 |
| Tel El Amarna, the desert altars of Egypt's southern desert |
וְנֶפֶשׁ כִּי תַקְרִיב קָרְבַּן מִנְחָה לַיהוָה סֹלֶת יִהְיֶה קָרְבָּנוֹ וְיָצַק עָלֶיהָ שֶׁמֶן וְנָתַן עָלֶיהָ לְבֹנָה
KJ (King James translation): And when any will offer a meat offering unto the LORD, his offering shall be of fine flour; and he shall pour oil upon it, and put frankincense thereon:
BN (BibleNet translation): And when any one brings a meal-offering to YHVH, his offering shall be of fine flour; and he shall pour oil on it, and lay frankincense on it.
MINCHAH appears to have meant something different then from what it does now; then "an offering", now the afternoon service. But in fact this is correct in both accounts: the change came with the destruction of the Second Temple in 70CE, after which sacrifice was no longer available, but the Rabbis determined that the "substitute" - prayer - should mirror the sacrificial times.
Why fine flour - it sounds like a form of batter for a deep-fry? And indeed, it probably was, because one of the ultimate purposes of the Temple was to obtain divine permission to eat. But then, why frankincense, which adds nothing to the flavour? Because the part of the meal which the divine takes is precisely the aroma - the "sweet savour to YHVH" - the smell of cooking in the MITBACH, a word which means "kitchen" as well as "abattoir" (clearly YHVH isn't into cordon bleu, which would surely have recommended parsley or cilantro!).
One interesting side-question, thrown up by my link on the word frankincense, is: how on Earth did the Beney Yisra-El in the desert acquire sufficient quantities of a substance grown, in those days, exclusively in the Yemen and along the Gulf?
One interesting side-question, thrown up by my link on the word frankincense, is: how on Earth did the Beney Yisra-El in the desert acquire sufficient quantities of a substance grown, in those days, exclusively in the Yemen and along the Gulf?
2:2 VE HEVIY'AH EL BENEY AHARON HA KOHANIM VE KAMATS MI SHAM MEL'O KUMTSO MI SALTAH U MI SHAMNAH AL KOL LEVONATAH VE HIKTIR HA KOHEN ET AZKARATAH HA MIZBECHAH ISHEH REYACH NIYCHO'ACH LA YHVH
וֶהֱבִיאָהּ אֶל בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֲנִים וְקָמַץ מִשָּׁם מְלֹא קֻמְצוֹ מִסָּלְתָּהּ וּמִשַּׁמְנָהּ עַל כָּל לְבֹנָתָהּ וְהִקְטִיר הַכֹּהֵן אֶת אַזְכָּרָתָהּ הַמִּזְבֵּחָה אִשֵּׁה רֵיחַ נִיחֹחַ לַיהוָה
KJ: And he shall bring it to Aaron's sons the priests: and he shall take thereout his handful of the flour thereof, and of the oil thereof, with all the frankincense thereof; and the priest shall burn the memorial of it upon the altar, to be an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the LORD:
BN: And he shall bring it [the offering] to Aharon's sons, the Kohanim; and he shall take from it the required handful of the fine flour, and the same of the oil, together with all the frankincense; and the priest shall make the memorial-part from it as smoke upon the altar, an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour to YHVH.
Why are some sacrifices brought to Aharon, but others to his sons? Does this signify a hierarchy in sacrifices through the hierarchy of sacrificers?
As with the offerings in Chapter 1, the bringer is himself responsible for much of the execution of the sacrifice.
What exactly is the AZKARAH, the "memorial-part"? We heard about "memorial stones" in the Book of Exodus (28:12 et al), and it was unclear what precisely they were then, but the sense seems to be that, in the cult of the Beney Yisra-El, there can never be "forgive and forget", but only "forgive and remember" - the remembering being the best chance of not repeating the bad. Memorial stones on graves achieve the same, as do Holocaust memorials, Books of the Dead, obituary columns in newspapers, biographies... and in modern Judaism the Passover Haggadah, through which personal identification with history can be obtained, and history thereby become sufficiently meaningful that it also becomes educative. I believe that this is the intention of the memorial here: you committed a sin; your offering is the atonement; but it does not end here; you still did the thing; you have to remember that you did it, and learn from the error, so that you will not repeat it. There is no "You are forgiven" nor "You are redeemed", because what has been done cannot be undone; but there is: "well done, you have accepted responsibility".
2:3 VE HA NOTERET MIN HA MINCHAH LE AHARON U LE VANAV KODESH KADASHIM ME ISHEY YHVH
וְהַנּוֹתֶרֶת מִן הַמִּנְחָה לְאַהֲרֹן וּלְבָנָיו קֹדֶשׁ קָדָשִׁים מֵאִשֵּׁי יְהוָה
KJ: And the remnant of the meat offering shall be Aaron's and his sons': it is a thing most holy of the offerings of the LORD made by fire.
BN: And whatever is left over of the meal-offering shall be for Aharon and his sons; this is the "holy of holies" of all the offerings made to YHVH by fire.
An important injunction this, known from the Temple service later: that burnt offerings of this sort could only be eaten by the Kohanim, not by the donor. This provides the definition of "sacrifice" that most of the modern world would offer: a giving up of something you hold dear, rather than a "making sacred" of it. With other offerings, you bring the animal to the Kohen for formal approval, and then you barbecue it on the altar and enjoy.
KODESH KADASHIM: My translation is correct, literally, and seems to me to work splendidly as a piece of poetry as well. Unfortunately, verse 10 will challenge it, by using exactly the same words, but to describe a different offering, and two different offerings cannot both be the "epitome", the "one and only and absolute". While the King James translation simply does not convey the significance: it only really translates one of the forms, KADASH.
samech break
2:4 VE CHI TAKRIV KARBAN MINCHAH MA'APHEH TANUR SOLET CHALOT MATSOT BE LULOT BA SHEMEN U REKIYKEY MATSOT MESHUCHIM BA SHAMEN
וְכִי תַקְרִב קָרְבַּן מִנְחָה מַאֲפֵה תַנּוּר סֹלֶת חַלּוֹת מַצֹּת בְּלוּלֹת בַּשֶּׁמֶן וּרְקִיקֵי מַצּוֹת מְשֻׁחִים בַּשָּׁמֶן
KJ: And if thou bring an oblation of a meat offering baken in the oven, it shall be unleavened cakes of fine flour mingled with oil, or unleavened wafers anointed with oil.
BN: And when you bring a burnt-offering baked in the oven, it shall be unleavened cakes of fine flour mingled with oil, or unleavened wafers spread with oil.
KARBAN: King James translates it as meat-offering, which it may or may not be (see my comments below); but the point here is not that it is meat, but that it is burnt.
TANUR: no question that a TANUR is an oven, probably clay-brick, but definitely not one of the utensils available to the Kohanim at the Tent, and not among those described as being in the Temple either.
Most of the sacrifices are raw, but this one is pre-cooked; as are several of the following. What is not explained is: were you expected to bring the animal for sacrifice first? And if so, could you then take it home still raw, and cook it in your oven, in order to then bring it back for what would be a second sacrificial ceremony? The rules given in later chapters, defining what can be eaten, and where, and when, do not include this option. And if it was, or is going to become, a burnt-offering, why cook it in the oven first anyway?
samech break
2:5 VE IM MINCHAH AL HA MACHAVAT KARBANECHA SOLET BE LULAH VA SHEMEN MATSAH TIHEYEH
וְאִם מִנְחָה עַל הַמַּחֲבַת קָרְבָּנֶךָ סֹלֶת בְּלוּלָה בַשֶּׁמֶן מַצָּה תִהְיֶה
KJ: And if thy oblation be a meat offering baken in a pan, it shall be of fine flour unleavened, mingled with oil.
BN: And if your offering is a meal-offering baked on a griddle, it shall be of fine flour unleavened, mingled with oil.
Ah the nuances! Non-Jews can now begin to understand why Judaism is really a religion of the stomach, not the soul, a constant ebb and flow between feasting and fasting. And note that too has to be cooked at home before being brought as an offering.
2:6 PATOT OTAH PITIM VE YATSAKTA ALEYHA SHAMEN MINCHAH HI
פָּתוֹת אֹתָהּ פִּתִּים וְיָצַקְתָּ עָלֶיהָ שָׁמֶן מִנְחָה הִוא
KJ: Thou shalt part it in pieces, and pour oil thereon: it is a meat offering.
BN: You shalt slice it in pieces, and pour oil over it: it counts as a meat offering.
PATOT: the origins of pizza, honestly.
samech break
2:7 VE IM MINCHAT MARCHESHET KARBANECHA SOLET BA SHEMEN TE'ASEH
וְאִם מִנְחַת מַרְחֶשֶׁת קָרְבָּנֶךָ סֹלֶת בַּשֶּׁמֶן תֵּעָשֶׂה
KJ: And if thy oblation be a meat offering baken in the fryingpan, it shall be made of fine flour with oil.
BN: And if your offering is a meal-offering baked in a stewpot, it shall be made using fine flour with oil.
MARCHESHET: Here and Leviticus 7:9 are the only two instances of the word in the Tanach. In 7:9 a distinction is made between the TANUR, the MARCHESHET and the MACHAVAT (מַחֲבַת). The probability is that the TANUR (as above), was a clay-oven, the MARCHESHET a cauldron or cooking-pot, of the sort that Ya'akov would have used to make stew for Esav (Genesis 25:29), and the MACHAVAT a frying-pan.
2:8 VE HEVE'TA ET HA MINCHAH ASHER YE'ASEH ME ELEH LA YHVH VE HIKRIYVAH EL HA KOHEN VE HIGIYSHAH EL HA MIZBE'ACH
וְהֵבֵאתָ אֶת הַמִּנְחָה אֲשֶׁר יֵעָשֶׂה מֵאֵלֶּה לַיהוָה וְהִקְרִיבָהּ אֶל הַכֹּהֵן וְהִגִּישָׁהּ אֶל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ
KJ: And thou shalt bring the meat offering that is made of these things unto the LORD: and when it is presented unto the priest, he shall bring it unto the altar.
BN: And you shall bring the meal-offering that is made of these things to YHVH; and it shall be presented to the Kohen, and he shall bring it to the altar.
Seeming to confirm our reading of the earlier sacrifices; these are given to the Kohen, who presents them.
2:9 VE HERIM HA KOHEN MIN HA MINCHAH ET AZKARATAH VE HIKTIR HA MIZBECHAH ISHEH REYACH NIYCHO'ACH LA YHVH
וְהֵרִים הַכֹּהֵן מִן הַמִּנְחָה אֶת אַזְכָּרָתָהּ וְהִקְטִיר הַמִּזְבֵּחָה אִשֵּׁה רֵיחַ נִיחֹחַ לַיהוָה
KJ: And the priest shall take from the meat offering a memorial thereof, and shall burn it upon the altar: it is an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the LORD.
BN: And the Kohen shall take from the meal-offering its memorial-part, and he shall make it smoke upon the altar as an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour to YHVH.
AZKARATAH: See my notes to verse 2.
AZKARATAH: See my notes to verse 2.
2:10 VE HA NOTERET MIN HA MINCHAH LE AHARON U LE VANAV KODESH KADASHIM ME ISHEY YHVH
וְהַנּוֹתֶרֶת מִן הַמִּנְחָה לְאַהֲרֹן וּלְבָנָיו קֹדֶשׁ קָדָשִׁים מֵאִשֵּׁי יְהוָה
KJ: And that which is left of the meat offering shall be Aaron's and his sons': it is a thing most holy of the offerings of the LORD made by fire.
BN: And whatever is left over of the meal-offering shall be for Aharon and his sons; this is the "holy of holies" of all the offerings made to YHVH by fire.
KODESH KADASHIM: see my note to verse 3.
2:11 KOL HA MINCHAH ASHER TAKRIYVU LA YHVH LO TE'ASEH CHAMETS KI CHOL SE'OR VE CHOL DEVASH LO TAKTIYRU MIMENU ISHEH LA YHVH
כָּל הַמִּנְחָה אֲשֶׁר תַּקְרִיבוּ לַיהוָה לֹא תֵעָשֶׂה חָמֵץ כִּי כָל שְׂאֹר וְכָל דְּבַשׁ לֹא תַקְטִירוּ מִמֶּנּוּ אִשֶּׁה לַיהוָה
KJ: No meat offering, which ye shall bring unto the LORD, shall be made with leaven: for ye shall burn no leaven, nor any honey, in any offering of the LORD made by fire.
BN: No meal-offering, which you shall bring to YHVH, shall be made with leaven; for you shall not turn any leaven, nor any honey, into smoke as an offering made by fire to YHVH.
This statement about chamets (leavened bread) is significant, because we generally identify chamets, or at least abstinence from chamets, and the burning thereof, with Passover; but there is no indication in the text that these are specifically Passover regulations (though the calendar of these events suggests we may well be at or about the time of Passover; see my notes at the start of Leviticus 1 and Numbers 1). On the contrary, these are everyday sacrifices, and it is clearly stating that chamets may never be used as an offering made by fire to YHVH. And yet, burning is precisely what is done with the chamets in preparation for Passover - not on the altar it is true, but burned is surely burned. It is interesting either way that chamets is forbidden; the third option is that this, perhaps all of Leviticus, was written much later, and was an attempt to excise Osher (Osiris) and Tammuz worship from the rites - both were manifestations of the corn-god, for whom the chamets was therefore deeply symbolic of fertility; though in fact such an act of removal actually reinforces them.
DEVASH: Honey was sacred to the bee-goddess, Devorah, and though the bee-goddess was associated with fertility, through the swarms in her hives and the bees' essential role in propagating flowers, she was also associated with death, her "beehive tombs" being the tumuli in which the ancients buried their dead, as we know from the passing mention of her burial beneath the sacred weeping-oak in Genesis 35:8. Other than (perhaps) in war, and in fertility cults where the Underworld of demonic monsters is really the undersoil of necessary worms, biodegrading dead matter to transform it into fertilising compost, humans do not generally make sacrifices in hommage to the goddess of death.
2:12 KARBAN RE'SHIT TAKRIYVU OTAM LA YHVH VE EL HA MIZBE'ACH LO YA'ALU LE REYACH NIYCHO'ACH
קָרְבַּן רֵאשִׁית תַּקְרִיבוּ אֹתָם לַיהוָה וְאֶל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ לֹא יַעֲלוּ לְרֵיחַ נִיחֹחַ
KJ: As for the oblation of the firstfruits, ye shall offer them unto the LORD: but they shall not be burnt on the altar for a sweet savour.
BN: But as far as the source of the burnt-offering is concerned, you may bring them [the leaven and honey of verse 11] to YHVH as an offering of first-fruits, but they shall not come up for a sweet savour on the altar.
First fruits were generally brought as part of the summer pilgrimage, at Shavu'ot. But the point here is not a description of a type of offering, as in the King James translation, but the emphatic re-statement of a fundamental principle (RESHIT): do not mis-understand "sweet savour" as meaning "sugar", in any form.
2:13 VE CHOL KARBAN MINCHAT'CHA BA MELACH TIMLACH VE LO TASHBIT MELACH BERIT ELOHEYCHA ME'AL MINCHATECHA AL KOL KARBANCHA TAKRIV MELACH
וְכָל קָרְבַּן מִנְחָתְךָ בַּמֶּלַח תִּמְלָח וְלֹא תַשְׁבִּית מֶלַח בְּרִית אֱלֹהֶיךָ מֵעַל מִנְחָתֶךָ עַל כָּל קָרְבָּנְךָ תַּקְרִיב מֶלַח
KJ: And every oblation of thy meat offering shalt thou season with salt; neither shalt thou suffer the salt of the covenant of thy God to be lacking from thy meat offering: with all thine offerings thou shalt offer salt.
BN: And every one of your meal-offerings shall be seasoned with salt; you will not permit the salt of the covenant of your god to be lacking from your meal-offering; with all your offerings you shall offer salt.
The same is true of the offering of the chicken soup and the chopped liver on a Friday night, and is probably the source of the custom of many Jews, the sprinkling of salt on the challah at the same meal.
Is the salt intended for the fruit as well, or, as the text clearly states, only for "all meal-offerings" - while the fruit is specified as first-fruits and is therefore not a meal-offering? I ask because the fruit is in the same set of verses as the meal-offerings, and fruit can be a meal - though most unpleasant when salted - and mostly because the Thirteen Laws of Hermeneutics of Rabbi Yishmael would require a law deduced from one text to apply to any other subject within the same text; and therefore salt should be placed on the fruit as well.
And why salt? Note that it is the "salt of the covenant", and not just the salt in the cellar next to the pepper in front of the mint jelly and behind the pot of gravy; the inference is that the salt formed some part of the covenant ceremony, though we were never told of that before; and that this is itself an aspect of the covenant ceremony, as indeed was indicated just a moment ago.
The answer to all this lies in King Avi-Yah's (Abijah's) speech in 2 Chronicles 13:4/5, at the outset of the civil war with King Yerav-Am (Jeroboam): "Then Avi-Yah stood on Mount Tsemarayim, which is in the hill country of Ephrayim, and said, 'Listen to me, Yerav-Am and all Yisra-El: Do you not know that YHVH, the god of Yisra-El, gave the kingdom of Yisra-El forever to David and his sons through a covenant of salt?" For what precisely that meant, click here.
2:14 VE IM TAKRIV MINCHAT BIKURIM LA YHVH AVIV KALU'I BA ESH GERES KARMEL TAKRIV ET MINCHAT BIKUREYCHA
וְאִם תַּקְרִיב מִנְחַת בִּכּוּרִים לַיהוָה אָבִיב קָלוּי בָּאֵשׁ גֶּרֶשׂ כַּרְמֶל תַּקְרִיב אֵת מִנְחַת בִּכּוּרֶיךָ
KJ: And if thou offer a meat offering of thy firstfruits unto the LORD, thou shalt offer for the meat offering of thy firstfruits green ears of corn dried by the fire, even corn beaten out of full ears.
BN: And when you bring a meal-offering of first-fruits to YHVH in the spring, you shall bring corn for the meal-offering from your first-fruits, corn that is in the ear, which can then be parched with fire, or even individual pieces of corn, taken from the fresh ear.
The corn again takes us back to Tammuz and Osiris, but the first fruits are Shavu'ot (CHAG HA BIKURIM is its oher name), and it is desperately early in the year for the corn to be ripe already. Why does the corn have to be parched? Does this connect with the non-burning of the chamets?
The order of this verse does not feel right. AVIV seems out of place. And unclear whether it means the generality of "spring" or the specific month with that name.
IM: And why the word "if" in some translations? Are these offerings not obligatory then? IM is used for both "if" and "when"; clearly the intention here is "when".
2:15 VE NATATA ALEYHA SHEMEN VE SAMTA ALEYHA LEVONAH MINCHAH HI
וְנָתַתָּ עָלֶיהָ שֶׁמֶן וְשַׂמְתָּ עָלֶיהָ לְבֹנָה מִנְחָה הִוא
KJ: And thou shalt put oil upon it, and lay frankincense thereon: it is a meat offering.
BN: And you shall put oil on it, and lay frankincense on it; it is a meal-offering.
NATATA: "To give" rather than "to put", and it is not obvious why the verb used is not LISHPOCH, which would mean "to pour"; unless a distinction is being made: you "pour oil" as an act of anointing, and this is not to be misunderstood as being that. This is food preparation, not priestly ordination.
2:16 VE HIKTIR HA KOHEN ET AZKARATAH MI GIRSAH U MI SHAMNAH AL KOL LEVONATAH ISHEH LA YHVH
2:16 VE HIKTIR HA KOHEN ET AZKARATAH MI GIRSAH U MI SHAMNAH AL KOL LEVONATAH ISHEH LA YHVH
וְהִקְטִיר הַכֹּהֵן אֶת אַזְכָּרָתָהּ מִגִּרְשָׂהּ וּמִשַּׁמְנָהּ עַל כָּל לְבֹנָתָהּ אִשֶּׁה לַיהוָה
KJ: And the priest shall burn the memorial of it, part of the beaten corn thereof, and part of the oil thereof, with all the frankincense thereof: it is an offering made by fire unto the LORD.
BN: And the Kohen shall make the memorial-part of it smoke, right down to the grains, and the oil that is on it, with all of the frankincense; it is an offering made by fire to YHVH.
No comments:
Post a Comment