Difference between revisions of "Shabbat Table Topics – Parashat Shemini/0/en"

From AlHaTorah.org
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (Hillel moved page Shabbat Table Topics – Parashat Shemini/0 to Shabbat Table Topics – Parashat Shemini/0/en without leaving a redirect: Need /en parallel to /he)
m (Text replacement - "Seforno" to "Sforno")
 
Line 6: Line 6:
 
<p>After describing the eighth day of the consecration of the Mishkan, Parashat Shemini records the tragic deaths of Nadav and Avihu, who were consumed by heavenly fire while offering incense. Commentators struggle to understand what was so terrible about their deed that it warranted such a severe punishment. See <a href="Why Were Nadav and Avihu Killed" data-aht="page">Why Were Nadav and Avihu Killed</a>.</p>
 
<p>After describing the eighth day of the consecration of the Mishkan, Parashat Shemini records the tragic deaths of Nadav and Avihu, who were consumed by heavenly fire while offering incense. Commentators struggle to understand what was so terrible about their deed that it warranted such a severe punishment. See <a href="Why Were Nadav and Avihu Killed" data-aht="page">Why Were Nadav and Avihu Killed</a>.</p>
 
<ul>
 
<ul>
<li>Many<fn>See, for example, <multilink><a href="RYosefBekhorShorVayikra10-1" data-aht="source">R. Yosef Bekhor Shor</a><a href="RYosefBekhorShorVayikra10-1" data-aht="source">Vayikra 10:1</a><a href="R. Yosef Bekhor Shor" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="SefornoVayikra10-1" data-aht="source">Seforno</a><a href="SefornoVayikra10-1" data-aht="source">Vayikra 10:1</a><a href="R. Ovadyah Seforno" data-aht="parshan">About R. Ovadyah Seforno</a></multilink>.</fn> suggest that even if the brothers had positive intentions, they were punished for violating proper protocol. <multilink><a href="#" data-aht="source">R. S"R Hirsch</a></multilink>, thus, writes that though Nadav and Avihu desired to get close to Hashem, "in the sacrificial service there is no room for subjectivity... [closeness] will not be achieved except via listening to God". What are the dangers of subjective worship? Why might R. Hirsch, specifically, have been concerned about this?</li>
+
<li>Many<fn>See, for example, <multilink><a href="RYosefBekhorShorVayikra10-1" data-aht="source">R. Yosef Bekhor Shor</a><a href="RYosefBekhorShorVayikra10-1" data-aht="source">Vayikra 10:1</a><a href="R. Yosef Bekhor Shor" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="SfornoVayikra10-1" data-aht="source">Sforno</a><a href="SfornoVayikra10-1" data-aht="source">Vayikra 10:1</a><a href="R. Ovadyah Sforno" data-aht="parshan">About R. Ovadyah Sforno</a></multilink>.</fn> suggest that even if the brothers had positive intentions, they were punished for violating proper protocol. <multilink><a href="#" data-aht="source">R. S"R Hirsch</a></multilink>, thus, writes that though Nadav and Avihu desired to get close to Hashem, "in the sacrificial service there is no room for subjectivity... [closeness] will not be achieved except via listening to God". What are the dangers of subjective worship? Why might R. Hirsch, specifically, have been concerned about this?</li>
 
<li>According to <multilink><a href="RashbamVayikra10-1-2" data-aht="source">Rashbam</a><a href="RashbamVayikra10-1-2" data-aht="source">Vayikra 10:1-2</a><a href="R. Shemuel b. Meir (Rashbam)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel b. Meir</a></multilink>'s reading of the story,<fn>This is the general direction of his comments, but he does not state this explicitly.</fn> it is possible that the deaths were not a punishment, but rather a "work accident". According to this, Nadav and Avihu were in the wrong place at the wrong time and suffered the natural consequences. Are there "chance accidents", or must everything that occurs in the world be directly attributed to God and viewed in terms of reward and punishment?</li>
 
<li>According to <multilink><a href="RashbamVayikra10-1-2" data-aht="source">Rashbam</a><a href="RashbamVayikra10-1-2" data-aht="source">Vayikra 10:1-2</a><a href="R. Shemuel b. Meir (Rashbam)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel b. Meir</a></multilink>'s reading of the story,<fn>This is the general direction of his comments, but he does not state this explicitly.</fn> it is possible that the deaths were not a punishment, but rather a "work accident". According to this, Nadav and Avihu were in the wrong place at the wrong time and suffered the natural consequences. Are there "chance accidents", or must everything that occurs in the world be directly attributed to God and viewed in terms of reward and punishment?</li>
 
</ul>
 
</ul>

Latest revision as of 11:17, 28 January 2023

Shabbat Table Topics – Parashat Shemini

The Deaths of Nadav and Avihu

After describing the eighth day of the consecration of the Mishkan, Parashat Shemini records the tragic deaths of Nadav and Avihu, who were consumed by heavenly fire while offering incense. Commentators struggle to understand what was so terrible about their deed that it warranted such a severe punishment. See Why Were Nadav and Avihu Killed.

  • Many1 suggest that even if the brothers had positive intentions, they were punished for violating proper protocol. R. S"R Hirsch, thus, writes that though Nadav and Avihu desired to get close to Hashem, "in the sacrificial service there is no room for subjectivity... [closeness] will not be achieved except via listening to God". What are the dangers of subjective worship? Why might R. Hirsch, specifically, have been concerned about this?
  • According to RashbamVayikra 10:1-2About R. Shemuel b. Meir's reading of the story,2 it is possible that the deaths were not a punishment, but rather a "work accident". According to this, Nadav and Avihu were in the wrong place at the wrong time and suffered the natural consequences. Are there "chance accidents", or must everything that occurs in the world be directly attributed to God and viewed in terms of reward and punishment?

You Are What You Eat?

More...

For more, see: Parashat Shemini Topics.