Questions — Parshah Achrei Mot
Vayikra 16
EH translates “Be-Korvatam Lifne-Adonai” as “They drew close to the presence of the Lord.” Why not, “They drew close before the presence of the Lord”? Did they actually cross a physical line that brought them too close to the Divine presence? Was their mistake a mistake in judgement of what the limits were of God’s personal; space? Is this a different theory of the events than we saw in Parshat Shemini, or is it a shortened version of events? Is it meant as a way of speaking about the event that would cause less pain to Aaron if he heard it?
Why does this introductory phrase appear? The parshiyot of Tazria-Metsorah feel like an interruption into the flow of the narrative (such as it is). This phrase can be read to support that sense. The level of specificity of detail in those parshiyot is unusual. It is really only matched in Torah by the specificity of the parshiyot on the construction of the Mishkan. In fact they exceed them in deep attention to detail. This makes them seem even more like a text that has been interjected into the flow of an existing text. (For an alternate theory, if we read Tazria-Metsorah primarily for its role as part of a catalog of the types of sacrifices and how they are performed we would see less of a disruption. Also, the sequence of types of leprosy: body, garments, house, matches the sequence in which the priests carry out sanctification of the Mikdash itself. We can relate these two events, sanctification and the examination of the cases of leprosy, as somehow related in the way that each maintains the sanctity of the Land of Israel)
Aaron is supposed to bring a ram with the bull as an offering. Can this be the ram that he gets from the people of is it his own ram and thus each ram is part of the separate offerings of purification?
What is Azazel? What is supposed to happen to the goat for Azazel?
Who is responsible for the lottery that determines which goat has which fate? How would that lottery have been performed? Could it have been done using the Umim and Thummim? How were these goats selected by the people? Where did they come from?
Moses is to use the incense to create smoke that will obscure his ability to see the cover of the ark. Why? God appreciates the small of the sacrifice. It is the only part of the sacrifice that God “consumes.” Is the smell of the incense not part of that experience for God? Doe is do double duty?
When Moses sprinkles the blood of the bull he is to sprinkle it, “over the cover on the east side and in front of the cover he shall sprinkle some of the blood with his finger seven times.” What is going on with this directionality? We understand the spatial orientation of the Temple, but was was the spatial orientation of the Mikdash? Was it fixed in the same NS/EW orientation as a rule? Why one sprinkle on the cover and seven in front of it?
The blood of the people’s goat is also sprinkled. However, number and orientation and ambiguous. Why?
When the shrine has been purged of impurities and the transgression of the Israelites the High Priest emerges on does the same for the Tent of Meeting, thus expanding the purified space step by step (which the goat of Azazel seemed to expand further. How do we understand the vagueness of where the goat for Azazel goes? Can the land as a whole have the same state of purity that the shrine and tent of meeting have or is that not possible?
Why is the goat for Azazel released after the other goat is sacrificed? How do sins move around: How does the High Priest come to be able to transmit the people’s sins to the goat? Is the priest a sin-eater? Is the goat as well?
What is done with the blood from the bull and the goat that is not put on the horns of the altar or sprinkled (on the altar?) ? (See 16:27)
Why does Aaron need to change his clothes and bath after dealing with the blood and before offering the sacrifice on the altar?
Expiation seems to be done through the handling of the blood, but then the burning of the sacrifice is also required. What element achieves expiation: blood, flesh or the transfer of sins to the goat for Azazel? Is it all of these? The process then seems chaotic and messy.
Do the actions of the High Priest render them impure? Is that why they need to bath, or is it that they are overly pure? How can they be in the closest possible proximity to the Divine presence in a state of impurity? Is that impossible in the case where they survive?
The laws relating to the sacrifices on Yom Kippur are to be “a law for all time,” but have been in abeyance for millenia? Can prayer and fasting really perform the function of the sacrifices and the use of the scapegoat? What is the consequence of being individually, or communally responsible for atonement without a High Priest to be the place where the buck stops?
Yom Kippur is a Sabbath without enjoyment? It is an abnormal Sabbath ina way. What is the platonic ideal of a Sabbath experience?
Why do we have the summary of the day in verses 29-34?
Why is there no recounting of how all of what has been described was done?
Chapter 17
The idea of a punishment for the killing of food animals outside of the sacrificial system makes a certain kind of sense, however, why is the averah seen seemingly as if it is comparable with the killing of a human?
Why is it such a problem that the Israelites would sacrifice to goat-demons? Was the goat for Azazel just such a sacrifice and it was the High Priest made it? Is there a difference between a gift and a sacrifice?
Why is a sacrifice outside of the Temple precincts less problematic that the killing of an animal for food (Though still a problem)?
The use of blood for expiation is different from the consumption of blood, but it seems to be a use for the blood. Isn’t the blood God’s and not for human use?
Why are birds allowed to be killed outside of the Temple system?
Does the prohibition on eating animals that have died or been torn have a way of shedding one’s guilt apply in all cases or only in cases where the consumption was inadvertent?
Chapter 18
Why are the laws of family purity recounted here? What do we gain from their placement here?
What is the nuance of the phrase “uncover nakedness”? Doe it just mean have sex with in any case? Does it have a more expansive meaning than that? How else might have this been phrased?
In 18:6 we see the phrase, “his own flesh.” Relatives by marriage are also included in the specifics. Can those who marry into a family be considered one’s “own flesh?”
Why the repeated use of redundant phrases, like “your father’s daughter?”
What is meant by the phrase in 18:10, “their nakedness is yours,” which does not appear in the other cases?
Why is the issue of incest with a daughter or a granddaughter singled out as depravity? Is this actually the most obvious case.
Jacob’s marriages to Rachel and Leah violate the prohibition in 18:18. Why is this not mentioned?
In verse 18:20 we are enjoined from having “Carnal relations” with our neighbor’s wife. Why is the phrase of sexual relations here a more obvious usage that in the other cases? Wy is the phrase ”and defile yourself with her” added. Is the first not already a violated of coveting from Aseret Ha-Dibrot. Does one not defile oneself in the other cases mentioned?
What the qualifying phrase on 18:22 with regards to male homosexual relations, “as one lies with a woman?” Many now read the whole phrase as something other than a prohibition of male homosexuality? How does this interpretation work? Do we need this, or is it better to read the simpler way (though it may still not be the actual Peshat) and allow male homosexuality through a Takanah?
Why does a man defile himself through bestiality and a woman commit an act of perversion?
The Land of Israel is being cleared for the Israelites because its inhabitants violated these laws of family purity. Did they really? How commonly?
In verse 18:30 we are told that all of these forbidden acts cause one to defile oneself. Why then were only the few acts that were specifically noted as causing one to defile oneself described that way an not any of the others as a formula?
Only in the case of bestiality is the woman attributed agency. Is the woman not responsible for an Averah unless she is considered to have agency? Is a woman considered to lack agency in all of these cases? What is the consequence for the female partner in any of these cases?
Similarly, if one has male homosexual relations with another male “as one lies with a woman” is the male partner in this case attribute the agency of a male and the guilt, or not?
