5783/2023

In Parashat VaYikra, the Torah begins to introduce the laws for

Korbanot, meaning offerings. In fact, another name for VaYikra

is Torat Kohanim because it is so focused on the rules of

Kohanim and their service. However, laws of Korbanot are not

so easy to become enthusiastic over, hence Hashem takes

measures to engage Bnei Yisrael because after all, קרבן comes

from the word קרב, to bring close, and the point of these

offerings is to build a relationship between Bnei Yisrael and

Himself.

Firstly, we will look at the most asked question on Sefer

VaYikra: why is the Alef in VaYikra smaller than the regular

font? Rashi explains that Moshe wanted to write ויקר instead of

ויקרא because the former is the language used when Hashem

talked to Bilaam, and because Moshe was humble, he didn’t

want to look any better even though his prophetic level was

obviously on a higher level. However, the language Rashi uses

in regard ot Bilaam’s conversation with Hashem is “וטמאה עראי,“

“temporary and unholy” (Rashi to Vayikra 1:1). Why would

Moshe want to be compared to this?

Another question is why the Torah changes Its language in

regards to two distinct times when blood is sprinkled on the

Parochet. The first case, if a Kohen Gadol was mistaken and led

the nation to do an Aveirah, the atonement process is described

the towards” “, ֶאת־ ְּפנֵי ָּפרֶֹכת ַהּקֶֹדׁש” times seven sprinkling as

Parochet HaKodesh” (VaYikra 4:6). Strangely, eleven Pesukim

later the Torah describes what to do if the Sanhedrin

accidentally leads Bnei Yisrael to sin, blood is sprinkled seven

(4:17 .Ibid” (Parochet the towards” “, ֵאת ְּפנֵי ַה ָּפרֶֹכת” times

noticeably missing the word “HaKodesh.” Why is “HaKodesh”

removed the second time around?

Now, let’s answer the first question. Rav Moshe Taragin

explains that at the beginning of our Parashah, when Hashem

commands Moshe Rabbeinu to speak to Bnei Yisrael it is meant

to be a continued discussion between all the mentioned

parties. Although Bnei Yisrael must listen to whatever Hashem

commands, they are still part of the conversation and affirming

that they want to serve Hashem. When Moshe Rabbeinu claims

that Hashem speaks to him in passing by using ויקר, the

temporary nature encourages Bnei Yisrael: if they commit to

having real relationship with Hashem, they will get it; if

Bilaam’s discussion with Hashem is described as Tamei and

temporary, a Torah based devotion towards Hashem will spur

great connections.

For the second question, Rashi explains that the defining factor

between whether the Parochet retains its Kedusha is how

many people sinned. By the Kohen Gadol, there is one sinner.

However, by the Sanhedrin, all seventy one of them have

sinned. Again, Rav Moshe Taragin explains that this is a greater

failure because in those times the Sanhedrin were the center

for Torah and if they made a mistake, they will lose the respect

of the nation and consequently the Torah will lose respect;

hence, the Parochet loses some Kedushah. However, if the

Sanhedrin had exercised a little more care and unconditionally

sought the truth through lengthened discussion and derivation

of the Torah, the travesty would have been averted.

In both of these cases, the Torah highlights the value of

meaningful discussion in the lead up to laws that are difficult to

understand. However, by turning to one another and

disseminating Torah ideas, the truth will ultimately be

unearthed. Discussion is no coincidence after all.