Difference between revisions of "Warning Bells – "וְנִשְׁמַע קוֹלוֹ... וְלֹא יָמוּת"/2"
(Import script) |
(Import script) |
||
Line 43: | Line 43: | ||
<point><b>Who might die?</b> – Rashbam asserts that the concern is lest an ordinary priest die<fn>The singular form of the word "יָמוּת" is problematic for this understanding.</fn> due to his presence in the sanctuary while the high priest is atoning for the nation.<fn> The fear, perhaps, is that these priests might accidentally see the Divine presence during the high priest's service.</fn></point> | <point><b>Who might die?</b> – Rashbam asserts that the concern is lest an ordinary priest die<fn>The singular form of the word "יָמוּת" is problematic for this understanding.</fn> due to his presence in the sanctuary while the high priest is atoning for the nation.<fn> The fear, perhaps, is that these priests might accidentally see the Divine presence during the high priest's service.</fn></point> | ||
<point><b>Parallel verses</b> – According to this approach, the verse in Shemot is integrally connected to the command of Vayikra 16:17, "וְכָל אָדָם לֹא יִהְיֶה בְּאֹהֶל מוֹעֵד בְּבֹאוֹ לְכַפֵּר בַּקֹּדֶשׁ".</point> | <point><b>Parallel verses</b> – According to this approach, the verse in Shemot is integrally connected to the command of Vayikra 16:17, "וְכָל אָדָם לֹא יִהְיֶה בְּאֹהֶל מוֹעֵד בְּבֹאוֹ לְכַפֵּר בַּקֹּדֶשׁ".</point> | ||
− | <point><b>"הַקֹּדֶשׁ"</b> – This refers to the Holy of Holies,<fn>See Vayikra 16:2,16,20 for other verses in which the term "הַקֹּדֶשׁ" seems to refer to the Holy of Holies.</fn> which the high priest entered on the Day of Atonement.<fn>See, | + | <point><b>"הַקֹּדֶשׁ"</b> – This refers to the Holy of Holies,<fn>See Vayikra 16:2,16,20 for other verses in which the term "הַקֹּדֶשׁ" seems to refer to the Holy of Holies.</fn> which the high priest entered on the Day of Atonement.<fn>See, similarly, <multilink><aht source="RAvrahamShemot28-35">R. Avraham b. HaRambam</aht><aht source="RAvrahamShemot28-35">Shemot 28:35</aht><aht parshan="R. Avraham Maimonides" /></multilink>.</fn></point> |
<point><b>Entering the inner sanctum with bells?</b> – This position encounters considerable difficulty from Vayikra 16 which ostensibly indicates that the high priest did not wear his robe when he entered the Holy of Holies on Yom HaKippurim, but rather wore only pure white garments. Rashbam does not address the issue but one might suggest several solutions: | <point><b>Entering the inner sanctum with bells?</b> – This position encounters considerable difficulty from Vayikra 16 which ostensibly indicates that the high priest did not wear his robe when he entered the Holy of Holies on Yom HaKippurim, but rather wore only pure white garments. Rashbam does not address the issue but one might suggest several solutions: | ||
<ul> | <ul> | ||
− | <li><multilink><aht source="IbnEzraVayikra16-4">Ibn Ezra</aht><aht source="IbnEzraVayikra16-4">Vayikra 16:4</aht><aht parshan="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" /></multilink> | + | <li><multilink><aht source="IbnEzraVayikra16-4">Ibn Ezra</aht><aht source="IbnEzraVayikra16-4">Vayikra 16:4</aht><aht parshan="R. Avraham ibn Ezra" /></multilink> learns from our verse that on the Day of Atonement the priest did, in fact, wear the garments mentioned here (the robe, tunic, and breastplate) into the inner chamber, in addition to his all white clothing.<fn>According to him, Vayikra only mentions the white vestments since the others were taken for granted because of their previous mention.</fn></li> |
<li>Alternatively, one might suggest that there was a change in the law. Initially, the high priest was allowed into the Holy of Holies whenever he wanted, wearing his regular uniform. Only after the sin of Nadav and Avihu, did Hashem limit entry to one day a year,<fn>Cf. the position of R. Eliyahu of Vilna who asserts that most of Vayikra 16 is aimed at the generation of the dessert and refers not to the obligation to atone for the nation on Yom HaKippurim, but the permission given to Aharon to enter the inner sanctuary whenever he wanted, as long as he followed the correct protocol. He does not assume that that this was limited after the sin of Nadav and Avihu. In fact, the directives might have first been given right after the sin, and in reaction to it, to ensure the correct procedure and prevent future deaths. The law only changed after the nation entered the Land of Israel (or perhaps, after Aharon's death).</fn> and with specific garments.<fn>This might be supported by the position in <multilink><aht source="VayikraRabbah20-9">Vayikra Rabbah</aht><aht source="VayikraRabbah20-9">20:9</aht><aht parshan="Vayikra Rabbah" /></multilink> that asserts that Nadav and Avihu's sin was entering unrobed.</fn> Our verses, then, would not be limited to Yom HaKippurim, but would refer to any time the high priest wanted to atone in the inner sanctuary.</li> | <li>Alternatively, one might suggest that there was a change in the law. Initially, the high priest was allowed into the Holy of Holies whenever he wanted, wearing his regular uniform. Only after the sin of Nadav and Avihu, did Hashem limit entry to one day a year,<fn>Cf. the position of R. Eliyahu of Vilna who asserts that most of Vayikra 16 is aimed at the generation of the dessert and refers not to the obligation to atone for the nation on Yom HaKippurim, but the permission given to Aharon to enter the inner sanctuary whenever he wanted, as long as he followed the correct protocol. He does not assume that that this was limited after the sin of Nadav and Avihu. In fact, the directives might have first been given right after the sin, and in reaction to it, to ensure the correct procedure and prevent future deaths. The law only changed after the nation entered the Land of Israel (or perhaps, after Aharon's death).</fn> and with specific garments.<fn>This might be supported by the position in <multilink><aht source="VayikraRabbah20-9">Vayikra Rabbah</aht><aht source="VayikraRabbah20-9">20:9</aht><aht parshan="Vayikra Rabbah" /></multilink> that asserts that Nadav and Avihu's sin was entering unrobed.</fn> Our verses, then, would not be limited to Yom HaKippurim, but would refer to any time the high priest wanted to atone in the inner sanctuary.</li> | ||
</ul> | </ul> | ||
Line 101: | Line 101: | ||
<multilink><aht source="TosafotSanhedrin83b">Tosafot Sanhedrin</aht><aht source="TosafotSanhedrin83b">Sanhedrin 83b s.v. "אין"</aht><aht parshan="Baalei HaTosafot">About Ba'alei HaTosafot</aht></multilink>, | <multilink><aht source="TosafotSanhedrin83b">Tosafot Sanhedrin</aht><aht source="TosafotSanhedrin83b">Sanhedrin 83b s.v. "אין"</aht><aht parshan="Baalei HaTosafot">About Ba'alei HaTosafot</aht></multilink>, | ||
<multilink><aht source="ChizkuniShemot28-35">Chizkuni</aht><aht source="ChizkuniShemot28-35">Shemot 28:35</aht><aht parshan="Chizkuni">About R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach</aht></multilink>, | <multilink><aht source="ChizkuniShemot28-35">Chizkuni</aht><aht source="ChizkuniShemot28-35">Shemot 28:35</aht><aht parshan="Chizkuni">About R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach</aht></multilink>, | ||
− | |||
<multilink><aht source="AbarbanelShemot28-35">Abarbanel</aht><aht source="AbarbanelShemot28-35">Shemot 28:35</aht><aht parshan="Abarbanel">About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel</aht></multilink>, | <multilink><aht source="AbarbanelShemot28-35">Abarbanel</aht><aht source="AbarbanelShemot28-35">Shemot 28:35</aht><aht parshan="Abarbanel">About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel</aht></multilink>, | ||
Version as of 23:39, 5 February 2014
Warning Bells – "וְנִשְׁמַע קוֹלוֹ... וְלֹא יָמוּת"
Exegetical Approaches
Overview
Commentators disagree on what served to prevent death from occurring in the sanctuary. Vayikra Rabbah and Rashi view the final words of the verse ("וְלֹא יָמוּת") as related to the wearing of all of the priestly garments, the absence of any one of which would have fatal consequences. Rashbam, in contrast, understands the words to refer specifically to the ringing bells of the high priest's robe which would alert the ordinary priests to evacuate the Tabernacle while the purification rite was being performed on Yom HaKippurim. Finally, Ralbag also explains that the words relate to the sound of the bells, but he posits that the bells had a year round function to remind the high priest to always be mentally prepared for his service.
Wearing Full Attire
The high priest will not die if he wears all of the required vestments for serving in the Tabernacle, and the bells of the robe play no special role as far as this.
- 28:35 which comes in the context of the special vestments of the high priest and refers specifically to the high priest.
- 28:43 which follows the instructions regarding the basic priestly garments and applies to all priests.
Evacuation of the Sanctuary
The bells of the high priest's robe served to warn the ordinary priests to leave the sanctuary prior to the high priest's entry. The priests' exit protected them from potential death.
- Ibn Ezra learns from our verse that on the Day of Atonement the priest did, in fact, wear the garments mentioned here (the robe, tunic, and breastplate) into the inner chamber, in addition to his all white clothing.6
- Alternatively, one might suggest that there was a change in the law. Initially, the high priest was allowed into the Holy of Holies whenever he wanted, wearing his regular uniform. Only after the sin of Nadav and Avihu, did Hashem limit entry to one day a year,7 and with specific garments.8 Our verses, then, would not be limited to Yom HaKippurim, but would refer to any time the high priest wanted to atone in the inner sanctuary.
Preparation or Protection of the High Priest
The ringing of the bells insured that the high priest approached his service in the Tabernacle with proper respect and purity of thought, and that he would not perish.
- Permission request – According to most of these commentators, the bells were the high priest's way of knocking to request permission to enter.
- Protection – Ramban and R. Bachya additionally suggest that they served to alert the ministering angels who normally filled the Tabernacle to the arrival of the high priest. This would signal them to leave, ensuring that they did not harm the incoming priest.
- Reminder – For Ralbag, in contrast, the bells were a reminder to the high priest to properly channel his thoughts to the worship of Hashem.
- Status – Ramban suggests that the command is aimed only at the high priest due to his higher stature and greater service.10 Ralbag could similarly explain that the high priest was held to a higher standard due to the importance of his role.
- Ordinary priests absent – Alternatively, one might suggest, as does Seforno, that in the desert, the ordinary priests were never allowed in the Tabernacle at all.11 As such, they obviously had no need for bells to announce their arrival or to focus their thoughts, since they never served inside the sanctuary.