Fourth Reading: The Beginnings of Dispute
וְסָמַךְ יָדוֹ עַל־רֹאשׁ קָרְבָּנוֹ (ויקרא ג, ב)
“He must place his hand upon the head of his sacrifice…” (Leviticus 3:2)
The Secrets of the Torah and the Beginnings of Dispute
In our discussion of how synthesis works, we mentioned that synthesis is related to the “Workings of the Chariot” (מעשה מרכבה), the general name given to the Torah’s inner dimension, and the numerical allusion is that this phrase has the same value as “right-left-center” (ימין-שמאל-אמצע), which captures the dynamic between the thesis, anti-thesis, and synthesis. All disputes can be seen as thesis and anti-thesis, so disputes are intrinsically related to the Torah’s inner dimension. Where do we find an explicit connection between the two? In the first two mishnayot of the second chapter of tractate Chagigah.
The first mishnah speaks about the Working of the Chariot and is the only mention of this topic in the Mishnah. The second mishnah describes the history of dispute about law within the people of Israel. A connection that could not be more explicit.
The First Dispute
In the first pair, Yossi ben Yoezer and Yossi ben Yochanan, the first Yossi says that it is forbidden to place the hands on the sacrifice on a Yom Tov (one of the three festivals and Rosh Hashanah) and the second Yossi says that it is permissible. In the early generations, there was no substantial dispute that could not be resolved in the Sanhedrin, apart from this law, whether place the hands on an animal offering on Yom Tov is permissible or not.
What does placing the hands on the neck of the sacrifice mean? When bringing a sacrifice to the Temple, the person bringing it places his hands upon the head of the sacrifice. He must place both his hands upon it with all his strength. If the sacrifice is for atonement, then while his hands are placed on the head, he must also confess. This is a commandment in the Torah, in the beginning of the Book of Leviticus.
The question whether it is permissible to do so only refers to Yom Tov because on Shabbat, the question is moot because there are no personal sacrifices brought on Shabbat, nor are freewill offerings brought. But, on Yom Tov it is permitted for an individual to bring a sacrifice.
What is the problem with placing the hands on the sacrifice’s head? Why would it not be allowed on a Yom Tov? Apparently, the problem is that doing so makes use of an animal. We see that the primary essential problem on which the sages disagreed is related to the use of animals; it is related to the relationship between humans and animals, a relationship that is captured to a degree in the verse, “You [God] shall save a man and an animal.” According to Maimonides, there is also the additional issue of excessive effort on Yom Tov. In any case, contemporary scholars prove that the main issue is only the use of animals.
There are several commentators who explain the spiritual reason that the first dispute is about the placing of the hands. The same word that means, “placing of the hands” (סמיכה) also refers to the ordination of sages, from a master to his disciple. Thus, the question becomes: Is it permissible to receive ordination on Yom Tov?
What is the connection between an animal sacrifice and the ordination of a sage? The Ramban, Nachmanides, explains that a sacrifice takes the place of the person bringing it. Thus, if a person does not have the correct intention when preparing the sacrifice, thinking that the sacrifice is me—that really, they should have been slaughtering me for atonement—then the sacrifice is not complete.
In passing, let us mention that it might be that this is why we do not have sacrifices today. Perhaps nowadays people are not able to experience the intention that when I bring a sacrifice, it is I, myself, that is being sacrificed.
Given that this is the intent in bringing a sacrifice, what does placing the hands on the animal’s head and pushing down symbolize? Why is it so important?
Nachmanides explains that placing the hands is an act of infusing my soul into the animal—placing myself within the animal. Obviously, there can be no more intense use of an animal than this. It is an important mitzvah to insert myself into the animal. Now, when the animal is about to be slaughtered, I will experience that it is I that is being slaughtered. In fact, I won’t just feel it, it will happen.
This is the benefit to be had in building a Temple and bringing sacrifices. If you want to advocate for having a Temple, you need to understand the reasoning behind it.
In light of this idea, the entire Temple is a unification of “man and beast.” The beasts, the animals, are given the opportunity to do good for man, by being offered in his stead.
Now we somewhat understand what the first dispute was about: Is it permissible to infuse oneself into an animal on Yom Tov or not?
Returning to ordination, it is easy to understand that ordination accomplishes the same thing. The Rabbi who gives ordination to his disciples imparts of himself, he transfers himself, infuses his essence, into his disciple.
This is why ordination in ancient times was performed despite being many times an act of self-sacrifice, as recounted in the Talmud about ordination during times of decree. It is an act of giving oneself that has almost no equal. When a Rabbi performs ordination, a true Rabbi, just as Moses ordained Joshua, it is like infusing himself into his successor. And like ordination to the rabbinate, ordination upon an animal in the Temple is to infuse oneself within it.
