant in its entirety. Now, if we compare what we are told when Moshe
ascends the mountain, in Sefer Shemot, with what we find at the end of Vayikra,
we find that the conclusion echoes the introduction:
Shemot 24
Introduction:
a. "Ascend to Me to the
mountain"
b. "And I shall give you"
c. "and the teaching"
d. "and the commandments"
Vayikra 26
Conclusion:
a. "At
b. "Which God gave"
c. "and the teachings"
d. "the statutes and the
judgments" (= the commandments)
The
conclusion that arises here is that in inviting Moshe to ascend the mountain,
God intends to teach him the laws of Shemitta and Yovel, and
perhaps even more importantly, but only afterwards the appendix of blessings
and curses. For reasons that we have not yet established, this parasha (Vayikra
25-26) does not appear in its proper place, following chapter 24 of Shemot,
as the closing section of the covenant (as we find, for example, in chapter 28
of Devarim); rather, it is postponed to the end of Sefer Vayikra.
The
metaphysical significance of the above will be treated below. Meantime, we
already understand that in fact the covenant at Sinai is a complete one,
including all its components. Part of it is recorded in Sefer Shemot,
while the end appears only at the end of Vayikra, even though it was
also part of the revelation at Sinai.
We may
now propose our answer to the question of why the conclusion of the covenant
appears only at the end of Vayikra.
The Torah
contains three major collections of commandments:
a. The list in Sefer Shemot,
given at Sinai (20-23)
b. The list in Sefer Vayikra,
given in the Tent of Meeting (18-25)
c. The list in Sefer Devarim,
given at the plains of Moav (12-26).
The rest
of the Torah consists of narratives or historical (genealogical etc.) lists,
and a large section devoted to the Mishkan and its service (end of Shemot
and beginning of Vayikra, as well as part of Bamidbar).
The first
collection of laws (in Sefer Shemot) appears (see shiur on Parashat
Mishpatim) as part of the covenant at Sinai.
The third
collection (Devarim) is part of the covenant forged on the plains of
Moav.
The
middle collection (Vayikra) does not appear to be part of either of
these two covenants. There are two covenants, but three sets of laws.
The
transfer of the conclusion of the covenant and the appendix of blessings and
curses to the end of Vayikra serves to include the second collection of
laws within the covenant of Sinai. Hence we may say that the covenant of Sinai
includes not only the commandments in the parashot of Yitro and Mishpatim,
but also the chapters of laws in Sefer Vayikra. In other words, from a
historical point of view the covenant in its entirety, including the chapters
of summary, was given to Moshe at Sinai. From a literary and legal perspective,
the transfer of the summary of the covenant to the end of Sefer Vayikra
tells us that the chapters of commandments in Vayikra are also part of
it.
Indeed,
the introduction to the chapters of commandments in chapter 18 of Vayikra
testifies that it is a sort of conclusion to the covenant in Parashat
Bechukotai:
"God
spoke to Moshe, saying: You shall not follow the behavior of the
The
characteristic formulations "observe My statutes," "perform My
judgments," and the threat throughout that the land will expel the nation,
are all typical (linguistically and thematically) of chapter 26 the curses.
In other words, the Torah includes all the lists of commandments in the second
part of Sefer Vayikra within the framework of the covenant that
concludes it. I.e., their fulfillment or heaven forefend violation is also
part of the covenant.
Part 5 Sefer
Shemot and the Missing Metaphysical Link
Our main
question, in discussing the location of the concept of the Mishkan in Sefer
Shemot, concerned the thematic jump between the parashiyot related
to the exodus from Egypt which assume God's revelation at Sinai and His
appearance from the heavens, but not that God dwells on earth and the parashiyot
concerning the Mishkan, which assume God's presence within the camp of Israel,
on earth.
I propose
that in light of our discussion thus far, chapters 25-26 of Vayikra
should be inserted immediately following chapter 24 (the covenant) of Shemot,
and prior to the command concerning the Mishkan. This leads us to the missing
metaphysical link.
Observance
of the covenant ensures that Am Yisrael will enjoy all kinds of
benefits: abundant wealth, security, and peace. But the crux of the Divine
promise, in the wake of the covenant, is to be found in the following verses:
"And
I shall set My dwelling place among you, and My soul shall not abhor you. And I
shall walk among you, and I shall be your God, and you will be My nation."
(26:11-12)
There are
two promises here:
a. That God's Presence will rest in the
midst of the nation of Israel and the land of Israel, and
b. That He will be our God (i.e., He will
lead us and be our Sovereign), and we will be His nation.
While the
second promise lies at the foundation of the Exodus from Egypt ("I shall
take you as My nation and I shall be your God" Shemot 6), the
first promise as stated has no mention in Sefer Shemot until the
sudden command to build the Mishkan. The two promises are obviously connected:
the Judge and Leader acts from within His nation; only if God dwells in our midst
can He lead us directly. This is the significance of God's declaration
following the debacle of the Golden Calf: "I shall not ascend in your
midst, for you are a stiff-necked nation lest I consume you on the way."
If God is in our midst, He leads, decides, and judges immediately. This can
certainly be to the nation's detriment, where they are sinful.
If we
pursue our assumption that these verses were given to Moshe at Sinai, prior to
the building of the Mishkan, the Torah is then conveying an explicit message:
"If
you follow My statutes and observe the covenant, I shall dwell in your
midst." The promise of the Divine Presence is not a condition for the
covenant, nor the foundation upon which the covenant is presented. Rather, it
is its result; we may also say its climax. But in terms of order, it is like
the promises of peace or livelihood: it represents not the framework of the
relationship, but rather its result. God's promise here to allow His Presence
to rest among us, assumes the fundamental principle that God is not in heaven
and He may reveal Himself from time to time in the world, but He may choose to
actually dwell upon earth: "My resting place is among you." This is
the necessary foundation for the concept of the Mishkan. The command to build
the Mishkan closes the gap between the promise of the covenant which, by its
own terms, can be fulfilled only on earth and the reality of Bnei Yisrael in
the desert, encamped at the foot of Mount Sinai. God promises that He will
dwell amongst the nation meantime, along the way, too and not only when they
reach the land of Canaan if they will build Him a Mishkan.
If we
summarize what we have said above, the following picture emerges:
Divine
service, in its most fundamental sense, does not require that God dwell amongst
the nation. The metaphysical model that is presented up until the chapters of
the covenant is that God remains in His heavenly abode, and He reveals Himself
in the world as necessary, or leads us through some emissary an angel. This
is exactly what we are told in the unit describing the earthen altar and the
unit on the angel (Shemot 20, 23).
Divine
service may be aimed heavenward; such is the religious worship of every nation.
But the Exodus also includes the idea of a covenant, meaning that God will be
our King "I am the Lord your God." In other words, while every
nation has its king, when it comes to Bnei Yisrael, "God is your
King" (as Shemuel tells the people I Shemuel 8). The moment that
the nation enters into and accepts the covenant "We shall do and we
shall hear" this represents an acceptance and invitation to God to rule
over us. Therefore, immediately after the ceremony of the covenant, God
promises that if the covenant is indeed upheld, He will be able to dwell in our
midst, on earth. Meanwhile, the nation is not able to fulfill the covenant in
its entirety, for they have not yet reached the land. Therefore God tells
Moshe, "Let them make Me a Sanctuary that I may dwell in their
midst." In other words, it is enough to enter into the covenant for God to
agree to make His Presence rest among us. Obviously, actual violation of the
covenant will lead to its cancellation. But even the cancellation of the
covenant does not necessarily mean a cancellation of any relationship at all.
God may no longer be our King in direct practice, He may lead us from afar,
through an angel. He may not rest amongst us, but we still serve Him. The
possibility of maintaining "religious relations" outside of the
framework of the covenant, when it is violated, continues to exist. Hence,
although the historical ideal is the fulfillment of the covenant and the
establishment of the Mishkan, great importance is still attached to the more
primal religious model, expressed in the verse, "In every place where I
cause My Name to be mentioned, I shall come to you and bless you."
Historically
and logically, then, the covenant with its climax "I shall set My
resting place in your midst" precedes the command to build the Mishkan
and provides its metaphysical foundation.
Notes:
[1] It should be noted that there is one other chapter in Sefer
Vayikra with the same status chapter 27, which deals with the laws of
things dedicated to God. There the question is somewhat easier to deal with,
because the very appearance of this chapter after chapter 26 i.e., after the
conclusion of the covenant tells us that it is an appendix to the Sefer,
rather than an integral part of it. See note in the summary.
[2] We must question whether Vayikra 25 was also part of the
command conveyed in Parashat Mishpatim, or whether it was conveyed
independently; see further below.
Translated by Kaeren Fish