Difference between revisions of "Shabbat Table Topics – Parashat Shemini/0/he"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Copy from /en) |
|||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
<page type="Basic"> | <page type="Basic"> | ||
| − | <h1></h1> | + | <h1>נושאים לשולחן שבת – פרשת שמיני</h1> |
<category>The Deaths of Nadav and Avihu | <category>The Deaths of Nadav and Avihu | ||
| − | <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="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>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> | ||
Version as of 03:13, 22 August 2019
נושאים לשולחן שבת – פרשת שמיני
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 Rashbam'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?
- Commentators debate whether the Laws of Kashrut were instituted for their physical or spiritual benefits. Rashbam maintains that their purpose is purely utilitarian, and they serve to ensure the health of the nation. Akeidat Yitzchak vehemently disagrees that a commandment would be instituted for such mundane reasons, claiming that all mitzvot must serve to help man perfect his nature. Do you agree?
- Ramban suggests that since what you eat affects who you are, Hashem prohibited predatory animals and birds from consumption, lest man, too, become a beast of prey. Is this convincing? Does the food one consumes really affect one's character?
- Shadal asserts that another goal of the laws is to distance Israel from other nations. Besides marking the nation as unique, the dietary restrictions limit socialization. Does the Torah advocate for isolationism? If so, is this limited to the religious sphere, or also to cultural and social interactions? See Purpose of the Laws of Kashrut and A Nation that Dwells Alone.
More...
For more, see: Parashat Shemini Topics.
