Parshat Tzav: Action Versus Object In The Performance of Mitzvot

BY: Michelle Siegel


This week’s parsha, parshat Tzav, goes through many topics relating to korbanot, including the fires of the altar and details pertaining to the giving of the meal offering (mincha), the sin offering (chatat), the guilt offering (asham), and the thanksgiving offering (todah). It also discusses certain rejected offerings, forbids eating from the fat of korbanot, and orders the parts. Lastly, it discusses the consecration of the kohanim.

The parshiot that pertain to this kind of Temple service have a reputation of being hard to interpret and draw meaning from. Some contemporary commentators posit that current generations have no affiliation with these practices and that many find it difficult to relate to them. I think that this idea does have merit, but at the same time, there is a lot to take away from these passages. Much of what we do in our daily life, including tefillah and many of the laws and practices pertaining to holidays, are derived from the laws and customs of Temple service and sacrifices. Knowing this, these rules and procedures should have some connection to our current practice.

Nechama Leibowitz, in her work Studies in Leviticus, discusses one such connection. She quotes from the Tanchuma Yashan in its explanation of the olah offering, which quotes Isaiah: “For I the Lord love judgment; I hate robbery for a burnt offering.”[1] Leibowitz explains that this reference to robbery connotes that the person is unfit in some way to bring the offering; that he is tainted by dishonest dealings. She juxtaposes this with a quote from Malachi, “And you bring that which hath been robbed (referring to korbanot).”[2] She explains that this, as opposed to the previous statement in Isaiah, refers to the actual item being brought; that it is pasul (invalid) if it has been stolen.  These two excerpts represent two ideas within a much larger debate about the importance of actions versus items in the application of mitzvoth. Which is more important, the action that one does or the actual item that one is bringing? This debate comes up often in the Talmud, regarding many different practices. A salient example is in the case of lulav: is it the actual palm frond that is essential to the commandment, or is the act of shaking and holding it more important?

This dichotomy between action and object can be seen in many ritual practices. Specifically in this week’s Torah portion, it emerges through study of the command to the kohen to change his clothes during the Temple service. The Torah describes, “And he shall put forth his garments, and put on other garments, and carry forth the ashes without the camp to a clean place.”[3] Rashi clarifies that this is for the purposes of having clean garments; they should not be soiled.[4] However, Nechama Leibowitz cites Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch, who attributes to this very physical action a much deeper meaning.[5] He explains that the removal of the previous day’s clothes and the ashes in them represents a task already completed. We must strive, he explains, to have zeal and gusto for each mitzvah and each new day, even if we have performed that mitzvah in the past. This is symbolically conveyed by the removal of yesterday’s ashes.

In the debate over the centrality of action or item, I think that there really is no one correct way to look at it. Both the action and the item remain in our practice, and are therefore both important. One can choose to focus on either, as they see fit, for the purposes of gleaning meaning from our ritual practice. This also speaks to the issues that many have with the study of Temple practice, perceiving it as irrelevant and dry. While one may contend that this is so, one can also glean meaning from actions and items in our routines and rituals. 

Shabbat Shalom and Chag Kasher VeSameach!

---

[1] Isaiah 61:8. All translations are my own unless otherwise noted.

[2] Malachi 1:13

[3] Leviticus 6:3

[4] Leviticus 6:3, Rashi ad loc.

[5] Paraphrased from Leibowitz, Nehama, and Aryeh Newman. Studies in Vayikra: Leviticus. Jerusalem: World Zionist Organisation / Dep. for Torah Education and Culture in the Diaspora, 1983.