For a change, I will not be writing this week. We present to you instead, a shiur which originally was sent by the Gush VBM (a worthwhile site for all “surfers” to know). It was written by a friend of mind who teaches at Matan in Jerusalem. It is a great article because it manages to draw out the focal details from the verbose parsha regarding the clothes of the Kohanim. At the same time, the article succeeds in talking not about detail but rather the overall thrust of the parsha as a whole.
Enjoy.
Rav Alex
PARASHAT TETZAVEH
by HaRav Chanoch Waxman
by kind permission of theYeshivat Har Etzion VIRTUAL BEIT MIDRASH (VBM)
Shortly after the beginning of this week’s parasha,
Parashat Tetzave, the Torah turns from the topic of the
structure of the mishkan, the central motif in Parashat
Teruma, to the topic of the mishkan’s staff, the priests.
Moshe is instructed (Shemot 28:1-5) regarding the
selection of the priests, the manufacture of garments
“for honor and beauty” (“le-kavod u-letiferet”), the
identity of the manufacturer and finally the specific
garments to be manufactured. Strikingly, rather than
detailing the role and function of the priests in the
mishkan, a topic that surfaces at the very beginning of
Parashat Tetzaveh (27:20-21) in a short section
describing the kindling of the menora, the Torah focuses
solely on the priests’ attire. In fact, all forty-three
verses of chapter 28 consist of a detailed description of
the garments. While outfitting the priests in honorable
and beautiful garments is clearly important in order to
enhance the status of the sanctuary and the public
perception of the priests (Ramban, 28:2), one wonders why
the Torah describes the garments in such great detail and
at such length.
The structure of chapter 28 constitutes an important
tool for sharpening our formulation of the problem. After
the brief introductory section (1-5) outlining the for
whom and by whom, what clothes and what materials, the
Torah focuses almost exclusively on a handful of garments
worn by the High Priest alone. If we follow the setumot
and petuchot, the traditional divisions of the text, the
breakdown goes as follows:
- 1-5: the introduction as described above;
- 6-12: the instructions for the ephod;
iii. 13-14: the instructions for the “mishbetzot zahav”
(gold frames) and “sharsharot zahav” (gold chains), by
whose means the “choshen” (breastplate) is to be fastened
to the shoulder pieces of the ephod (28:25);
- 15-30– the design of the “choshen mishpat”
(breastplate of judgement) and the instructions for its
attachment to the ephod;
- 31-35 – the instructions for the “me’il ha-ephod”
(robe of the ephod) and its decoration;
- 36-43– the instructions for the remainder of the
garments including: a) the “tzitz,” the plate on the High
Priest’s forehead (36-38), b) the tunic, hat and belt of
the High Priest (39), c) the tunics, hats and belts of
the standard priests, and finally d) the pants of all of
the priests and the command to dress them (40-43).
As mentioned above, the Torah concentrates almost
exclusively on the four garments that are unique to the
High Priest. Sections ii, iii, and iv, a sum total twenty-
four verses, describe the “ephod-choshen” system (see
28:28), while section v centers on the “me’il” (robe) of
the High Priest. Finally, even the last segment, section
vi, opens with a detailing of the tzitz before briefly
sketching the garments worn both by the High Priest and
by the standard priests. Therefore, rather than
investigating the general question of the significance of
the priests’ attire, we must focus on the specific
question of the meaning, function and purpose of the
garments unique to the High Priest.
II
One of the general themes discernible in the
description of the High Priest’s clothes may be glimpsed
by focusing on the last of the specific garments
mentioned, the tzitz. After commanding the inscription of
the words “Kodesh la-Shem” (Holy unto the Lord) on the
tzitz and detailing its fastening onto the forehead of
the High Priest, the Torah states (28:38),
“And Aharon shall bear (‘nasa’) the iniquity (‘avon’)
of the holy things that the Children of Israel
consecrate… and it shall win acceptance for them
before the Lord.”
While a term based upon the stems “nsa” and “avn” can
sometimes mean “bear the iniquity” in a negative sense
(see Vayikra 5:1), most often such a term carries
connotations of “carrying the sin” for another, i.e.
removing the sin and achieving forgiveness. For example,
God is described in the Thirteen Attributes of Mercy
(Shemot 34:7) as “noseh avon,” meaning “forgiving sin.”
The primary role of the tzitz appears to be atonement. By
symbolizing the process of consecration to God, the
inscription of “Holy unto the Lord” achieves atonement
for, and repairs the errors that take place during the
process of sanctification and consecration. In the
formulation of the text, this message “wins acceptance”
for the less-than-perfect people and their flawed
offerings (see Rashi, 28:38).
The motif of atonement is also apparent in the
instructions for the “ephod-choshen” system. The Torah
informs us that Aharon will carry (“ve-nasa”) the names
of the tribes of the Children of Israel, which are
inscribed on the stones set into the choshen, “le-zikaron
lifnei Hashem tamid,” “for remembrance before the Lord
continually” (28:29). Similarly, in the very next verse,
after commanding the insertion of the “urim ve-tumim”
into the choshen, the Torah states that Aharon will carry
(“ve-nasa”) the judgement of the Children of Israel
“lifnei Hashem tamid,” before the Lord continually. All
of this echoes the statement a few verses earlier
regarding the ephod (28:11-12). Aharon had been commanded
to carry (“ve-nasa”) the “avnei shoham” engraved with the
names of the tribes of Israel on the shoulder straps of
the ephod as a remembrance (zikaron) before the Lord
(lifnei Hashem). As pointed out previously, the term
“nasa” (bearing) often carries connotations of atonement.
Likewise, the conjoining of “zikaron” and “lifnei Hashem”
sounds a nearly identical note. In Bemidbar 10:9-10, God
commands the sounding of the chatzotzrot (trumpets) in
both times of war and trouble, and on holidays. In the
case of war, the purpose is to be remembered (“ve-
nizkartem”) before God (“lifnei Hashem”) and to be saved.
In the case of holidays, the purpose is to be remembered
by God (“ve-hayu le-zikaron lifnei Hashem”) and to have
the holiday offerings accepted. A “remembrance before
God” activates God’s mercy and action on behalf of the
Children of Israel.
In addition to the fact that the terminology of the
text carries connotations of God’s mercy and forgiveness
(and hence atonement), the choice of materials used to
craft the “ephod-choshen” also strengthens this
impression. The centerpiece of the choshen consists of
four rows of precious stones, twelve altogether, with the
name of one of the tribes of Israel engraved on each
individual stone. Each stone is framed in a gold setting
(17-21). Interestingly enough, in Sefer Yechezkel (28:12-
13) the prophet develops a strikingly similar image
involving nine of the twelve stones utilized in the
choshen. Yechezkel laments:
You were the seal of perfection,
Full of wisdom and flawless beauty.
You were in Eden, the garden of God;
Every precious stone was your adornment:
Carnelian, chrysolite, and amethyst;
Beryl, lapis lazuli, and jasper;
Sapphire, turquoise, and emerald;
And gold beauwrought for you.
Yechezkel informs the sinner that once he had been
the perfect work of a divine craftsman. Once he had been
adorned with precious stones and gold. Once he had been
in Eden. Once he had existed in a pure state before
having sinned.
Sefer Bereishit (2:11) confirms the linkage of the
central materials of the ephod-choshen to Eden. One of
the four rivers that emerge from Eden, “Pishon,” leads to
the land of “Chavila,” the place of gold and shoham
stones. These are some of the exact materials collected
for and utilized in the construction of tephod-choshen in
Sefer Shemot (Shemot 25:7, 28:6,9-11,13-27). Apparently,
the engraving of the names of the tribes of Israel on the
precious stones of Eden (28:9-11,17-21) and their framing
in a golden setting (28:11,13-14,20, 22,24) constitutes a
symbolic reenactment of an Eden-like state – a state
where man was still the perfect work of the divine
Craftsman; a time when man deserved adornment with jewels
and gold; a pure state when man had not yet sinned. By
carrying the names of the tribes of Israel before God
adorned with the setting of Eden, the High Priest finds
favor for Israel in the eyes of God and achieves mercy
and atonement.
While the text explicitly states which sins the
tzitz atones for (28:38), the Torah makes no such
explicit declaration in the case of the ephod-choshen.
What, then, does the ephod-choshen atone for? The key may
lie in the phrase “choshen mishpat,” the proper name of
the choshen. Normally, this term is translated as
“breastplate of judgement,” a translation reached by
following the standard meaning of “mishpat.” Perhaps
atonement is necessary for the Children of Israel’s
errors in keeping the “mishpatim,” the judgements
commanded by God in Parashat Mishpatim (see Shemot 21:1).
Alternatively, perhaps atonement is necessary for
errors in justice, the process of mishpat, whereby
divinely ordained norms are applied to human reality.
Yitro had already advised Moshe that the process of
justice was too heavy for him to bear alone and that he
required others to help him carry (“ve-nasu”) the burden
of teaching and applying the laws of God (Shemot 18:14-
16,22-23). In fact, Yitro apprehended only part of the
problem. The burden of properly applying the laws of God
is too heavy for any human or group of humans. The very
act of mishpat, teaching and applying the transcendent
Torah to mundane human reality, is inevitably fraught
with difficulty and error and requires atonement. Aharon
therefore carries this burden of “mishpat” and achieves
divine favor and atonement (see Rashi, 28:15).
In contrast to the standard translation of
“judgement” and the resulting translation of “breastplate
of judgement,” the term “mishpat” can also be interpreted
as “decision,” yielding a translation of “breastplate of
decision.” As Rashbam points out (28:15), the sections
that describe the ephod-choshen system close with the
command to insert the urim ve-tumim into the choshen. The
mysterious urim ve-tumim constitute a type of oracle,
some sort of decision-making device (see Rashi, Ibn Ezra
and I Shemuel 28:5-7). The first conversation between God
and Moshe concerning Moshe’s death and the impending
transfer of leadership testifies to this interpretation.
God informs Moshe that national decisions will be made in
a slightly different fashion after Moshe’s death.
Yehoshua will lead with the assistance of Elazar the High
Priest and will consult the “mishpat ha-urim lifnei
Hashem,” “the decision of the urim before the Lord”
(Bemidbar 27:21). By this means, through the intermediary
of the High Priest and urim ve-tumim, decisions will be
made about war and other matters of national importance.
On this interpretation, the “breastplate of
decision” of the ephod-choshen system constitutes the
point of interaction between God and Israel on matters of
national importance and survival. When the High Priest
and leader request guidance from God, it is attempted in
a context that displays the names of the tribes
prominently, that sets them in Eden and adorns them with
the purity of Eden. The ephod-choshen attempts to arouse
the mercy of God, and to achieve atonement for Israel in
preparation for receiving guidance from God.
The theme of atonement surfaces not only in the
specific passages that describe the tzitz and ephod-
choshen but also in the interaction and joint symbolism
of the three pieces of apparel. Rashbam (28:36) claims
that the tzitz and its inscription of “Holy unto the
Lord” achieve atonement by virtue of their relation to
the engraving of the names of the tribes of Israel at
other points on the High Priest’s body. This requires
some explication.
As mentioned previously, the names of the tribes of
Israel are engraved on the stones of the choshen, to be
located at the High Priest’s heart (28:29). The choshen
is then fastened tightly to the “kitfei ha-ephod”
(shoulder straps of the ephod) by means of golden rings
and chains (28:22-28). These shoulder straps once again
carry the names of the tribes of Israel, engraved on the
shoham-stones located at the top of the straps, on
Aharon’s shoulders (28:9-12). The final engraving occurs
near the highest point on the body of the High Priest,
his forehead. Here God commands Moshe to engrave not the
names of Israel, but the formula of “Holy unto the Lord.”
This inscription constitutes the peak of a pyramid that
begins at the heart of the High Priest. The names of the
tribes of Israel merge upwards into the declaration of
“Holy unto the Lord,” thereby elevating, sanctifying and
consecrating the tribes of Israel to God. By virtue of
this elevation, the High Priest achieves atonement for
the Children of Israel. In sum, when the High Priest dons
his garments and serves before God, he transforms his
very body into a device for achieving sanctification and
atonement for the Children of Israel.
III
The interpretation of the High Priest’s clothes
propounded until this point, i.e. that they are a device
for achieving atonement, should go a long way to
explaining the length and detail the Torah devotes to
their design. Atonement constitutes one of the central
purposes of the mishkan and the High Priest (see Vayikra
16:15-18). In addition, this interpretation fits well
with the structure of the middle portion of the book of
Shemot.
From the beginning of chapter 25 through the end of
chapter 30, the Torah relates the command to build the
mishkan, detailing its design and listing the necessary
materials and personnel. The order runs as follows:
- 25:1-9 – the command to construct the mishkan and to
collect materials;
- 25:10-22 – the ark;
iii. 25:23-30 – the table;
- 25:31-40 – the menora;
- 26:1-30 – the curtains and pillars of the mishkan;
- 26:31-37 – the inner curtain;
vii. 27:1-8 – the altar;
viii. 27:9-19 – the external courtyard and its
curtains and pillars;
- 27:20-21 – the command to collect olive oil and
kindle the menora;
- 28:1-43 – the command to designate priests, and
details of the manufacture of their clothes;
- 29:1-37 – the induction ceremony for the priests and
the first operation of the mishkan;
xii. 29:38-46 – the command of daily sacrifices and the
description of God’s meeting with Israel at the mishkan;
xiii. 30:1-10 – the golden incense altar;
xiv. 30:11-15 – the collection of money for the
maintenance of the mishkan;
- 30:17-21 – the lather utilized by the priests when
they enter the sanctuary;
xvi. 30:22-33 – the command to manufacture “anointing
oil” to sanctify the priests and vessels;
xvii. 30:34-38 – the command to manufacture the
incense.
At first glance, the order of the parshiot appears
strange. Sections i through viii, the corpus of Parashat
Teruma, concern themselves with the physical structure of
the mishkan and its vessels. Sections ix and on seem to
represent a change in theme. From this point on, the
priests and matters related to the priests constitute the
central motif. However, this presents many difficulties.
For example, why is the kindling of the menora mentioned
first before the selection of the priests? Why are the
“golden incense altar” and the “lather” (sections xiii
and xv respectively) mentioned in the segment pertaining
to priests as opposed to in the segment delineating the
vessels of the mishkan, Parashat Teruma?
In fact, the turn at the beginning of Parashat
Tetzaveh, delineated as section ix above, should be
viewed not as a switch to the general topic of priests
and matters related to the priests, but as a move from
structure to operation. Sections ix through xvii begin to
outline the critical operations of the mishkan and the
materials and objects necessary for those operations.
Consequently, the segment opens with the daily kindling
of the menora, a critical daily operation. This theory
also the placement of the sections detailing the lather
and golden incense altar. Their primary purpose is to
play a role in certain daily operations the priests
perform in the mishkan (30:7-8 and 30:19-21), not to
constitute part of the physical structure of the mishkan,
the tabernacle and house of God. Consequently, they are
mentioned in the operations section, rather than in
Parashat Teruma.
This brings us full circle to the garments of the
High Priest. Just as the kindling of the menora
constitutes a crucial operation of the mishkan, so too,
atonement constitutes a crucial operation of the mishkan.
In fact, the very first vessel mentioned in Parashat
Teruma, the ark, is covered by the “kaporet,” the place
where the High Priest sprinkles blood in order to atone
(“le-khaper”) for the sins of the nation (Vayikra 16:14-
17). In a similar vein, the operations section (Parashat
Tetzaveh and on) dwells extensively on the garments of
the High Priest, clothes that are critical for the daily
kapara operation of the mishkan.
IV
Let us turn our attention to another aspect of the
High Priest’s garments. Like the theme of atonement, it
is intertwined with the multiple inscriptions present in
the High Priest’s apparel. If we follow the chronological
order of the text, the first of these is the engraving of
the names of the tribes of Israel on the avnei shoham
that Aharon carries on his shoulders (“al shtei ketefav,”
28:11-12). The second is the engraving of the names of
each tribe on the stones of the choshen. Aharon carries
these on his heart (“al libo,” 28:29). The third
inscription is the formula of “Holy unto the Lord,”
engraved on the tzitz, which Aharon bears on his upper
forehead right beneath his hat (28:37-38). One wonders:
what is the significance of these particular locations?
In fact, one of these locations constitutes a place
where matters of great importance are kept. In Sefer
Bemidbar, when Moshe divides the oxen and wagons donated
by the princes amongst the Levites for the purpose of
transporting the mishkan, Moshe refrains from
distributing to the Levites descended from Kehat. The
text explains (Bemidbar 7:9):
“To the sons of Kehat he gave none, because the work
of the sanctuary (‘kodesh’) belonged to them, they
bore it on their shoulders (‘ba-katef yisa’u’).”
The sons of Kehat were charged with transporting the
holiest components of the mishkan, the actual vessels of
the sanctuary. Consequently, in accord with the honor and
sanctity of the objects, they were required to carry them
personally, on their shoulders, rather than by means of
beasts of burden. This sheds new light on the Torah’s
demand that the High Priest carry the names of the tribes
of Israel on his shoulders (28:12). Apparently, the names
of the tribes of Israel constitute objects that are holy
to the High Priest. Consequently, he bears them upon his
shoulders.
The places of heart and head also appear in another
context in the Torah. Earlier on in Sefer Shemot, when
commanding the people to forever remember the day that
God redeemed them from Egypt, Moshe informs them that,
“It shall be for a sign upon your hand and a remembrance
(‘zikaron’) between your eyes… with a strong hand God
brought you out of Egypt” (13:9). This, of course, is the
command of tefillin. The people are commanded to place
certain texts, in this case one relating to the
redemption from Egypt, on their hand (traditionally
understood as the upper arm near the heart) and between
their eyes (traditionally understood as the area of the
upper forehead). Strikingly, the choshen and tzitz also
involve writing placed adjacent to the heart and head.
Furthermore, just as tefillin are termed a “zikaron,” a
remembrance, so too the Torah repeatedly utilizes the
term “zikaron” to describe the functioning of the
garments of the High Priest. What is the meaning of the
parallel of the choshen and tzitz to tefillin?
Tefillin serve to remind the wearer of the contents
of the texts he is wearing: he must know in both his
heart and head that God redeemed him from Egypt.
Apparently, the choshen and tzitz function in a similar
manner. Placing the names of Israel and the formula of
“Holy unto the Lord” on the heart and head of the High
Priest serve to remind him of his dedication to Israel
and to God. The priest carries consciousness of Israel in
his heart and of God in his head.
In sum, we can discern a second theme present in the
Torah’s description of the High Priest’s garments. They
function reflexively. The “zikaron” means not only to
remind God of Israel, but also to remind the High Priest
himself of Israel and of God. Israel must be holy to the
High Priest and hence he carries them upon his shoulders.
Israel must be located in the heart of the High Priest
and hence he carries them upon his heart. The High Priest
must remember his dedication to God and his function as a
means to dedicate and elevate Israel to God and to
facilitate the God-Israel relation. Hence, he carries the
statement “Holy unto the Lord” upon his head.
V
The two themes implicit in the High Priest’s clothes
presented above – the motif of atonement for Israel on
the one hand, and the reflexive definition of the role of
the priest on the other – provide an interesting
perspective on the development of the institution of
priesthood in the Torah. The Torah first mentions
priesthood in the narrative describing the revelation at
Sinai. God commands Moshe to descend the mountain and
warn the people and “the priests who come near the Lord”
(“ha-kohanim ha-nigashim el Hashem”) to keep their
distance (19:22). Who are this spiritual elite, these
priests who come near the Lord? Apparently, the group
consists of others besides Aharon and his sons (see
Rashi, Ibn Ezra, Ramban). In this light, the command to
designate Aharon and his sons as priests (28:1)
constitutes not just an act of enfranchising a select
group, but also a delegitimization and disenfranchisement
of a larger group, “the priests who come near the Lord.”
One wonders what constitutes the distinction between the
priesthood of “those who come near the Lord,” the pre-
Sinai institution of priesthood, and Aharon and his
children, the post-Sinai institution of priesthood?
Perhaps the Torah’s lengthy discourse on fashion,
and the symbolism of the clothes, provides the key.
Previously, priesthood had consisted of a spiritual
class, those who strove to come close to holiness for no
other purpose than the natural tendency to
search out God and to attempt to serve Him and cling to
Him. The text terms this “the priests who come near the
Lord” (19:22). However, in the context of mishkan and
post-Sinai priesthood, the universal religious quest is
not the sole focus or purpose of priesthood, and perhaps
is not a purpose or focus of priesthood at all. The
garments of the High Priest define the function of
priesthood. The clothes make the man. The priest serves
not for himself, not as part of his own religious quest,
but as a bridge between God and Israel. As his garments
indicate, he serves to elevate Israel and to atone for
their sins, to repair and maintain the God-Israel
relation.
QUESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY
1) While dealing extensively with three of the four
garments unique to the High Priest (the ephod, choshen
and tzitz), the above shiur neglects to deal with the
fourth garment of the High Priest, the me’il. Look at
Shemot 28:31-35 and the comments of Rashbam. How can the
me’il be explained according to each of the
interpretations presented in this shiur?
2) The Talmud (Zevachim 88b) states that the placement of
the section detailing the garments of the priests
(chapter 28) near the section of the Torah commanding
sacrifices (chapter 29) teaches us that, “Just as
sacrifices atone, so too the priest’s garments atone.” As
part of its correlation of the various garments with
various sins, the Talmud states that the tzitz atones for
“azut panim,” arrogance or brazenness. Relate both the
general and specific claims of the Talmud to the themes
developed in this shiur.
3) See Vayikra 10:1, regarding the sin and death of Nadav
and Avihu. As background, read at least 9:7, 9:15 9:23-
- How do the themes developed in the above shiur shed
new light on the error of Nadav and Avihu?
4) Most commentaries (Rashi, Ibn Ezra, Ramban, etc.)
assume that the firstborn constitute the class of priests
mentioned at Har Sinai who are replaced by Aharon and his
sons. Some commentaries connect this to the events of the
sin of the golden calf. See Shemot 32:4-6 and the
comments of Ramban. How different is the theory of the
commentaries from the theory presented in this shiur?
