Difference between revisions of "Sanctifying Hashem's Name/2"

From AlHaTorah.org
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
Line 19: Line 19:
 
<point><b>Context of Vayikra 22:31-33</b> – These sources differ in their understandings of how the verse of "וְנִקְדַּשְׁתִּי" connects to its surrounding context:<br/>
 
<point><b>Context of Vayikra 22:31-33</b> – These sources differ in their understandings of how the verse of "וְנִקְדַּשְׁתִּי" connects to its surrounding context:<br/>
 
<ul>
 
<ul>
<li><b>Closes unit beginning in 22:26</b> – Ibn Ezra views the verses as ending the immediately preceding unit (Vayikra 22:26-30), which he believes is directed at the priests.<fn>The verses open only with "וַיְדַבֵּר י"י אֶל מֹשֶׁה" making the intended audience ambiguous, but since the next chapter has a new opening which specifies "דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל", Ibn Ezra claims that the original unit must not have been addressed to the entire nation, but rather to the priests alone.</fn>&#160; It thus parallels several variations of "וְלֹא יְחַלֵּל.. כִּי אֲנִי י"י מְקַדְּשָׁם" which appear throughout the chapter<fn>See Vayikra 21:6, 21:12, 21:15, 21:23, 22:2, and 22:15. Almost all of these also serve as either introductory or closing statements.</fn> which similarly serve to remind the priests to be careful not to profane Hashem and His sanctity.</li>
+
<li><b>Closes unit beginning in 22:26</b> – Ibn Ezra views the verses as ending the immediately preceding unit (Vayikra 22:26-30), which he believes is directed at the priests.<fn>The verses open only with "וַיְדַבֵּר י"י אֶל מֹשֶׁה" making the intended audience ambiguous, but since the next chapter has a new opening which specifies "דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל", Ibn Ezra claims that the original unit must not have been addressed to the entire nation, but rather to the priests alone.</fn>&#160; It thus parallels several variations of "וְלֹא יְחַלֵּל.. כִּי אֲנִי י"י מְקַדְּשָׁם" which appear throughout the chapter<fn>See <a href="Vayikra21-6" data-aht="source">Vayikra 21:6</a>, <a href="Vayikra21-15" data-aht="source">21:12-15</a>, <a href="Vayikra21-23" data-aht="source">21:23</a>, <a href="Vayikra22-2" data-aht="source">22:2</a>, and <a href="Vayikra22-15" data-aht="source">22:15</a>. Almost all of these also serve as either introductory or closing statements.</fn> which similarly serve to remind the priests to be careful not to profane Hashem and His sanctity.</li>
 
<li><b>Closes Chapters 21-22</b> – Abarbanel may instead view the verses as the summation of the larger unit of Chapters 21-22 which speak of priestly laws and the Mikdash.&#160; As mentioned, these chapters contain the recurring motif "וְלֹא יְחַלֵּל.. כִּי אֲנִי י"י מְקַדְּשָׁם".&#160; Vayikra 22:31-33 with its addition of "וּשְׁמַרְתֶּם מִצְוֺתַי" and "הַמּוֹצִיא אֶתְכֶם מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם" would be an expanded version of this refrain, as befitting a conclusion.</li>
 
<li><b>Closes Chapters 21-22</b> – Abarbanel may instead view the verses as the summation of the larger unit of Chapters 21-22 which speak of priestly laws and the Mikdash.&#160; As mentioned, these chapters contain the recurring motif "וְלֹא יְחַלֵּל.. כִּי אֲנִי י"י מְקַדְּשָׁם".&#160; Vayikra 22:31-33 with its addition of "וּשְׁמַרְתֶּם מִצְוֺתַי" and "הַמּוֹצִיא אֶתְכֶם מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם" would be an expanded version of this refrain, as befitting a conclusion.</li>
 
<li><b>Closes unit beginning in 22:17</b> – Seforno might take a middle position, suggesting that verses 22:31-33 conclude the unit beginning 22:17.&#160; In contrast to the earlier units in Chapters 21-22 which were directed at the priests only, the second half of Chapter 22 is addressed to both the priest and the nation ("דַּבֵּר אֶל אַהֲרֹן וְאֶל בָּנָיו וְאֶל כׇּל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל"), allowing for the possibility that 22:31-33, too, is directed at everyone.</li>
 
<li><b>Closes unit beginning in 22:17</b> – Seforno might take a middle position, suggesting that verses 22:31-33 conclude the unit beginning 22:17.&#160; In contrast to the earlier units in Chapters 21-22 which were directed at the priests only, the second half of Chapter 22 is addressed to both the priest and the nation ("דַּבֵּר אֶל אַהֲרֹן וְאֶל בָּנָיו וְאֶל כׇּל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל"), allowing for the possibility that 22:31-33, too, is directed at everyone.</li>
Line 28: Line 28:
 
<li>In contrast, according to the Netziv, there is no connection between&#160;"וְלֹא תְחַלְּלוּ" and "וְנִקְדַּשְׁתִּי" except that they are both connected to the festivals.&#160; "וְלֹא תְחַלְּלוּ" represents a warning not to behave inappropriately when celebrating, as often happened in pagan rituals and celebrations.</li>
 
<li>In contrast, according to the Netziv, there is no connection between&#160;"וְלֹא תְחַלְּלוּ" and "וְנִקְדַּשְׁתִּי" except that they are both connected to the festivals.&#160; "וְלֹא תְחַלְּלוּ" represents a warning not to behave inappropriately when celebrating, as often happened in pagan rituals and celebrations.</li>
 
</ul></point>
 
</ul></point>
<point><b>Sources for martyrdom</b> – According to this position,&#160;"וְנִקְדַּשְׁתִּי" does not constitute the source for an obligation of martyrdom.&#160; Thus, following various Rabbinic sources,<fn>See <multilink><a href="MishnaBerakhot9-5" data-aht="source">Mishna Berakhot</a><a href="MishnaBerakhot9-5" data-aht="source">Berakhot 9:5</a><a href="Mishna" data-aht="parshan">About the Mishna</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="SifreDevarim6-5" data-aht="source">Sifre Devarim</a><a href="SifreDevarim6-5" data-aht="source">6:5</a><a href="Sifre Devarim" data-aht="parshan">About Sifre Devarim</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="BavliBerakhot61b" data-aht="source">Bavli Berakhot</a><a href="BavliBerakhot21b" data-aht="source">Berakhot 21b</a><a href="BavliBerakhot61b" data-aht="source">Berakhot 61b</a><a href="Talmud Bavli" data-aht="parshan">About the Bavli</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="BavliPesachim25a-b" data-aht="source">Bavli Pesachim</a><a href="BavliPesachim25a-b" data-aht="source">Pesachim 25a-b</a><a href="Talmud Bavli" data-aht="parshan">About the Bavli</a></multilink>, and <multilink><a href="BavliSanhedrin74a-b" data-aht="source">Bavli Sanhedrin</a><a href="BavliSanhedrin74a-b" data-aht="source">Sanhedrin 74a-b</a><a href="Talmud Bavli" data-aht="parshan">About the Bavli</a></multilink>.</fn> the Netziv derives the obligation to forfeit one's life rather than transgress the three cardinal sins of idolatry, illicit relations, and murder from the entirely separate verse of "וְאָהַבְתָּ אֵת י"י... בְּכׇל לְבָבְךָ וּבְכׇל נַפְשְׁךָ".&#8206;<fn>Alternatively, this approach could consider the possibility that there is no unique verse which mandates forfeiting one's life for the observing of commandments.</fn></point>
+
<point><b>Sources for martyrdom</b> – According to this position,&#160;"וְנִקְדַּשְׁתִּי" does not constitute the source for an obligation of martyrdom.&#160; Thus, following various Rabbinic sources,<fn>See <multilink><a href="MishnaBerakhot9-5" data-aht="source">Mishna Berakhot</a><a href="MishnaBerakhot9-5" data-aht="source">Berakhot 9:5</a><a href="Mishna" data-aht="parshan">About the Mishna</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="SifreDevarim6-5" data-aht="source">Sifre Devarim</a><a href="SifreDevarim6-5" data-aht="source">6:5</a><a href="Sifre Devarim" data-aht="parshan">About Sifre Devarim</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="BavliBerakhot61b" data-aht="source">Bavli Berakhot</a><a href="BavliBerakhot21b" data-aht="source">Berakhot 21b</a><a href="BavliBerakhot61b" data-aht="source">Berakhot 61b</a><a href="Talmud Bavli" data-aht="parshan">About the Bavli</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="BavliPesachim25a-b" data-aht="source">Bavli Pesachim</a><a href="BavliPesachim25a-b" data-aht="source">Pesachim 25a-b</a><a href="Talmud Bavli" data-aht="parshan">About the Bavli</a></multilink>, and <multilink><a href="BavliSanhedrin74a-b" data-aht="source">Bavli Sanhedrin</a><a href="BavliSanhedrin74a-b" data-aht="source">Sanhedrin 74a-b</a><a href="Talmud Bavli" data-aht="parshan">About the Bavli</a></multilink>.</fn> the Netziv derives the obligation to forfeit one's life rather than transgress the three cardinal sins of idolatry, illicit relations, and murder from the entirely separate verse of "וְאָהַבְתָּ אֵת י"י אֱלֹהֶיךָ בְּכׇל לְבָבְךָ וּבְכׇל נַפְשְׁךָ".&#8206;<fn>Alternatively, this approach could consider the possibility that there is no unique verse which mandates forfeiting one's life for the observing of commandments.</fn></point>
 
</category>
 
</category>
 
<category>Positive Behavior
 
<category>Positive Behavior
 
<p>The phrase "וְנִקְדַּשְׁתִּי בְּתוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" is a general commandment which obligates people to behave in a manner which will sanctify God's name.</p>
 
<p>The phrase "וְנִקְדַּשְׁתִּי בְּתוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" is a general commandment which obligates people to behave in a manner which will sanctify God's name.</p>
<mekorot><multilink><a href="RSaadiaGaon" data-aht="source">R. Saadia Gaon</a><a href="RSaadiaGaon" data-aht="source">R. Saadia Gaon</a><a href="R. Saadia Gaon" data-aht="parshan">About R. Saadia Gaon</a></multilink>,<fn>R. Saadia's position cannot be established with any degree of certainty based on a few words from his Azharot on the Aseret HaDibberot.&#160; In a second set of Azharot on the Taryag Mitzvot, he does not enumerate sanctifying Hashem's name at all.&#160; The extant fragments of R. Saadia's Sefer HaMitzvot are still awaiting (reportedly, imminent) publication.</fn> <multilink><a href="RambamIggeretHaShemad" data-aht="source">Rambam</a><a href="RambamIggeretHaShemad" data-aht="source">Iggeret HaShemad</a><a href="RambamHilchotYesodaiTorah5-11" data-aht="source">Hilchot Yesodai Torah 5:11</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Maimon (Rambam, Maimonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Maimon</a></multilink>,<fn>See below that Rambam also derives the obligation of martyrdom from the phrase.</fn> R. D"Z Hoffmann<fn>He also brings the opinion of Bavli Berakhot that the verse teaches that a quorum of ten is needed for words of holiness in prayer and Bavli Sanhedrin which learns from it the obligation of martyrdom.</fn></mekorot>
+
<mekorot>Perhaps <multilink><a href="RSaadiaGaon" data-aht="source">R. Saadia Gaon</a><a href="RSaadiaGaon" data-aht="source">R. Saadia Gaon</a><a href="R. Saadia Gaon" data-aht="parshan">About R. Saadia Gaon</a></multilink>,<fn>R. Saadia's position cannot be established with any degree of certainty based on a few words from his Azharot on the Aseret HaDibberot.&#160; In a second set of Azharot on the Taryag Mitzvot, he does not enumerate sanctifying Hashem's name at all.&#160; The extant fragments of R. Saadia's Sefer HaMitzvot are still awaiting (reportedly, imminent) publication.</fn> <multilink><a href="RambamIggeretHaShemad" data-aht="source">Rambam</a><a href="RambamIggeretHaShemad" data-aht="source">Iggeret HaShemad</a><a href="RambamHilchotYesodaiTorah5-11" data-aht="source">Hilkhot Yesodai Torah 5:11</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Maimon (Rambam, Maimonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Maimon</a></multilink>,<fn>See below that Rambam derives also the obligation of martyrdom from this phrase.</fn> R. D"Z Hoffmann<fn>RD"Z also cites Bavli Berakhot that the verse teaches that a quorum of ten is needed for "דברים שבקדושה" (see above) and Bavli Sanhedrin which derives from it the obligation of martyrdom (see below).</fn></mekorot>
<point><b>Passive form of "וְנִקְדַּשְׁתִּי"</b> – The passive form is difficult for this approach, as one would expect a command to be formulated in the imperative. These sources might suggest that the command is simply implied,<fn>They might further suggest that since the prohibition against profaning Hashem is written in the imperative, and sanctification is simply the flip side of this prohibition, it was self evident that it too is a command.</fn> similar to the statement "I am the Lord your God..." which is understood by many to constitute the source of the obligation to know or believe in Hashem.<fn>See, for example, Rambam Sefer HaMitzvot Positive Commandment 1 and Ramban and Ralbag on Shemot 20:2.&#160; In this case, too, however, not all agree that the verse constitutes a commandment.</fn></point>
+
<point><b>Passive form of "וְנִקְדַּשְׁתִּי"</b> – The passive form is difficult for this approach, as one would expect a command to be formulated in the imperative. These sources might suggest that the command is simply implied,<fn>They might further suggest that since the prohibition against profaning Hashem is written in the imperative, and sanctification is simply the flip side of this prohibition, it was self evident that it too is a command.</fn> perhaps similar to the statement "I am the Lord your God..." which (despite its lack of an imperative form) is understood by many to constitute the source of the obligation to know or believe in Hashem.<fn>See, for example, Rambam Sefer HaMitzvot Positive Commandment 1 and Ramban and Ralbag on Shemot 20:2.&#160; In this case, too, however, not all agree that the verse constitutes a commandment.</fn></point>
 
<point><b>What type of behavior sanctifies Hashem's name?</b><ul>
 
<point><b>What type of behavior sanctifies Hashem's name?</b><ul>
<li><b>Performing commandments purely out of love</b> – Rambam asserts that a person sanctifies Hashem's name when he observes His commandments with no ulterior motive, but rather out of love.&#160; This would suggest that sanctification can be internal as no one else is aware of the individual's thoughts.</li>
+
<li><b>Performing commandments purely out of love</b> – Rambam asserts that a person sanctifies Hashem's name when he observes His commandments purely out of love without an ulterior motive.&#160; This would suggest that sanctification can be internal as no one else is aware of the individual's thoughts.</li>
<li><b>Actions that cause others to praise</b> – Rambam also claims that if a person behaves in a way that leads others to praise him, such as having a pleasant demeanor, good manners and speech,<fn>See also <multilink><a href="BavliSotah10b" data-aht="source">Bavli Sotah</a><a href="BavliSotah10b" data-aht="source">Sotah 10b</a><a href="Talmud Bavli" data-aht="parshan">About the Bavli</a></multilink> which points to Yehudah as sanctifying Hashem's name when admitting his guilt before Tamar,&#160; and to the behavior of the sages in <a href="BavliYoma86a" data-aht="source">Bavli Yoma</a>.</fn> he will sanctify Hashem's name.&#160; This points to an external understanding of sanctification, as an act that leads others to glorify Hashem.</li>
+
<li><b>Actions that cause others to praise</b> – Rambam also claims that if a person behaves in a way that leads others to praise him, such as having a pleasant demeanor, good manners and speech,<fn>See also <multilink><a href="BavliSotah10b" data-aht="source">Bavli Sotah</a><a href="BavliSotah10b" data-aht="source">Sotah 10b</a><a href="Talmud Bavli" data-aht="parshan">About the Bavli</a></multilink> which points to Yehudah as sanctifying Hashem's name when admitting his guilt before Tamar,&#160; and to the behavior of the sages in <a href="BavliYoma86a" data-aht="source">Bavli Yoma</a>.</fn> he thereby sanctifies Hashem's name.&#160; This points to an external understanding of sanctification, as an act that leads others to glorify Hashem.</li>
 
<li><b>General upright behavior</b> – R. Saadia Gaon and R. D"Z Hoffmann speak more generally about being upright in every action, observing Hashem's commandments, and being subservient to Him.<fn>R. Hoffmann claims that it is through such servitude that Hashem is proclaimed as holy.</fn>&#160;</li>
 
<li><b>General upright behavior</b> – R. Saadia Gaon and R. D"Z Hoffmann speak more generally about being upright in every action, observing Hashem's commandments, and being subservient to Him.<fn>R. Hoffmann claims that it is through such servitude that Hashem is proclaimed as holy.</fn>&#160;</li>
 
</ul></point>
 
</ul></point>
<point><b>Context of Vayikra 22:31-33</b> – As the immediate context of the verse relates specifically to priestly laws, it is difficult to understand why it suddenly speaks of commandments relating to the behavior of the nation at large.<br/>
+
<point><b>Context of Vayikra 22:31-33</b> – As the immediate context of these verses relates specifically to priestly laws, the sudden shift to speak of commandments relating to the broader behavior of the nation at large requires explanation.&#160; R. D"Z Hoffmann thus suggests that 22:31-33 serves as a summation for the much larger unit of the Holiness laws which stretches from Chapter 19 through 22.<fn>These open with the directive "קְדֹשִׁים תִּהְיוּ", and contain many warnings directed at the entire nation regarding both desecration of Hashem and sanctification of the people. See <a href="Vayikra19-1-2" data-aht="source">Vayikra 19:1-2</a>, <a href="Vayikra19-12" data-aht="source">19:12</a>,<a href="Vayikra20-3" data-aht="source">20:3</a>, and&#160;<a href="Vayikra20-7-8" data-aht="source">20:7-8</a> which are aimed at the nation at large, and <a href="Vayikra21-6" data-aht="source">21:6</a>, <a href="Vayikra21-15" data-aht="source">21:15</a>, <a href="Vayikra21-23" data-aht="source">21:23</a>, <a href="Vayikra20-22" data-aht="source">20:22</a>, and<a href="Vayikra22-15" data-aht="source"> 22:15</a> which are directed at the priests.</fn>&#160; According to him, the general command of "וּשְׁמַרְתֶּם מִצְוֺתַי וַעֲשִׂיתֶם אֹתָם" in verse 31<fn>He points out that this general admonition to heed Hashem's commandments parallels other similar warnings in <a href="Vayikra19-37" data-aht="source">Vayikra 19:37</a>, <a href="Vayikra20-7-8" data-aht="source">20:8</a> and <a href="Vayikra20-22" data-aht="source">20:22</a>.&#160; The summation also ends with mention of Hashem "הַמּוֹצִיא אֶתְכֶם מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם", since the purpose of the Exodus was to make the Children of Israel into a "מַמְלֶכֶת כֹּהֲנִים וְגוֹי קָדוֹשׁ". Thus, the summation of 22:31-33 contains the motifs found in all of the chapters of Vayikra 19-22 and forms an appropriate conclusion for the entire Holiness unit.</fn> proves that the entire concluding pericope is connected to more than only the immediately preceding cultic law unit.</point>
<ul>
+
<point><b>Relationship to the prohibition of "וְלֹא תְחַלְּלוּ אֶת שֵׁם קׇדְשִׁי"</b> – Rambam and R. Hoffmann view the two commandments as flip sides of a coin, the only difference being the positive or negative formulation.&#160; As such, desecration of Hashem's name would include sinning purely to spite or anger Hashem, behaving in a way which brings disrepute to Hashem, or general negligence in observance.</point>
<li>This position might respond that the fact that the directive is preceded by the general warning, "וּשְׁמַרְתֶּם מִצְוֺתַי", severs the direct connection to cultic law and&#160; supports the possibility that verse 32, as well, speaks of general behavior.</li>
+
<point><b>Sources for martyrdom</b> – Similar to the first approach, this position could also derive the obligation of martyrdom from the separate verse of "וְאָהַבְתָּ אֵת י"י אֱלֹהֶיךָ בְּכׇל לְבָבְךָ וּבְכׇל נַפְשְׁךָ".</point>
</ul>
 
<ul>
 
<li>R. D"Z Hoffmann goes further to suggest that 22:31-33 serve as a summation<fn>He points out that the warning to consecrate Hashem in the closing verses is prefaced by a general warning to heed Hashem's commandments, which parallels other similar warnings in <a href="Vayikra19-37" data-aht="source">Vayikra 19:37</a>, <a href="Vayikra20-7-8" data-aht="source">20:8</a> and <a href="Vayikra20-22" data-aht="source">20:22</a>. It ends with mention of Hashem "הַמּוֹצִיא אֶתְכֶם מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם", since the purpose of the Exodus was to make the Children of Israel into a "מַמְלֶכֶת כֹּהֲנִים וְגוֹי קָדוֹשׁ". Thus, the three verses together form an appropriate conclusion for the entire Holiness unit.</fn> to the much larger unit of laws relating to holiness which stretches from Chapter 19 through 22.<fn>These open with the directive "קְדֹשִׁים תִּהְיוּ", and contain many warnings directed at the entire nation regarding both desecration of Hashem and sanctification of the people. See <a href="Vayikra19-1-2" data-aht="source">Vayikra 19:1-2</a>, <a href="Vayikra19-12" data-aht="source">19:12</a>,<a href="Vayikra20-3" data-aht="source">20:3</a>, and&#160;<a href="Vayikra20-7-8" data-aht="source">20:7-8</a> which are aimed at the nation at large, and <a href="Vayikra21-6" data-aht="source">21:6</a>, <a href="Vayikra21-15" data-aht="source">21:15</a>, <a href="Vayikra21-23" data-aht="source">21:23</a>, <a href="Vayikra20-22" data-aht="source">20:22</a>, and<a href="Vayikra22-15" data-aht="source"> 22:15</a> which are directed at the priests.</fn>&#160; After many specific commands warning against profaning Hashem, at the conclusion of the unit Hashem elaborates and gives a general command to sanctify Him.</li>
 
</ul></point>
 
<point><b>Relationship to the prohibition of "וְלֹא תְחַלְּלוּ אֶת שֵׁם קׇדְשִׁי"</b> – Rambam and R. Hoffmann view the two commandments as flip sides of a coin, the only difference being the positive or negative formulation.&#160; As such, desecration of Hashem's name would include sinning only to spite or anger Hashem, acting rudely or out of anger, and general disrespect or negligence in observance.</point>
 
<point><b>Sources for martyrdom</b></point>
 
 
</category>
 
</category>
 
<category>Martyrdom
 
<category>Martyrdom

Version as of 00:50, 13 May 2016

Sanctification of Hashem's Name

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Result of Observance

The words "וְנִקְדַּשְׁתִּי בְּתוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" describe a result of the sanctification of Hashem's name, but do not constitute an obligation to perform a specific action.

Passive form of "וְנִקְדַּשְׁתִּי" – The passive form of the word "וְנִקְדַּשְׁתִּי" supports this position, suggesting that the sanctification is a consequence rather than a command.
Who will sanctify Hashem's name?
  • The priests – According to Ibn Ezra and Abarbanel, the verse is directed at the priests.  Ibn Ezra asserts that if they adhere to the sacrificial laws which immediately precede this passage (not slaughtering a mother and son together and properly offering thanksgiving sacrifices), then Hashem's name will be sanctified.  Abarbanel relates the sanctification more broadly to general observance by the priests.
  • The nation – According to R. Yochanan in the Bavli and the Netziv, the verse refers to the public sanctification of Hashem's name (through the recital of "דברים שבקדושה") by a quorum of ten Israelites ("בְּתוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל").
  • Hashem Himself – Seforno maintains that if the people do not profane Hashem's name through improper or debased conduct, then Hashem will perform miracles for them and sanctify Himself in their midst.
What does it mean to "sanctify Hashem"? According to most of these sources, it appears that Hashem is sanctified by the nation's recognition of His glory. Thus, Abarbanel says that proper priestly conduct leads the rest of the nation to honor and fear Hashem, and Seforno explains1 that Hashem will be glorified by the people's witnessing of His wondrous deeds.
Context of Vayikra 22:31-33 – These sources differ in their understandings of how the verse of "וְנִקְדַּשְׁתִּי" connects to its surrounding context:
  • Closes unit beginning in 22:26 – Ibn Ezra views the verses as ending the immediately preceding unit (Vayikra 22:26-30), which he believes is directed at the priests.2  It thus parallels several variations of "וְלֹא יְחַלֵּל.. כִּי אֲנִי י"י מְקַדְּשָׁם" which appear throughout the chapter3 which similarly serve to remind the priests to be careful not to profane Hashem and His sanctity.
  • Closes Chapters 21-22 – Abarbanel may instead view the verses as the summation of the larger unit of Chapters 21-22 which speak of priestly laws and the Mikdash.  As mentioned, these chapters contain the recurring motif "וְלֹא יְחַלֵּל.. כִּי אֲנִי י"י מְקַדְּשָׁם".  Vayikra 22:31-33 with its addition of "וּשְׁמַרְתֶּם מִצְוֺתַי" and "הַמּוֹצִיא אֶתְכֶם מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם" would be an expanded version of this refrain, as befitting a conclusion.
  • Closes unit beginning in 22:17 – Seforno might take a middle position, suggesting that verses 22:31-33 conclude the unit beginning 22:17.  In contrast to the earlier units in Chapters 21-22 which were directed at the priests only, the second half of Chapter 22 is addressed to both the priest and the nation ("דַּבֵּר אֶל אַהֲרֹן וְאֶל בָּנָיו וְאֶל כׇּל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל"), allowing for the possibility that 22:31-33, too, is directed at everyone.
  • Introduces Chapter 23 – The Netziv uniquely suggests that the verses of Vayikra 22:26-33 are connected not to what precede them, but rather to what follow: the laws of the festivals. This enables him to suggest that 22:31 speaks of sanctification of Hashem during public prayers, such as those recited during the pilgrimage festivals.4
Relationship to the prohibition of "וְלֹא תְחַלְּלוּ אֶת שֵׁם קׇדְשִׁי"
  • According to Ibn Ezra, Abarbanel, and Seforno, this is an active command (aimed at either the priests5 or the nation6), the observance of results in Hashem's sanctification.
  • In contrast, according to the Netziv, there is no connection between "וְלֹא תְחַלְּלוּ" and "וְנִקְדַּשְׁתִּי" except that they are both connected to the festivals.  "וְלֹא תְחַלְּלוּ" represents a warning not to behave inappropriately when celebrating, as often happened in pagan rituals and celebrations.
Sources for martyrdom – According to this position, "וְנִקְדַּשְׁתִּי" does not constitute the source for an obligation of martyrdom.  Thus, following various Rabbinic sources,7 the Netziv derives the obligation to forfeit one's life rather than transgress the three cardinal sins of idolatry, illicit relations, and murder from the entirely separate verse of "וְאָהַבְתָּ אֵת י"י אֱלֹהֶיךָ בְּכׇל לְבָבְךָ וּבְכׇל נַפְשְׁךָ".‎8

Positive Behavior

The phrase "וְנִקְדַּשְׁתִּי בְּתוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" is a general commandment which obligates people to behave in a manner which will sanctify God's name.

Passive form of "וְנִקְדַּשְׁתִּי" – The passive form is difficult for this approach, as one would expect a command to be formulated in the imperative. These sources might suggest that the command is simply implied,12 perhaps similar to the statement "I am the Lord your God..." which (despite its lack of an imperative form) is understood by many to constitute the source of the obligation to know or believe in Hashem.13
What type of behavior sanctifies Hashem's name?
  • Performing commandments purely out of love – Rambam asserts that a person sanctifies Hashem's name when he observes His commandments purely out of love without an ulterior motive.  This would suggest that sanctification can be internal as no one else is aware of the individual's thoughts.
  • Actions that cause others to praise – Rambam also claims that if a person behaves in a way that leads others to praise him, such as having a pleasant demeanor, good manners and speech,14 he thereby sanctifies Hashem's name.  This points to an external understanding of sanctification, as an act that leads others to glorify Hashem.
  • General upright behavior – R. Saadia Gaon and R. D"Z Hoffmann speak more generally about being upright in every action, observing Hashem's commandments, and being subservient to Him.15 
Context of Vayikra 22:31-33 – As the immediate context of these verses relates specifically to priestly laws, the sudden shift to speak of commandments relating to the broader behavior of the nation at large requires explanation.  R. D"Z Hoffmann thus suggests that 22:31-33 serves as a summation for the much larger unit of the Holiness laws which stretches from Chapter 19 through 22.16  According to him, the general command of "וּשְׁמַרְתֶּם מִצְוֺתַי וַעֲשִׂיתֶם אֹתָם" in verse 3117 proves that the entire concluding pericope is connected to more than only the immediately preceding cultic law unit.
Relationship to the prohibition of "וְלֹא תְחַלְּלוּ אֶת שֵׁם קׇדְשִׁי" – Rambam and R. Hoffmann view the two commandments as flip sides of a coin, the only difference being the positive or negative formulation.  As such, desecration of Hashem's name would include sinning purely to spite or anger Hashem, behaving in a way which brings disrepute to Hashem, or general negligence in observance.
Sources for martyrdom – Similar to the first approach, this position could also derive the obligation of martyrdom from the separate verse of "וְאָהַבְתָּ אֵת י"י אֱלֹהֶיךָ בְּכׇל לְבָבְךָ וּבְכׇל נַפְשְׁךָ".

Martyrdom

"וְנִקְדַּשְׁתִּי בְּתוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" is the positive commandment to forfeit one's life rather than transgress commandments in certain situations.

Passive form of "וְנִקְדַּשְׁתִּי" – This position must explain why the word "וְנִקְדַּשְׁתִּי" is not in the imperative if it constitutes an active commandment.
Context – As there is nothing in the surrounding verses which speak of martyrdom, these sources struggle to explain why the commandment is placed here. R. David HaKokhavi suggests that the context of sacrifices teaches that though in general animal sacrifices serve to replace a person, there are certain circumstances in which Hashem demands that a human sacrifice his soul for Hashem as well.
What is included? These sources disagree under which circumstances and for which commandments the command "וְנִקְדַּשְׁתִּי" obligates one to forfeit a life:
  • All commandments, but only in public – Most of these sources maintain that the command only speaks of the need to forfeit one's life when asked to transgress a commandment in public, "בְּתוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל". This suggest that sanctification of Hashem relates to His glorification by others, and thus, by definition, requires witnesses.
  • Also the three cardinal sins, even in private – Rambam in his Iggeret HaShemad and Mishneh Torah goes further to also include the sins of idolatry, illicit relations and murder, even without witnesses.18  Rambam might suggest that the phrase "בְּתוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" says nothing about who must be present but only who is obligated (Jews rather than non-Jews).19 According to this view, sanctification of Hashem might be internal, rather than external.
  • Only the sin of idolatry in public – R. Yishmael and Rambam in his Sefer Hamitzvot20 go in the opposite direction, limiting the obligation to the sin of idolatry in a public setting. This position might view sanctification as a declaration of faith,21 in which case the narrowing of the scope of martyrdom to idolatry is logical.
Other sources for martyrdom – The majority of sources which maintain that "וְנִקְדַּשְׁתִּי" does not include forfeiting one's life for the three cardinal sins in private differ regarding the source for this obligation:
  • Variety of sources – Bavli Sanhedrin22 suggests that idolatry can be learned from "וְאָהַבְתָּ אֵת י"י... בְכׇל נַפְשְׁךָ", while murder is learned from a logical dedcution23 and illicit relations via an inference (היקש) from the laws of murder.
  • Severity of sin – R. Acha in Tosefta Shabbat suggests that due to the severity of these sins, they never fell under the category of "וָחַי בָּהֶם"‎,24‎ and so the original prohibition stands even in private.25
  • No source or obligation – This position could also say that there is no obligation of martyrdom in private even for the three cardinal sins.
Relationship to the prohibition of "וְלֹא תְחַלְּלוּ אֶת שֵׁם קׇדְשִׁי"
Iggeret HaShemad