When It’s All About G-d’s Will, Each Detail is Important.

Texts & Contexts

Tzav

Rabbi Eliezer Shemtov

The reading of Tzav [1] opens with the duties of the priests regarding the sacrifice called "Olah," the ascension offering, since, unlike other types of sacrifices, which are partially consumed by the priests and/or the owners, it was completely consumed by the fire on the altar. One of the details concerns the ashes that were accumulating on the altar: "The priest shall put on his linen tunic and his linen trousers over his flesh. He shall remove the ashes within which the fire has consumed the ascension offering on the altar. He shall deposit these beside the altar. He shall take off his garments and put on other garments, and he shall carry the ashes to a clean place outside the camp." [2]

Rashi quotes the words "he shall take off his garments" and comments: It is not obligatory; It's a matter of good manners, so as not to soil the clothes he always uses for serving when removing the ashes. Clothes [he wore] to cook a pot for his master shouldn't be used to serve him a cup. That's why he had to put on other, lesser clothes.

At first glance, there seem to be two different reasons for the change of clothes:

1) it's a precaution regarding the priestly garments—so as not to soil them;

2) it's a detail linked to the priest's service—it's not appropriate to perform a higher-ranking service in the same clothes used to perform a lower-ranking service.

It's important to understand why Rashi gives these two reasons, being that the purpose of his commentary is not to explain the reasons for the precepts.

Regarding the first explanation —so as not to soil the usual clothes— we can say that Rashi is forced to explain the length of the text. The text could simply have said that the priest had to put on other clothes before removing the ashes; Why does it explicitly say that he had to take off his clothes and then put on other clothes? With his commentary, Rashi clarifies that the reason for changing clothes is to avoid soiling the clothes he was wearing. But why does Rashi bring up the second point?

The explanation:

Rashi wants to clarify a question that arises from the text. If the change of clothes was necessary to avoid soiling the clothes with ash, why was it necessary to change the clothes just before removing the ash from the camp and not before removing the ash from the altar, a service that could also soil the clothes?

It is to answer this question that Rashi brings up the second explanation, the example of not wearing the same clothes one was wearing when cooking a pot for one's master when one comes to pour him a cup of wine. With this, we understand the distinction between the priestly service of removing ashes from the altar to be deposited beside the altar and that of removing it to the its designated place outside of the camp:

One of the differences between cooking a pot and serving a cup is that the pot is cooked out of the king's sight; the cup is served to the king directly.

This is the difference between the two services related to the movement of ashes: the first was performed in proximity to the altar, "in the king's presence", and therefore required important attire. The transfer of the ashes outside the camp, while beginning "in the king's presence," in their place of accumulation beside the altar, requires lesser attire, since the objective is to remove them from the king's presence.

One more point: removing the ashes from the altar is the end of the process of bringing a sacrifice, unlike removing the ashes to the outside of the camp, which is simply something done to make room for more ashes. The first is comparable to "serving a cup" and is an end in itself; The second is comparable to "cooking a pot," a purely preparatory task. Something that is an important service within the Temple cannot be considered "dirty". Note that there was a lot of blood from the sacrifices that could "dirty" the priestly clothing, yet it is of no concern. It is only when performing the "maintenance" task of removing the ashes to the outside that the concern for "soiling" comes into play and requires a change of clothing.

The Mystical Dimension

Following Rashi's reasoning, a question arises: why was it necessary to change only the clothing and not the actors, since generally those who work in the kitchen are not the ones who serve the cup to the king?

From this, it follows that although these are two different types of service, it was appropriate for the same priest to perform them.

A practical lesson:

Regarding personal spiritual growth, the lesson is that we should not distinguish between the different tasks G‑d requires of us. Whether it is an "important" task, such as serving the cup, or an auxiliary task, such as working in the kitchen, one does it with the same dedication, since what matters is not one's prominence, but rather that G‑d's will be fulfilled.

Regarding the connection with one's neighbor, we may sometimes prefer to deal with those within our inner circle rather than with those outside. Let others take care of it… From Rashi's commentary, we learn that it is the same priest who takes care of the internal tasks, "presents the cup to his master," who must also take care, if necessary, of going outside the camp and doing whatever is needed there. And for this, he will have to "change his clothes, of lesser quality" to adapt his communication to the level of those who are currently "outside." And although it implies a demotion for him, since outside he cannot accomplish anything of great value (presenting a cup to the master), only something "preparatory" and elementary (cooking), it is precisely in this way that he fulfills the Divine plan. In fact, with this he emulates G‑d Himself, Who “personally” came down to Egypt to lead us out of slavery. And thus we will again —very soon— deserve that G‑d lead each of us out of the current exile.

Synthesis of Likutei Sichot, Vol. 37, pp. 1-6.

——————————————

1. Leviticus 6:1-8:36

2. ibid. 6:3,4