As one learns Ramban on Chumash it becomes clear that as he
declared in his introduction, he is having a dialogue with his predecessors. He
discloses in that introduction the names of two of them: Rashi and Ibn Ezra.
But a person familiar with Rambam’s thought will detect a constant underlying
dialogue with Rambam especially when the subject deals with theological matters
even when he does not explicitly tell us so. An example of such a subtle
dialogue can be detected in this week’s Parsha (Shemini) Vaykra 9:7-8.
ז וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה אֶל-אַהֲרֹן, קְרַב אֶל-הַמִּזְבֵּחַ
וַעֲשֵׂה אֶת-חַטָּאתְךָ וְאֶת-עֹלָתֶךָ, וְכַפֵּר בַּעַדְךָ, וּבְעַד הָעָם; וַעֲשֵׂה
אֶת-קָרְבַּן הָעָם, וְכַפֵּר בַּעֲדָם, כַּאֲשֶׁר, צִוָּה יְהוָה.
And Moses said unto Aaron: 'Draw near unto the altar, and
offer thy sin-offering, and thy burnt-offering, and make atonement for thyself,
and for the people; and present the offering of the people, and make atonement
for them; as the LORD commanded.'
ח וַיִּקְרַב אַהֲרֹן, אֶל-הַמִּזְבֵּחַ; וַיִּשְׁחַט
אֶת-עֵגֶל הַחַטָּאת, אֲשֶׁר-לוֹ.
So Aaron drew near unto the altar, and
slew the calf of the sin-offering, which was for himself.
The obvious question that comes to mind is what was the purpose of this
dialogue? Didn’t Aharon know that it was his job as Cohen to go up to the altar
to do the Avodah? Chazal detect reluctance on his part and comment on it. Rashi
abbreviates their comment and just points out that Aharon was shy and
reluctant. One gets the impression that it was possibly a lack of
self-confidence or humility, Aharon feeling that he was not worthy. Ramban is not content with leaving that
impression. After offering a somewhat strained Peshuto Shel Mikra explanation
he quotes the Midrash (Mechilta DeMiluim 7, Sifra ad locum) verbatim.
“But in Torat Kohanim [our Rabbis]
commented on this matter by offering a parable. This is comparable to a king
who married a woman who was ashamed [to be intimate] with him. She came to her
sister who told her – isn’t it for this purpose that you married him? Be bold
and come serve the king. So too Moshe told Aharon, brother weren’t you chosen
to be Cohen Gadol to serve God? Be bold and do your work. Some say, that to
Aharon the altar took the shape of an ox (Ketavnit Shor) and Aharon feared him,
Moshe came to him and told him not to let his fears take over, be bold and go
closer. That is why it says קְרַב אֶל-הַמִּזְבֵּחַ and וַיִּקְרַב אַהֲרֹן, אֶל-הַמִּזְבֵּחַ;”
When one reads that Midrash second explanation one can interpret it that
Aharon was feeling guilty about having been instrumental in the Egel episode. A
more sophisticated read, and probably that is how Rambam would read it, is that
he was trying to understand how is the concept of bringing offerings to an idol
different than burnt offerings on the altar in the Mishkan. Why when he created
the Egel which was ultimately directed to God, he was so harshly censured,
isn’t this similar? Isn’t the idea of
bringing an offering a sort of bribe exchanging it for goodwill? Aren’t we
attempting to bribe God here too? Moshe’s response was that despite the
questions he must do as ordered because it is God’s wish to allow the people to
indulge a little in their superstitious illusion and thereby slowly lead them
to a more advanced understanding of worship. This is a very directed and regulated
worship while the Egel was an unregulated spontaneous outburst of superstition
and even worse, to an intermediary, a representation of God.
Ramban however, at the beginning of Vaykra (1:9) has already voiced his
vehement disagreement with Rambam’s understanding that Korbanot are a
concession to human frailty. He does believe that offerings impact God if
brought with the proper intention. The Egel was to an intermediary which is
prohibited while Korbanot are directed to the Hallowed Name of Hashem. He now
worries that this Midrash will be interpreted support Rambam’s position.
“The meaning of this Midrash is because Aharon who was a holy person and
only had sinned once at the Egel, that sin stood out in his mind, … and he saw
the form of the calf, namely that it was preventing him from successfully
getting forgiveness. Moshe tells him not
worry as he is already forgiven for that misstep. Others say that the Satan was
showing him the calf, as the Rabbis say there, Aharon my brother, even though
God forgave you, you still have to offer something to the Satan to stop him
from interfering when you come into the Holy places…”
Ramban interprets the Midrash as saying that Aharon was worried about his
having sinned and that will stand in the way of his worship. He makes that point
lest we interpret that the Korbanot themselves were problematic. Ramban does
not see a problem with offerings as long as they are directed to God. The second
explanation offered by the Rabbis he interprets as the Satan appearing to
Aharon demanding a bribe for himself. There are circumstances where even the Torah
sanctions bringing offerings other than to God. Satan at times may have to be
placated just like the Azazel offering on Yom Kippur see Ramban and Ibn Ezra on
Vayikra 16:8.
Rambam in MN 3:46 explains that the Azazel offering does not imply that one
can transfer one’s sins onto another entity (reminds us of Kaparot and I would
not be surprised that was in his mind as the custom goes back to Geonim) but
rather to symbolically awaken in us the thought that we have left our past
behind and we are starting afresh with the undertaking of not repeating past
mistakes. This offering represents the most abhorrent sins of the whole people
which are so bad that they cannot be bought into the sanctuary in front of God.
I also believe that at the end of the whole charged Avodah of the holiest day
of the year, Yom Kippur, the last offering does not come onto the altar as a
symbol that the burning is not what a Korban is. God does not need it and to
Him it is all the same whether offered to him as a burnt offering or whether it
is gratuitously destroyed. It is all to get us thinking about our actions and
improving them. We have here a classic redirection of a habit that cannot be stopped.
