English translation — תצוה ב

A.

The portion in our sidra of the making and wearing of the priestly garments concludes with the statement¹

"And they shall be upon Aaron and upon his sons when they come into the Tent of Meeting, or when they approach the altar to minister in the holy place, that they bear not iniquity and die."

Rashi cites the word "and die" and explains: "Behold, you have learned that one who serves lacking the garments is liable to death"².

The commentators ask³

: According to Rashi, we already learned earlier⁴

"And it shall be upon Aaron to minister, and his sound shall be heard when he comes into the holy place before the Lord and when he goes out, and he shall not die": "And he shall not die — from a negative you infer a positive,

if he has them he will not be liable to death,

behold, if he enters lacking one of these garments he is liable to death at the hands of Heaven" — why must we again hear

("behold, you have learned")

the same law?

Were it not for Rashi's commentary on the second verse,

one could learn that the verse repeats it once more only in order to add to the substance of the matter,

<b>in the manner of </b>as one finds in many places,

that the Torah repeats more than once the same prohibition and warning "to transgress it with two negative commandments"⁵

and the like.

Rashi says, however, here explicitly "<b>you have learned</b>" — specifically from this

(second)

verse

one learns the law — is not understood: &lt;b&gt;Rashi himself &lt;/b&gt;already said,

that one learns this from the previous verse?

2.

The Ra”m&lt;sup&gt;6&lt;/sup&gt;

explains,

that from the previous verse one learns only regarding the six garments which are mentioned in the verses up to there&lt;sup&gt;7&lt;/sup&gt;

— breastplate, ephod, robe, tunic, turban, and sash — but not regarding the two garments

(tzitz and trousers)

which were not mentioned earlier; and the law

(that when the tzitz or trousers are missing one is liable to death),

one learns from

(the second)

verse “and they shall not bear iniquity and die”,

which stands &lt;b&gt;after &lt;/b&gt;the command regarding tzitz and trousers.

And superficially one can be precise from the variations in language in Rashi:

In the previous verse Rashi says "that if he enters lacking one of the garments &lt;b&gt;these&lt;/b&gt;",

but in this verse Rashi says "lacking garments" simply — because from the previous verse one knows

(according to Rashi)

only about "garments &lt;b&gt;these&lt;/b&gt;" — those which are mentioned earlier; but by the second verse Rashi is general "serves lacking garments",

a "lacking" of one of the garments

(all eight garments)

is liable to death.

Based on this, however, it is not understandable on the other hand: since it states in

the verse the punishment after the Torah enumerates <b>all</b> eight garments — why must there be beforehand a separate warning regarding these "garments"

(the aforementioned six garments),

which are included in the category of the eight garments⁸?

3.

Other commentators learn⁹,

that the two verses do not speak about ordinary

(about all)

priestly garments — the command in the first verse refers only to the me'il¹⁰,

about which it is discussed in that verse and in the verses before it there; the second warning "and it shall be upon Aharon and upon his sons etc. and they shall not bear iniquity and die" is only regarding the trousers about which it speaks in the preceding verse¹¹.

And that which Rashi says the phrase "one who serves lacking garments" simply,

and also earlier "if he enters lacking one of these garments",

is not his intention,

that this is derived from the two verses

(the actual derivation is from a later verse in the portion¹²

— "and you shall gird them etc. and it shall be for them a priesthood as an eternal statute",

that specifically through the garments there is effected for the kohanim the matter of the priesthood,

and as the Gemara¹³

learns from this verse that "when their garments

their priesthood is upon them,

their garments are not upon them, their priesthood is not upon them, and they are considered “strangers” and “a stranger who served [is liable to] death”),

but since it is “the truth of the matter” that one “lacking one of the garments” is liable to death, Rashi explains “according to the truth”¹⁴.

According to this, however, Rashi's commentary on the verses is entirely not understandable,

which is the plain meaning of Scripture

does not rely on what is stated in a later verse]

a)

On the later verse "And you shall gird them with sashes etc. and they shall have the priesthood," Rashi does not mention at all the aforementioned teaching of our Sages "When their garments are upon them, their priesthood is upon them etc." — Rashi explains there only "and they shall have,

the filling of hands, this is for an eternal priesthood"¹⁶,

and this is altogether a matter that is connected with the seven days of consecration¹⁷

One cannot say,

that Rashi relies <b>here </b>on the <b>later </b>verse, when there he explains it differently¹⁸.

b)

In the first explanation of Rashi mentioned above,

where he says simply "Behold, if he enters lacking one of the garments, etc.",

one could possibly learn

(with great difficulty, at any rate),

that Rashi says it "according to the truth"

(although we do <b>not </b>learn it from there)

; but in his explanation on the second verse, Rashi explicitly says "<b>Behold, you have learned </b>etc." — that it is <b>learned </b>from <b>that </b>verse.

4.

Seemingly, one could answer this in another manner,

according to another difference between the two explanations of Rashi:

In the earlier verse Rashi says the wording "הא אם <b>יכנס </b>מחוסר אחד מן הבגדים" and in the second verse Rashi says "<b>שהמשמש </b>מחוסר בגדים".

are mefarshim explain¹⁹,

that from the

first verse,

about the me'il,

where the language of the verse is "and his voice shall be heard <b>when he comes</b> into the holy [place]",

one learns the prohibition and punishment of one lacking garments only regarding <b>his entry</b> into the Sanctuary

(even when he is not performing the service there²⁰)

; and the verse "and they shall not bear sin and die",

which stands adjacent to "when they approach the altar <b>to minister</b> in the holy [place]",

comes to teach that "<b>one who serves</b> lacking garments is [liable to] death",

i.

e.

if he performs the service lacking garments.

And even though after we already know that a lack of garments is liable to death even for entry alone,

one already does not need a separate teaching for "the one who serves lacking garments"

(he is already liable to death immediately upon his entry)²¹

— the commentators explain this in several ways:

a)

that the liability to death for the entry of one lacking garments is only "when he comes to the Sanctuary",

the Tent of Meeting,

but not outside,

"when they approach the altar" — and this is added by the second verse "when they approach the altar to serve in the Sanctuary",

that there

(he is not liable for entry and approach,

but specifically —

<b>to serve</b>)

“<b>the one who serves </b>lacking garments

is liable for death”²².

b)

That which one can

(according to Rashi)

learn the punishment,

both by "yikanes" and by "meshamesh"

(as Rashi learns)

is because there are two verses — one verse

(the first)

comes to teach "if <b>yikanes</b> lacking etc.",

and the second — "<b>hamshamesh</b> lacking garments"; but if it had stood only one verse one would learn that the liability is only by "<b>hamshamesh</b> lacking garments"²³.

(But also this explanation cannot be accepted according to the way of <b>p'shat</b>,

because in the second verse both matters stand — "<b>b'vo'am</b> el ohel mo'ed o v'gishtam el hamizbe'ach <b>l'shareis</b> etc. v'lo yis'u avon va'metu".

One can indeed from this verse itself learn the liability of death on both matters: both on <b>knisah</b>

(b'vo'am el ohel mo'ed),

and also on <b>m'shamesh</b> lacking garments

(b'gishtam etc. <b>l'shareis</b>²⁴.

it is according to the simple meaning there was no entry into the Tent of Meeting

(with permission)

except for the purpose of performing the service.

And consequently,

when the verse says that one must wear the garments "when he comes into the Sanctuary,"

it means

(according to the simple meaning)

— the entering &lt;b&gt;to minister &lt;/b&gt;in the Sanctuary&lt;sup&gt;26&lt;/sup&gt;].

And nevertheless the question returns to its place: why does one need &lt;b&gt;two &lt;/b&gt;studies mentioned above?

And also: What is the reason for the change of language in the two explanations of Rashi: "&lt;b&gt;enters &lt;/b&gt;lacking one of the garments &lt;b&gt;these&lt;/b&gt;"; "&lt;b&gt;who serves &lt;/b&gt;lacking garments

(plain)

5.

One will understand this by prefacing a general difference between the two explanations of Rashi —

The language of Rashi on the second verse

(39)

is in the style of a law "behold you have learned that the ministering priest lacking garments is [liable to] death"; and his commentary on the preceding verse

(35)

is in the style of a narrative "behold if he enters lacking one of these garments".

And it can be said that in this indeed consists the difference between the two commentaries of Rashi:

The verse

(43)

"And they shall be <b>upon Aaron and upon his sons</b> etc. and they shall not bear iniquity and die <b>a statute forever for him and for his seed after him</b>",

speaks about the general law for all kohanim,

High Priest and ordinary priest,

and in all generations;

But the previous verse

(35)

where it says "And it shall be upon <b>Aaron</b> to minister",

speaks about Aaron the High Priest in particular,

from which one would not have known regarding other kohanim

(ordinary priests)²⁷.

And although the one lacking garments of the verse [in] Megillah,

does not mean only the lack of

(one of)

the four garments,

in which a High Priest and an ordinary priest are equal,

rather as Rashi explains at the beginning of the verse,

והיו על אהרן — "all these garments upon Aaron that are fitting for him",

ועל בניו "mentioned in them" — we know from this apparently the law also regarding the eight garments of Aaron the High Priest — so why is a special verse needed?

Then this is no question,

because from the previous verse one learns a special teaching and law,

as the precise language of Rashi there "אם &lt;b&gt;יכנס &lt;/b&gt;מחוסר אחד מן הבגדים &lt;b&gt;הללו&lt;/b&gt;",

as follows.

6.

According to the simple meaning of the language, one can say,

that with the words "these garments" Rashi does not mean all six garments

(Choshen, Ephod, Me'il, Mitznefes, Kesones, and Avnet)²⁸

— which are

(only)

<b>mentioned</b> earlier and at the beginning of the portion — but only the three garments²⁹

Ephod, Choshen, and Me'il,

regarding the details of whose making Moshe was <b>here</b> commanded.

In these three garments one finds in the verse a special matter — at the conclusion of the command regarding each of the three garments, the verse adds the content of their matter and function:

At the conclusion of the command regarding the making of the ephod³⁰

"And you shall place the two stones on the shoulder straps of the ephod, stones of remembrance for the children of Israel; and Aaron shall bear their names before the Lord on his two shoulders for remembrance";

At the conclusion of the command regarding the breastplate³¹

— "And Aaron shall bear the names of the children of Israel in the breastplate of judgment upon his heart when he goes into the holy place, for a memorial before the Lord continually,"

"And Aaron shall bear the judgment of the children of Israel upon his heart before the Lord continually"³²

And at the conclusion of the portion of the robe: "And it shall be upon Aaron to minister, and its sound shall be heard when he goes into the holy place before the Lord and when he comes out."

4.

5.

The matter and intention of the garments is connected only with the entry — with the very fact that Aharon <b>comes</b> before Hashem dressed in these garments, an action is effected

The "judgment of Bnei Yisrael upon his heart" by means of the choshen

(as Rashi explains the content in the aforementioned places),

and "his voice shall be heard when he comes into the holy place" regarding the me'il]

However, regarding the rest of the garments, it is not stated in the verse what their purpose is,

only after what is stated concerning all the garments in general³³

"And you shall clothe them, Aharon your brother and his sons with him, and anoint them, and fill their hand, and sanctify them, and they shall serve Me as kohanim" — that they are connected with filling of hands,

sanctification and service of the kohanim themselves — the verse continues,

that specifically then,

they can enter and perform the service,

"<b>And they shall be</b> upon Aharon and upon his sons

When they come into the Tent of Meeting or when they approach the altar to minister in the holy [place].”

D.

E.

That in themselves there is no special matter,

And their purpose is only so that the kohen can do³⁴

the service³⁵.

7.

And because of this, both studies from the verses are necessary,

and therefore the difference in Rashi on them:

Regarding all the garments, one learns that "the one who serves lacking garments is [liable] to death,"

because their essence is connected with service and use.

But "these garments,"

the three garments: ephod, breastplate, and robe,

by them the obligation of death

(from one lacking garments)

is not from the aspect of the service after this,

but from the aspect of the very entry into the Sanctuary: when at the entry one of the 3 garments is missing,

the action and service that <b>the garment</b> effects is missing,

and therefore he is liable to death.

(at the conclusion of the command regarding its making³⁶)

: "And it shall be on Aaron's forehead, and Aaron shall bear the iniquity of the holy things that the children of Israel sanctify, etc., and it shall be on his forehead always <b>for acceptance for them before the L‑rd</b>" —

That according to this his activity and work consists in the very essence of his "upon the forehead

Aaron",

and nevertheless the verse includes the obligation of death for one lacking the tzitz not with the three garments mentioned above,

but together with the general law of "one who serves lacking garments" in the second verse³⁷

is the explanation in this,

that the essence of the tzitz is not similar to the essence of the three garments,

as Rashi explains the meaning of the word "tamid" that is written by tzitz: "tamid l'ratzot lahem even if it is not on his forehead that the Kohen Gadol was not serving at that time"³⁸,

that is,

that the action of the tzitz is not connected with the entry

(and even not with its being on the forehead of Aharon),

rather this is a constant action that takes place by virtue of the essence of the tzitz³⁹].

8.

And based on this, a novelty emerges according to Rashi,

that in this law of one lacking garments, there is a difference between the two types of garments: when a Kohen Gadol enters the Heichal lacking garments,

and

(not performing any service)

he goes out⁴⁰

from

Heichal⁴¹,

is a difference whether one of the three garments is missing from him or from the other five garments:

If one of the other five garments is missing from him, there is no death penalty,

because he did not serve; but when one of the "garments <b>these</b>" is missing from him, he is "liable to death at the hands of Heaven" even when he did not serve,

etc.

(simply)

language of Rashi "If <b>he enters</b> lacking one of the garments <b>these</b>, he is liable to death."

9.

And it can be explained, the inner dimension of the Torah in Rashi:

The two matters mentioned above in connection with the High Priest —

(a)

his <b>entry</b> into the Holy,

which is connected with the <b>three</b> garments,

Choshen, Ephod, and Me'il,

and

(b)

his <b>service</b> in the Holy

( — with all eight garments)

— correspond to the two matters that are thereby accomplished among Jews:

The function of the service of the Kohen Gadol

(and similarly all kohanim)

in the Beis HaMikdash,

that he does as an agent

(or⁴²

representative — empowered)

of all of Israel,

is to connect — through his service in the Sanctuary "before Hashem" — all Jews with the Most High.

And the connection of Jews with the Most High is in two ways:

a)

how Jews connect themselves with the Above through actual work,

through their <b>work in Torah and mitzvos</b>,

and as our sages said⁴³

I was created <b>to serve </b>my Creator.

b)

how Jews,

from the perspective of their <b>essential existence</b>,

are His sons or His servants of the Above⁴⁴

(even <b>before </b>they carry out their function in the world).

the reason why Jews are compared to a "precious treasure ..

vessels of honor and precious stones that kings &lt;b&gt;treasure &lt;/b&gt;them”&lt;sup&gt;46&lt;/sup&gt;

: just as the treasures &lt;b&gt;hidden &lt;/b&gt;of the king, their essence and purpose is not to &lt;b&gt;carry out &lt;/b&gt;with them a specific function in the matters of the kingdom; their existence is only so that the king should with them amuse himself,

have from them pleasure — so too the very existence of a Jew is higher even than the purpose that through them is made a dwelling place for Him, blessed be He, in the lower realms; the Supreme One amuses Himself with Jews].

10.

And these are the two matters mentioned above in the service of the High Priest:

First comes his <b>entry</b> into the holy,

which alludes to the entry,

the coming in of all Jews

(in whose agency etc. he enters)

into the holy in a manner of "for a remembrance before the Lord".

<b>The</b> action is not connected with the <b>service</b> of the High Priest in the holy,

but the

essence of entry into the holy effects the "remembrance" of Jews as they are from the aspect of their <b>essential existence</b> His sons or His servants of the Lord

(before they carry out through their service)⁴⁷.

And only then begins the service of the High Priest,

he is "serving" in the Holy,

which is connected with the service of Jews,

"to serve his Master".

Yes.

Based on this one will understand the connection of the entry of the High Priest into the Holy to the three garments — Choshen, Ephod, and Me'il — because in these garments are alluded the Jews according to their various types and levels:

On the stones of the choshen and the ephod were engraved "the names of Bnei Yisrael",

which are the higher levels of Jews in whom one sees revealed

(and in the manner of engraving⁴⁸)

their "name" — Bnei Yisrael

"Choshen" — whose place is "upon the heart of Aharon" — the level of Jews who have completely transformed the attributes of the animal soul to holiness;

And "Ephod",

whose two stones are "upon the <b>shoulders</b> of the Ephod"

(not from before him,

upon the heart — like the Choshen)

— this alludes to the Jews who are still engaged in the service of <b>itkafya</b>,

which is the aspect of "back sides"⁵⁰],

And the Me'il is connected with the lower levels of Jews,

which pertain only to action in practice.

As discussed at length once⁵¹

In the reason that at the hem of the Me'il there were “<b>pomegranates</b>”,

Because they allude to the Jews who are on the level of “pomegranates”⁵²

— “Like a piece of pomegranate is your temple⁵³

— The empty ones among you are filled with mitzvos <b>like a pomegranate</b>”⁵⁴.

And when the Kohen Gadol enters with all types of Jews,

it becomes the “remembrance before Hashem”,

as above⁵⁵.

And on this they say "If one enters lacking <b>one</b> of these garments, he is liable for death" — in order to bring about the "remembrance before the L-rd" of the children of Israel,

one must have <b>all</b> types of Jews,

and when it is lacking

at the entry one type of Jew — the

(or — in the)

action of the entry is lacking.

Because the remembrance and unification of Jews with the Most High is not any division,

it encompasses all Jews &lt;b&gt;as one&lt;/b&gt;&lt;sup&gt;56&lt;/sup&gt;.

And consequently,

when one distributes to a Jew,

the matter is lacking.

12.

This must be a lesson for every rabbi,

guide and for every one who can have an influence in his environment:

When one meets a Jew,

in whatever state he may be,

one must first and foremost effect in him "for a remembrance",

remind him what his true existence is — he has a soul which is a "veritable part of G‑d above" and "and is drawn from His thought and wisdom, blessed be He"⁵⁷,

and consequently one brings him immediately <b>in</b>,

"enters" "before the L‑rd";

And this is accomplished through the "Kohen Gadol" of the generation — through the connection to the tzaddikim and Torah scholars,

through which it is "as if he cleaves to the Shechinah itself⁵⁸

for through attachment to Torah scholars, the nefesh, ruach, and neshamah of the common people are bound and united with their original essence and their root in the supernal wisdom"⁵⁹

— which pertains to all types of Jews.

And only afterwards does one begin to deal with him in his <b>particular</b> services and levels,

including "to make atonement for him"⁶⁰

— removing the undesirable things that have attached themselves to him,

Carefulness in turning away from evil,

addition in doing good.

And through the spiritual service of the wearing of the priestly garments, one merits to "clothe them for the future to come"⁶¹,

that "Aaron and his sons and Moses with them"⁶¹

in the Third Beis HaMikdash.

(From the talks of Shabbos Parshas Tetzaveh and Shabbos Parshas Tisa 5741)