Abravanel

Abarbanel’s introduction to Leviticus based on Abravanel’s World of Torah by Zev Bar Eitan

“And God called unto Moses, and spoke unto him out of the Tent of
Meeting. Speak unto the Children of Israel, and say unto them: When
any man of you brings an offering unto God, you shall bring your offering
of the cattle, even of the herd or of the flock.”

In the Book of Leviticus (Vayikra), Abravanel lays out his lengthiest introduction of any of the Torah’s five Books
of Moses. (Interestingly, some books have no prefatory remarks whatsoever.) Naturally, this presents a
blogger, who is intent to keep blogs short, with a pickle. Our solution is to present below a sampling or
taste of this important prolegomenon.

Genesis (Bereshit) of the divine Torah tells about the creation of the world ex nihilo. Readers also learn
about the roots of mankind and the first generations. We also read about the lives of the saintly Jewish
patriarchs, culminating with Jacob and his family descending into Egypt.

In the Book of Exodus (Shemot) the Torah conveys how Egyptians manhandled the Hebrews, against a
backdrop of exile and enslavement. Centuries of misery concluded with God’s redemption of His chosen
ones, Moses and Aaron playing lead roles. Miracles a many accompanied the Jews in Egypt and at the
Red Sea. The desert trek, too, played a venue to wonders.

And then came Sinai. There the entire nation experienced full-blown prophecy. From the mouth of the
Maker, they received the Torah and commandments. Folly followed; the people sinned egregiously
when they fashioned a calf of gold. How was catharsis achieved?

When the Hebrews built the Tabernacle, to house the mystical Shechinah(the presence of God) and spread divine providence
in their midst, Heaven’s cloud swathed the encampment. Specifically, the cloud covered the Tent; God’s
glory permeated the Tabernacle.

This brings us to the Torah’s third book – the Book of Leviticus (Vayikra). It explains the service of the
Tabernacle. We learn how the priests or Kohanim served the Creator, service that helped the Holy
People achieve atonement for their sins. For the Kohanim’s part, they dedicated their lives to plumb the
depths of the Torah, Jewish Law, and the divine six hundred and thirteen commandments. Moreover,
the Kohanim taught their brethren good conduct. These pious mentors showed the Jews to walk in
God’s ways, the path to upright character and deed, per the verse: “For the priest’s lips should keep
knowledge, and they should seek the law at his mouth, for he is the messenger of the Lord of hosts.” On
topic, Scripture records: “And you shall come unto the priests the Levites, and unto the judge that shall
be in those days. And you shall inquire, and they shall declare unto you the sentence of judgment.” Here
is another description of the role of the priests: “They shall teach Jacob Your ordinances, and Israel Your
law.”

Now we turn to another topic in the introduction to Leviticus: sacrifices (korbonot). The Torah is
explicit regarding animal sacrifices in the Tabernacle. However, for modern readers, sacrifices have
become a closed book. Too many centuries of non-performance of the holy service have taken their toll.
With the destruction of the holy Temples in Jerusalem, the Hebrews’ glory and magnificence has faded.
The Rambam, a classic Biblical and Oral Law expositor, writes as much.

Further contributing to why we have a spotty understanding of sacrifices has to do with the Torah’s
treatment of the multifaceted subject. In a word, it is all over the place. For instance, one aspect is
mentioned in Exodus. Another source may be traced to Numbers, where more than ten separate
sections on sacrifices are interspersed. And, of course, sacrifices will be spoken about in Leviticus.

Hence, the need for our prolegomenon. We will not introduce novel ideas. Instead, our steady course
will follow the Scripture’s treatment of the subject, as well as the authentic Oral Law. The Rambam’s far-
reaching eye, too, will be our guide. Our task, then, will be to gather disparate sources, and properly
organize them.

As stated, we provide only a thumbnail sketch of the original version of Abravanel’s introduction.
Interested readers are encouraged to read the full introduction in Vayikra volume I: The Meat of the
Matter. In it, readers shall gain a solid grasp on animal sacrifices, an important Biblical topic that has
become, tragically, arcane.

“Now Yitro, the priest of Midian, Moshe’s father-in-law, heard of all that
God had done for Moshe, and for Yisrael His people, how God brought
Yisrael out of Egypt.”

The verse creates a curious conundrum: After we read that Yitro “heard of all that God had done for
Moshe, and for Yisrael”, which really represents a catch-all, it then offers a slimmed down version of
that grander observation: “how God brought Yisrael out of Egypt.” Put differently, at first the Torah
alludes to miracles galore, indicating discussion of all of the wonders that devastated Egypt, including
the vast miracles performed at the Red Sea. Viewed as a whole, this panorama is followed by news of
the Jews’ exodus. But, isn’t the exodus part and parcel of that bigger picture, “all that God had done for
Moshe, and for Yisrael His people?”

Furthermore, why doesn’t our verse refer to the plagues that rocked Egypt, bringing it to its knees? Mammoth miracles a many. And yet Yitro focuses on the Hebrews casting off their shackles and gaining freedom. Finally, why isn’t a word of Moshe’s performance uttered?
“Now Yitro, the priest of Midian, Moshe’s father-in-law, heard…” Despite Yitro’s dominant position
within Midian society, and despite the honor Moshe might have shown to him by going to Midian and
debriefing the elder statesman, things did not turn out that way. Distance was not the issue; Midian was
close by. The prophet had even more compelling reasons to take the jaunt to Midian: His wife and
children were there. Why, then, had Moshe, uncharacteristically for a husband and father, not departed
and rode out to his wife and kids?

In fact, we need to reassess the entire scene. When Yitro, who was “the priest of Midian” and “Moshe’s
father-in-law” heard the news’ headlines, he was naturally gobsmacked. The priest learned “of all that
God had done for Moshe”, meaning the honor and prominence accorded to him. Yitro heard about
national redemption and unprecedented rescue operation: “And for Yisrael His people.” The purpose of
these wonders featured “how God brought Yisrael out of Egypt.” Divine miracles accompanied the
Hebrews out of bondage. Note, the Hebrew term we originally translated as “how” or ki needs a tweak,
seeing that ki allows for multiple meanings. We substitute “when” for “how” or ka’asher.

This emerges. The verse is meant to be read as a tell-all of what transpired in Egypt, “all that God had
done.” Thus, we understand that Yitro had been apprised of the plagues and ultimate crippling of what
had been a vibrant country and economy. The priest also knew about the splitting of the Red Sea,
including the drowning of Pharoah and his troops. Even the news of the Jews’ victory over Amalek had
made the rounds.

Sensational headlines piqued Yitro’s interest, to state it lightly. He also wanted to bring Tzipporah to
Moshe. The priest’s presence would help smooth reconciliation. When the prophet would see his wife
and two sons, healthy family life could resume.

This is especially so since the boys were a source of blessing and good cheer. One son’s name was
Gershom, a name given to mark Moshe’s sojourn in a foreign land: “I have been a stranger in a strange
land.” The second son’s name was Eliezer. That name invoked salvation – “the God of my father was my
help, and delivered me from the sword of Pharoah.” Indeed, providence stayed Pharoah’s hand from
executing Moshe as the prophet delivered plague after plague after plague.

Moshe, for his part, did not want to budge from the encampment, a place resonating with closeness to
the Creator or devekut. Moreover, the prophet served as the nation’s leader and he did not want to
leave his brethren. Also, Moshe needed to oversee the people’s preparation for receiving the Torah at
Sinai. Hence, the seer did not go to Midian so close to where the camp marched, to honor Yitro. Nor was
the prophet in the position to go to Midian and encourage his wife to join him, or to see his sons. This
devolved upon Yitro; he needed to make the trip.

Don Isaac Abravanel (1437-1508) was a preeminent Jewish thinker, scholar, and prolific Biblical
commentator. Exodus chapter 19 sets the backdrop for mankind’s defining moment: The transmission of
the Torah on Mount Sinai.

“In the third month after the Children of Israel were gone forth out of the
land of Egypt, the same day came into the wilderness of Sinai.”

Abravanel asks about the timing of the watershed event: Why did God wait so long? Consider, the
Hebrews left Egypt three months earlier. Why now? Abravanel probes further, asking why the Creator
hadn’t transmitted the Pentateuch to Adam, the first man? Or perhaps, Abravanel writes, the Torah
should have been given to Noah, when the Maker entered into a covenant with mankind. As for
exemplary individuals, certainly the patriarchs – Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob – ranked as worthy
recipients. Hence, why didn’t God communicate the Torah to them, as He does now with Moses?

At length, Abravanel answers this intriguing question. See Abravanel’s World for the full treatment.
Here, we will touch on the three main points of the essay. But here is the starting premise. The Torah
should not be mischaracterized as a religious text concerning conduct, a guidebook of dos and don’ts.
Rather it is a divinely-crafted and heavenly-honed system for mastering true faith, divine belief. Now let
us return to the question: Why was God’s Torah transmitted at this particular juncture in history?

One, it wouldn’t befit the Pentateuch to be given to a special individual or even a cadre of holy people.
Torah demands throngs or myriads of gathered, quality folk. Only in the midst of the Chosen Nation can
Torah be transmitted.

Two, the intermediary or transferor of the Torah needed to be a unique soul, a noble personage. With
all due respect to the phenomenal patriarchs and their illustrious ancestors (including Adam and Noah),
Moses was cut from a different cloth. Of course, we are speaking about highly unusual traits. Abravanel
lists ten. To give a sampling, first on the list is moderation of physical or spousal comforts, like sexual
intimacy. In a word – detachment. Second is disinterest in eating and drinking, illustrated by Moses’
forty-day periods without food or drink.

Three, context and orchestration are key. Thunder and lightning and shofar blasts contributed to Sinai’s
ambience and mood, promoting the proper prelude. The lead-up miracles wrought in Egypt and the
splitting of the Red Sea, too, were all indispensable.

In sum, Abravanel teaches that God’s Torah needed a specific combination or conflation of diverse
elements to perfectly fall into place, before it could be wrested from heaven and brought down to earth.

A critical mass of huddled Hebrews, under the tutelage of the greatest of all prophets – Moses, on the
heels of the wonders the Creator performed in Egypt and in the desert proved to be the requisite and
rich ensemble.

Don Isaac Abravanel, sometimes spelled Abarbanel (1437-1508) was a preeminent Jewish thinker, scholar, and prolific Biblical
commentator. Midway through Exodus chapter 30, we read about another consecrated fixture of the
Tabernacle: the copper wash basin.

“And God spoke unto Moses saying, you shall also make a wash basin
of brass…to wash, and you shall place it between the Tent of Meeting
and the altar, and you shall put water therein. And Aaron and his sons
shall wash their hands and their feet therewith…”

Abravanel analyzes the verses pertaining to the Tabernacle’s wash basin: “And Aaron and his sons shall
wash their hands and feet therewith.”First, Abravanel focuses on Aaron, the High Priest. He and his
successor high priests need to wash their hands and feet “when they go into the Tent of Meeting.” Place
the accent on the Tent of Meeting. Feet walk them there. Showing up there without the requisite bodily
washing carries the death penalty: “They shall wash with water, that they die not.”

However, a very different emphasis relates to assistant priests. “Or when they come near to the altar to
minister, to cause an offering made by fire to smoke unto God, so they shall wash their hands and their
feet.”All priests took part in offering sacrifices on the altar. From that perspective, washing hands
highlights the priestly role of occupying themselves with animal sacrifices. Of course, this function
resulted in hands bloodied by their interaction with animals.

Given the different emphases between high priests (rinsing feet before entering the Tent of Assembly)
versus assistant priests (dealing with animals and the altar), the Bible reiterates: “So they shall wash
their hands and feet, that they die not…” Even though high priests and assistant priests did different
Tabernacle activities, this much they had in common: laxity in rinsing hands and feet proved fatal.

Abravanel continues his analysis. Washing did not reflect the need to remove dirt associated with
working the altar. That is because when people set aside livestock for the altar, those animals attain
holiness; they are pure. Thus, when priests handle sacrifices, they do not become spiritually impure.
Bloodied yes, ritually defiled no.

In sum, the reason why high priests cleansed their hands and feet upon entering the Tent of Assembly,
and the reason why assistant priests washed their hands and feet upon officiating at the altar had to do
with a general concern about personal hygiene. Perhaps priests needed rinsing due to outside causes of
defilement.

In closing, Abravanel likens priests who minister in the Tabernacle to a king’s servants, who wait on him
and serve him food at the royal dining table. Obviously, these waiters scrub their hands before
entering the king’s dining room, seeing that they handle his food and pour his wine.

As for the divine commandment to wash feet, this conveys the manner in which priests officiated in the
holy compound – barefoot. As an expedient, and in acknowledgement that, invariably, men’s feet get
dirty and smelly, washing them just makes good sense.

See Abravanel’s World for more analysis of the topic of the Tabernacle’s wash basin.

Don Isaac Abravanel, sometimes spelled Abarbanel, (1437-1508) was a preeminent Jewish thinker, scholar, and prolific Biblical
commentator. Exodus chapter 31 introduces Bible students to the chief and assistant superintendents,
two men of renown to whom the Tabernacle’s construction was entrusted. Bezalel assumed the top
honors, Oholiab his most able assistant: “And I, behold, I have appointed with him Oholiab, the son of
Ahisamach, of the tribe of Dan…”

“And God spoke unto Moses saying, See, I have called by name Bezalel
the son of Uri, the son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah. And I have filled him
with the spirit of God, in wisdom, and in understanding…and in all
manner of workmanship, to devise skillful works, to work in gold and in
silver…and in cutting stones of setting and in carving wood…”

In putting together the Tabernacle dream team, Moses faced a daunting dilemma. Indeed, Abravanel
lays out the prophet’s predicament, regarding which men had the right stuff to take on the divine
mission, and construct the hallowed chambers that the Creator would call home.

Scores of men offered their services to Moses, each one yearning to be part of the Tabernacle project.
To be sure, altruism motivated them.

Moses, however, had been well aware of Bezalel’s genius and unimaginable capabilities. Herein was the
prophet’s quandary; Bezalel was his sister Miriam’s grandson. Moses feared a backlash, accusations of
nepotism coming from different quarters. One faction would charge: “Moses, you took kingship. You
appointed your brother and nephews to minister in the Tabernacle. And now, you choose Bezalel as
the Tabernacle’s chief superintendent?”

Another group of disgruntled folks would balk at Moses, saying: “How is it that a Hebrew who spent
years at the grindstone, working in Egyptian servitude picked up skills “in all manner of
workmanship…to work in gold and in silver and in cutting stones…?” Finally, a third gang of gripers had
this say: “Bezalel doesn’t hold a candle to Oholiab. Oholiab should be in charge!”

God forestalled a boisterous protest, leveled against Moses. “And God spoke unto Moses saying, See, I
have called by name Bezalel…”In so many words, the Creator assuaged the prophet and quieted all
potential troublemakers when He singled out Bezalel, and chronicled his lineage. I, the Maker said,
“called by name Bezalel the son of Uri, the son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah.” By so doing, God diffused a
delicate matter: Heaven designated Bezalel to build a house to God.

God, according to Abravanel, imparted another fact of life. That is, man perceives only that which lies on
the surface and is skin deep. The Almighty, in contrast, penetrates man’s heart. He attested: “And I have
filled him with the spirit of God.”

See Abravanel’s World for an in-depth description of Bezalel’s brilliance and versatility.

"In sum, tight linkage between the Utterances (10 Commandments) and accompanying laws convincingly persuades readers that Parashat Mishpatim conveys divine directives unlike any manmade moral code."

Shemot: Sinai Rules, page 464

“And God said to Moshe, saying: Speak to the Children of Israel and collect a separated portion. From
those who are generous you shall take a separated portion for Me.”

‘In a general Torah sense and here in this section in particular, Heaven’s modus operandi comes out in
full splendor. That is, Hashem desired to increase both the Hebrew people’s merit and Moshe’s
prominence. In our context, it means that Heaven did away with celestial intermediaries. In their
place, the Almighty instituted His direct divine guidance to the Jews and to Moshe, their faithful
shepherd.’

Page 9 Shemot vol. II: Assembled at Sinai

Don Isaac Abravanel (1437-1508) was a preeminent Jewish thinker, scholar, and prolific Biblical
commentator. In Exodus chapter 25, parshat Terumah, we read about the divine commandment to build for God a
sanctuary in the tabernacle. We also learn how this sacred structure was to be financed.

“And God spoke unto Moses saying: Speak to the Children of Israel, that
they take for Me an offering. Of every man whose heart makes him
willing, you shall take My offering….And let them make Me a sanctuary,
that I may dwell among them.”

Abravanel gets right to the point: Why did God command the Jews to build a sanctuary for Him? Is the
Creator a physical being, in need of shelter? Of course, any physicality attributed to the Maker ranks
preposterous, let alone despicable and untruthful. Wise Solomon, who built Jerusalem’s Holy Temple,
stated the thorny problem: “But will God in very truth dwell on earth? Behold, heaven and the heaven
of heavens cannot contain You. How much less this house that I have built?”

Here is a synopsis of Abravanel’s approach. “God forbid,” Abravanel categorically states, “that the
Creator is needful of a house with all its appurtenances.” Bible students, instead, should understand
this commandment as follows. The Tabernacle is an object lesson, a concrete reminder that God dwells
amidst the Hebrew encampment.

Each Jew must process and internalize that lofty message, so it becomes etched in his soul and fiber.
Song of songs alluded to God’s proximity this way: “He stands behind our wall. He looks through the
windows. He peers through the lattice.”The Creator watches every move, hears every thought.

The prophet Isaiah confirms this theological paradox of God’s infinitude and nearness. “Thus says God:
The heaven is My throne, and the earth My footstool. Where is the house that you may build unto Me?
And where is the place that may be My resting place? For all these things has My hand made…”

Abravanel puts his finger on the significance inherent in the Tabernacle. The divine edifice is designed in
order for Jews to know in their heart of hearts that the Creator’s providence cuddles the Chosen People.
Abravanel returns to Isaiah: “But on this man will I look, even on him that is poor and of a contrite spirit,
and trembles at My word.”

“And let them make Me a sanctuary, that I may dwell among them.” See Abravanel’s World for the full
impact of this divine directive.

Don Isaac Abravanel, sometimes spelled Abarbanel (1437-1508) was a seminal Jewish thinker, scholar, and prolific Biblical
commentator. Exodus 35 enshrines the greatness of the Jewish nation, recording their can-do spirit and
generosity. Bible students will learn of the outpouring of volunteerism that inspired them in a most holy task:
building the Tabernacle.

“And Moses assembled all the congregation of the Children of
Israel…And Moses spoke…take you from among you an offering unto
God, whosoever is of a willing heart. Let him bring…gold and silver and
copper…”

In this chapter, Abravanel explains how the nation gallantly rose to the occasion, driven by a single
purpose – to serve God and sedulously craft for Him a sacred structure in which to house His divine
presence.

When it came to financing and assembling the Tabernacle, Moses understood that a sacred enterprise
of this nature, could not come about through coercion. Accordingly, the prophet nixed the notion of
sending fundraisers door to door, tent to tent. Instead, Moses appealed to “whosoever is of a willing
heart.”

Abravanel explains that there were two types of donors. One group brought to Moses’s tent “gold and
silver and copper” not to mention an array of other valuables (fine linen, goat’s hair, ram’s skins, acacia
timber, oils, spices, and precious stones).

A second category of Hebrews brought their minds and imagination, pledging to do “the work of the
Tent of Meeting, and for all the service thereof… And all the women who were wise-hearted did spin
with their hands…the fine linen.”Abravanel notes that some of the artisans also donated raw material
for the Maker’s earthly abode.

Regarding the craftsmen who assembled the Tabernacle, Abravanel makes another point. We are not
speaking about master plumbers or carpenters. To state the obvious, Egyptian taskmasters had not
offered training courses and career advancement to their Hebrew servants. Thus, the newly-freed men
and women lacked for skills, emerging from Egypt wholly untrained.

But what the Hebrew men and women lacked in skill set they made up for in grit. “Whosoever is of a
willing heart” alluded to an indomitable spirit. The Jews promised Moses they would get the job done,
precisely as God commanded. A promise kept.

See Abravanel’s World for the fuller discussion of the behind-the-scenes making of the Tabernacle.

Don Isaac Abravanel (1437-1508) was a preeminent Jewish thinker, scholar, and prolific Biblical
commentator. We read in Exodus chapter 20, parshat Yitro, that the Ten Commandments were transmitted to the
Hebrews on Mount Sinai.

“And God spoke all these words saying: I am God, Who brought you out
of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no
other gods before Me…”

Abravanel discusses exactly what makes the Ten Commandments stand out from the rest of the Bible. It
is, not surprisingly, an elaborate discourse. See Abravanel’s World for the entirety of it. Here, we will
share with Bible students Abravanel’s three, salient observations.

One has to do with the Speaker – God. In contrast to all of the other divine commandments, only the
Decalogue was from Heaven, sans an intermediary. That is, when it came to the other commandments,
Moses delivered them to the Hebrews, at God’s behest. Not so with the Ten Commandments. Neither
angel or seraph or prophet uttered them; they came directly from Above. On that historic day, the
Creator of heaven and earth descended, as it were, and addressed His nation. Understand, therefore,
the Decalogues’ intrinsic prominence.

Two stresses the audience, the Chosen People. With the other commandments, God transmitted them
to a single person, Moses, albeit His specially-designated messenger who had shown himself worthy.
Moses’ brethren were not privy to hear what Moses heard, nor see what he had seen. How different
were the Ten Commandments! Every person, young and old, heard and understood God’s words. The
myriads of Jews were an integral part of the conversation with the Divine. The fire at Sinai they beheld;
the audible voice they heard.

Three emphasizes the material upon which the Ten Commandments were written – all etched in stone.
No other verse in the Torah, no other commandment had been so indelibly engraved. Rather, they were
transcribed from God to Moses, who wrote them on parchment. As for the Ten Commandments,
moreover, no engraver’s tool had been utilized. It was the Maker’s handiwork, His imprint upon rock.
Moses hadn’t participated an iota in it.

In brief, Bible students are hereby apprised of the Ten Commandment’s uniqueness, their
otherworldliness. The Almighty alone put His imprimatur on them, in a manner of speaking, as
evidenced by the three reasons stated above.

Almighty, but by My name [Hashem] I made Me not known to them.”  Parashat Va’era, First Aliyah

must.

“And God spoke to Moshe and to Aharon, saying: This is the governing
law that God commands, saying: Speak to the Children of Israel that they
should take for you a red cow, hardy [and] blemish free, which has never
borne upon it a yoke.”

Don Isaac Abravanel (1437-1508) observes: One important question concerning the red
cow commandment is its placement or position among the 613 Torah commandments.
According to the Talmudic sages, the red cow commandment belongs to the body of priestly
commandments. They learn that it forms part of those commandments whose focus is the
Tabernacle service. As for the date, the sages peg the red cow mitzvah to the first of Nisan. On
that most auspicious day, ten crowns descended from Heaven. Apropos, the rabbis explained,
the red cow was ceremoniously burned. Its ashes would become a key element for the
cleansing mixture, ashes that served to rehabilitate and spiritually cleanse the Jewish nation.
Said cleansing prepared and allowed Hebrews to enter the Holy Tabernacle with proper
readiness.

However, this opinion of the placement of the red cow commandment is problematic. If
the red cow commandment occurred simultaneous with the building of the Tabernacle, why
wasn’t it written in Leviticus (and not here in Numbers), where the body of Temple and priestly
commandments are provided? Second, why do we find the red cow commandment set here
among the two highly perturbing narratives covering the Korach rebels and camp complainers
or maylinim, both events taking a heavy toll on the wrongdoers.

Abravanel answers as follows. The ancient sages put forth that Moshe performed the
rites associated with the first red cow. He occupied himself with it when he served as the High
Priest in the Tabernacle. On the first day of Nisan, the Tabernacle was erected in the desert. On
that day, a red cow was ceremoniously burned, this for purposes of spiritually cleansing those
men and women who wanted to visit the holy place. Had visitors to the Tabernacle not been
ritually cleansed, they would have defiled it and profaned its sanctity.

The admixture featuring the red cow’s ashes that Moshe prepared went a long way.
Forty years. For forty years, while the Jews wandered in the desert, the prophet’s signature
batch served its purpose admirably. Temple goers took of the red cow’s ashes and purified
themselves before visiting the Tabernacle.

At the conclusion of the forty years, the Chosen People were slated to liberate Canaan.
God foresaw the Holy Land engulfed in bloody wars. Hebrew soldiers would come in close
contact with the dead, triggering their ritual defilement. Some campaigns would take place in
cities; some in open fields. Regardless of the battle’s location, the result would be the same.
Jewish warriors would be needful of red cow ashes to help them restore their ritual status.

Moshe’s batch would not suffice. For that reason, the Almighty guided and directed
Moshe and Aharon in the minutiae of the red cow commandment. As for Korach’s gang and
camp complainers, many of their followers had perished during the two respective rebellions.
Moshe’s original quantity of red cow ashes were, perforce, depleted by the loyalists handling
the corpses.

For these two reasons, God provided an expedient in our Torah section when He
commanded Moshe and Aharon to record this red cow mitzvah. Note, however, although we
read of the red cow’s particulars at this juncture, it would only become operational on the eve
of the Hebrews marching into Canaan.

From the forthcoming Abravanel’s World, Bamidbar Vol. II
Parashat Chukat, First Aliyah Zot Chukat (Numbers 19:1-2).

“And God remembered Noah, and every living thing, and all the cattle
that were with him in the ark. And God made a wind to pass over the
earth, and the waters assuaged.”

Don Isaac Abravanel (1437-1508) was a preeminent Jewish thinker, scholar, and prolific Biblical
commentator. In Genesis chapter 8, the Bible chronicles the conclusion of the great flood, replete with
an exact timeline of events. When the earth dried, the Noah’s ark came to a rest. He opened the ark’s
door in efforts to assess damage. Bleakly, devastation glared back at the ancient mariner.

Abravanel provides Bible students with four key takeaways from the Biblical blow that bashed the
world. They offer readers insights in religious creed, underscoring God’s hands-on interface with His
universe.

•  God rewards and He punishes. The Almighty pays attention to His creations, and compensates
  accordingly. God’s ways are trusted and perfect. Further, He communicates with man, informing
  them of the future.
•  God created a world from nothing, and if He so desires, He returns it back to nothingness. The
  deluge proved how existence is putty in His hands. For Abravanel, the heavens and earth are
  transitory, a subject he develops throughout his Bible commentaries.
•  The propagation of any given species follows natural means – requiring a male and female.
  Apropos, God commanded Noah to bring males and females into the ark for “the day after.”
•  When God created the world, one of His creations was time. Time was, and always will be,
  measured in terms of a solar calendar, consisting of 365 days a year, subdivided into twelve
  lunar months, and further subdivided into thirty days per month. Noah’s ark floated, in cadence
  with time as we know it. Noah’s sea sojourn lasted a year (plus ten days).

We have briefly summarized Abravanel’s four lessons in faith, a short primer in belief. It is one that he
derives from the denouement of the great flood’s account. For the fuller discussion, see Abravanel’s
World of Torah.

“And it came to pass when men began to multiply on the face of the
earth…that the sons of God saw the daughters of men that were fair.
And they took them wives…The Nephilim were in the earth in those
days, and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the
daughters of men. And they bore children to them. The same were the
mighty that were of old, the men of renown.”

Bible studies with Don Isaac Abravanel’s commentary (also spelled Abarbanel) has withstood the test of
time. For over five centuries, Abravanel has delighted – and enlightened – clergy and layman alike,
offering enduring interpretations of the Bible.

In Genesis chapter 6, the Bible brings a narrative that reads more like Greek or Roman
mythology than Holy Writ.

Abravanel launches an investigation: Who were these “sons of God?” And who were the fair maidens
who captivated them with bewitching appeal?

Some commentators suggested that the “sons of God” were princes and of blue blood. Others posited
that these men were clairvoyants or astrologists. They charted the zodiac, peeked into the future, and
ascertained which women would give birth to children who would, in time, become worthy men.

Finally, some sages put forth that the “sons of God” were angels. They write that the angels were the
“Nephilim”, referred to in our verses above. “Nephilim”, they claim, carries an immoral or unethical
connotation. The Hebrew term “Nephilim” is closely related to another Hebrew word, “noflim”, which
means “fallers” or “falling.” These rabbis borrow “noflim,” per se, and turn it into “the fallen”, as in to
fall from grace.

Asserting that the “sons of God” means angels, for a simple reason, does not meet Abravanel’s criterion
for a straightforward interpretation of the Bible. Angels are wholly intelligent and incorporeal beings.
Moreover, according to Abravanel, angels have no physical impulses with zero inclination to sin. Thus,
wrongdoing for these heavenly facilitators is a non-starter.

As to the identity of these “sons of God”, Abravanel offers two responses. We offer one below, though
in shorthand.

“Sons of God” may have been descendants of Seth, the third son of Adam and Eve. The reason why the
Bible characterizes Seth’s seed as “sons of God” is because they were, well, godly and pious. Insofar as
they were pure in character and deed, the Bible lauds them as “sons of God.”

Who, then, were the “daughters of men?” Abravanel answers that they hailed from Cain, the first born
of Adam and Eve, born of dubious circumstances, as an earlier blog has ascertained. Since Cain tilled the
soil, the Bible refers to the women as daughters of man, as in farmer. In Hebrew the generic term for
“man” (adam) shares its root with “land” (adamah).

In sum, we have established that the “sons of God” could not possibly have been angels. But now that
Abravanel identified the suitors and the bevy of beauties, there still remain questions: Why does the
Bible seem to disparage their marriages, putting the matchmaking in a negative and lopsided light?

Further, what shall we say about the “Nephilim?” If they weren’t crestfallen, heavenly angels, then who
were they?

For the fuller discussion on both of these topics, see Abravanel’s World of Torah. There, Bible students
will learn why Heaven frowned on Seth’s descendants marrying the descendants of Cain. They will also
read why certain people were designated or labeled “Nephilim.”

workers were essentially oblivious to Moshe’s rousing seminars…”

Page 103 Shemot vol. I, Sinai Rules

Bible studies with Don Isaac Abravanel’s commentary (also spelled Abarbanel) has withstood the test of
time. For over five centuries, Abravanel has delighted – and enlightened – clergy and layman alike,
offering enduring interpretations of the Bible. Don Isaac Abravanel (1437-1508) was a preeminent Jewish thinker, scholar, and prolific Biblicalcommentator. Chapter 40 pertains to Joseph’s interactions with Pharaoh’s staff members, while in prison. But who were Joseph’s fellow inmates?

“And it came to pass after these things, that the Egyptian king’s wine
steward and baker offended their master, the king of Egypt. And
Pharoah was wroth at his two courtiers, against the chief steward, and
against the chief baker.”

Abravanel, who served as the treasurer to the kings of Portugal and Spain, understood palace protocol.
He draws upon personal experience in order to make sense of the verses quoted above.

The first verse brought above speaks about the king’s wine steward and baker. Yet, the next verse
describes two men as officers, before calling them chiefs. Abravanel seeks to clarify for Bible students
the cast of characters. Who exactly ran afoul Egypt’s king?

Abravanel posits that Pharaoh’s palace’s cuisine attendants – food and beverage personnel – likely
resembled palace staff hierarchy in his own time (15 th century). Thus, the first verse does not refer to the
chief wine steward or chief baker. Abravanel assumes this because the title “chief” or “minister” does
not appear there. Instead, the Bible merely mentions stewards or attendants. In contrast, the second
verse does talk about the food and drink officers, also known as ministers.

Untangling matters, Abravanel clarifies. Pharaoh had higher ups or ministers in charge of cuisine (wine
and baker). In their respective duties and areas of expertise, no attendant ranked higher than them.
These ministers personally served Pharaoh rarely, the exception being the most special of occasions
(Pharaoh’s birthday or major festival). Their presence at those celebrations showed the king respect,
and enhancing the event.

However, every other day, the ministers remained behind the scenes, supervising their sizable staff.
Clearly, the officers’ employees were reliable, professionals whose trust was implicit. After all, one
misstep on the employees part carried deadly ramifications for all concerned. Pharaoh, of course,
expected dependable service from his ministers, those closest to the throne.

Abravanel ties it all together. “And it came to pass after these things, that the Egyptian king’s wine
steward and baker offended their master, the king of Egypt.”These were the men who attended to the
king day in day out. As to their offense, it is not explicit. Perhaps they plotted to poison Pharaoh, or some other dastardly deed against the monarchy. Be that as it may, the king did not expend an ounce of energy on them after they were apprehended. He summarily chopped off their heads. 

“And Pharaoh was wroth at his two courtiers….” The regent fumed at his two ministers, under whose
supervision was an army of workers. “And he put them in ward in the house of the captain of the guard,
into prison, the place where Joseph was bound.” A white-collar lockup fit the two officers’ station, and
not a prison reserved for the rank and file.

At the end of our chapter, we will read about the circumstances surrounding the serendipitous meeting
between Joseph and the two senior ministers, one that will change the course of history.

cohesive unit in our parashah.

Parashat Bo, First Aliyah, based on Abravanel’s World of Torah

“And God descended in the cloud, and stood with him there, and
proclaimed the name of God. And God passed by before him and
proclaimed: God, the Lord, God, merciful and gracious, long-suffering,
and abundant in goodness and truth; keeping mercy unto the thousandth
generation, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin. And will by no
means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the
children, and upon the children’s children, unto the third and unto the
fourth generation.”

Don Isaac Abravanel, sometimes spelled Abarbanel (1437-1508) was a seminal Jewish thinker, scholar, and prolific Biblical
commentator. In Exodus 34, the Torah affords what is arguably the closest peek into God’s elusive
nature, including a guide into how He relates to man. Gorgeous eloquence transcribes God’s thirteen
attributes of mercy. Abravanel’s discourse on the subject provides Bible students with a memorable
interpretation of the Creator’s divine traits. See Abravanel’s World for the essay in its entirety.

Abravanel asks: What underlies the terse descriptions of the divine? Additionally, how are readers to
understand the grammatical style of this passage, one that appears choppy and disjointed? Note, for
example, how the thirteen attributes commence with God’s name, and repeats that name, before
providing adjectives which depict, per se, the Maker’s defining characteristics (“merciful”, “’gracious”
etc.). Finally, the paragraph switches gears into verbal or predicate phrases that portray God’s conduct
(“keeping mercy unto the thousandth generation”, “visiting the iniquity” etc.).

In fantastic shorthand, here is how Abravanel approaches these all-important theological lessons. God’s
(Hashem) name – repeated – establishes His credentials as the Creator of existence; His will perpetuates
life (“God, the Lord”). The next mention of the One Above (El) features His role as the Main Mover or
Lever of the heavens. The divine crank, for lack of a better word or image, churns lower celestial beings
into motion. Three appellations of God begin the first three of the thirteen attributes count (“God, the
Lord, God”).

Traits four, five, and six bespeak God’s relationship with man, at his embryonic and early development
stages. We refer to “merciful”, “gracious”, and “long-suffering.”

Next come seven, eight, and nine. These are the Creator’s benevolence with the righteous and pious –
“abundant in goodness and truth; keeping mercy unto the thousandth generation.” God reserves and
applies the final four, which brings the attribute count to ten, eleven, twelve, and thirteen to evildoers –
“forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin. And will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of
the fathers upon the children….”

Don Isaac Abravanel, sometimes spelled Abarbanel (1437-1508) was a probing and penetrating Jewish thinker, as well as a prolific
Biblical commentator. Leviticus Chapter 17 focuses on the laws concerning slaughtering animals during the desert
years. Notwithstanding the importance of this particular commandment, Bible students will find an
answer to an intriguing, albeit unrelated, question: How did Moses transmit the Torah to the Children
of Israel?

“And God spoke unto Moses saying, speak unto Aaron, and unto his
sons, and unto all the Children of Israel and say to them. This is the
thing which God has commanded saying, what man soever there be of
the House of Israel who kills an ox or lamb or goat in the camp…”

“And God spoke unto Moses saying, speak unto Aaron, and unto his sons, and unto all the Children of
Israel…” The prophet, according to the verse, held three distinct Torah seminars, let us call them.
Abravanel asks: Of all the Torah commandments, why does it say here the method by which Moses
disseminated or transmitted the Torah?

Abravanel’s query continues. Yet, he writes, the prophet taught all the commandments precisely the
same way. That is, first Moses informed Aaron. Next, he edified Aaron’s sons. Later, he convened all of
the Hebrews, apprising them of all the divine commandments – one by one. Finally, Abravanel wraps up
his question. Since this method of distilling Torah from Moses down to Aaron, to Aaron’s sons, and to
the Children of Israel had been the modus operandi for each and every commandment, why was it
associated with the law concerning the Jews and slaughtering animals in the desert?

Here is the abbreviated answer, one that requires textual context. In the previous chapter (Leviticus 16),
the Torah described the Yom Kippur services in the Tabernacle. Among them were sacrifices, including
the high priest’s collecting sacrificial blood before dashing it.

This present chapter also writes about blood dashing: “And the priest shall dash the blood against God’s
altar, at the door of the Tent of Meeting, and make the fat smoke for a sweet savour unto God.”

Abravanel goes on to explain more about this commandment. It is imperative that blood dashing is only
in service of the Creator. Historically, Abravanel adds, primitive peoples offered blood to devils and
demons etc. For Hebrews, such mumbo jumbo is taboo. The altar is the only appropriate designation for
said service.

Hence, Abravanel concludes, this is why Moses transmitted this commandment along the chain of
command, per se, that we described above. First, Moses convened Aaron and his sons insofar as they
were the ones to dash sacrificial blood. Only priests were allowed to offer sacrifices in the Tabernacle.
Aaron and his sons, when it came to certain sacrifices such as the peace offering, slaughtered it at the
entrance of the Tent of Meeting. Following the slaughter, priests dashed blood on the copper altar.

Moses, lastly, convened all his brethren. The prophet wanted them to know about blood dashing; it
served a major purpose. Throughout Yom Kippur, the high priest’s rites featured multiple blood dashing.
This commandment of limiting blood dashing to priests underscored its importance.

When the Hebrews learned that blood dashing was the sole domain of the priests, the Maker’s servants,
the people would internalize its gravitas. In turn, they would be careful to bring animal sacrifices to the
priests in the Tabernacle, and not slaughter in the desert.