Smichah
Parsha Pages | March 31, 2024
Print This Article
View Original PDF

Smichah

Parsha Pages | June 27, 2025

ויקרא ט,ו: זֶׁ ה הַדָבָר אֲשֶׁר־צִׁוָּה ה' תַעֲשוּ

The Sforno explains that the obscure phrase זה הדבר refers to the ritual of סְמִיכָה (act of laying hands). Since the glory of HaShem had already filled the Ohel haMoed at this time. The act of Smichah will merit an additional relevation.

Moshe and Aharon

ויקרא י ,יא: וְאֵּת ׀ שְ עִׁיר הַחַטָאת

The discussion between Aharon and Moshe is explained by the Sforno as follows:

The eighth day (from which this portion gets its name) was Rosh Chodesh Nissan. The sin offering which the Kohanim burnt was that of the New Moon sacrifice which Moshe believed had to be eaten if it was to serve its purpose of atonement. Aharon, however, argued that an Onen (a mourner from the time of a relative’s death until nightfall following the burial) may not partake of any sacrifice especially a communal one. Aharon and his other sons were in such a category. Even if an exception was made by Moshe regarding the meal offering of consecration, this dispensation could not apply to the sin offering of the New Moon, which is obligated for all generations not like the one-time meal offering of the consecration.

Therefore, Aharon suggested that they were justified in burning the sin offering given their state of Onen. Moshe accepted Aharon’s reasoning and was pleased to see the clarity and logic of his brother’s thinking which was not clouded by the tragic death of his two sons.

ויקרא ט,ו: זֶׁ ה הַדָבָר אֲשֶׁר־צִׁוָּה ה' תַעֲשוּ

The Sforno explains that the obscure phrase זה הדבר refers to the ritual of סְמִיכָה (act of laying hands). Since the glory of HaShem had already filled the Ohel haMoed at this time. The act of Smichah will merit an additional relevation.

Moshe and Aharon

ויקרא י ,יא: וְאֵּת ׀ שְ עִׁיר הַחַטָאת

The discussion between Aharon and Moshe is explained by the Sforno as follows:

The eighth day (from which this portion gets its name) was Rosh Chodesh Nissan. The sin offering which the Kohanim burnt was that of the New Moon sacrifice which Moshe believed had to be eaten if it was to serve its purpose of atonement. Aharon, however, argued that an Onen (a mourner from the time of a relative’s death until nightfall following the burial) may not partake of any sacrifice especially a communal one. Aharon and his other sons were in such a category. Even if an exception was made by Moshe regarding the meal offering of consecration, this dispensation could not apply to the sin offering of the New Moon, which is obligated for all generations not like the one-time meal offering of the consecration.

Therefore, Aharon suggested that they were justified in burning the sin offering given their state of Onen. Moshe accepted Aharon’s reasoning and was pleased to see the clarity and logic of his brother’s thinking which was not clouded by the tragic death of his two sons.

PDF Preview