Par sh at A chr ei - Mot

Twin s
Ra bbi Ari Kahn

In this week’s Parsha we find the instructions given to Aharon regarding the
service for Yom Kippur. The service is introduced by reminding us of the death of
the two sons of Aharon, Nadav and Avihu, thus drawing a connection between the
service performed and the fate of the two sons of Aharon. In order to understand
the service of Yom Kippur we must compare and contrast it with the actions of the
sons of Aharon which led to their deaths.

The objective of Yom Kippur is to bring about forgiveness for the entire people:

For on that day I will forgive you, to purify you from all your sins, in front of
G-d you will become pure. (16:30)

Aside from the entire nation, special attention is given to the Temple and the
Kohanim:

And he shall make an atonement for the Holy Sanctuary, and he shall make
an atonement for the Tent of Meeting, and for the Altar, and he shall make
an atonement for the Kohanim, and for all the people of the
congregation.(16:33)

Part of the service, then, deals with improper behavior on the part of the Kohanim.
We are told at the outset that Aharon himself should not enter the inner sanctum
at all times, only at the proper time, and in the proper sequence of worship
(16:2,3). While Nadav and Avihu entered the Temple and approached G-d in a
moment of ecstasy, Aharon is given very specific instructions on the manner and
conditions for service. The line between service of G-d and self-styled service may
be a thin one, but that line may be the difference between life and death. Here,
Aharon is being warned of the consequences of entering the Temple
inappropriately:

Do not enter at every time the “Holy” from within the curtain… so you shall
not die. (16:2)

The Shem MiShmuel suggested that the sin of Nadav and Avihu resulted from
unbridled passion and love of G-d; they tried to relate to G-d via this love. The
Talmud teaches that this day was beloved for G-d as well.

It was taught, on that day there was as much joy in front of G-d as the day
of creation of heaven and earth. (Talmud Megila 10b)

Sensing this joy, Nadav and Avihu seized the moment and tried to respond to G-
d’s great love of man. Their response was improper for it was not called for by G-
d. The seriousness and somberness of Yom Kippur stands in stark comparison to
the ecstasy of Nadav and Avihu. This is G-d’s response to the behavior of Nadav
and Avihu. The pitfall of religious experience born of ecstasy is creating a
relationship which has an alien component, and may result in the worship of an
alien god. In order for the religious experience to be valid it must be objective, it
must be part of the fulfillment of a directive from G-d. Otherwise the experience is
a subjective one, and may be crossing the line between creating god in our image
instead of manifesting the image of G-d within ourselves. This does not mean that
Judaism does not recognize the ecstatic, or joyful relationship with G-d, but such a
relationship may only be developed after “fear of G-d” is perfected. Only after the
Yom Kippur service in which we follow G-d’s detailed instructions, may we find
ourselves relating to G-d via love. In Temple times the Yom Kippur service
concluded in a great outpouring of joy:

THEY WOULD THEN BRING TO HIM HIS OWN GARMENTS, HE PUT THEM ON.
THEY WOULD ACCOMPANY HIM TO HIS HOUSE. HE WOULD ARRANGE FOR A
DAY OF FESTIVITY FOR HIS FRIENDS WHENEVER HE HAD COME FORTH
FROM THE SANCTUARY IN PEACE.: (Yoma70b)

Rabban Shimon ben Gamiliel taught: There were not joyful days in Israel
like the 15th of Av and Yom Kippur (Mishna Ta’anit 4:8)

The sages tell of the streets of Jerusalem filled with well-wishers; the Kohain Gadol
would not make his way through the crowds and would arrive home hours after
the service was completed. The greatest spectacle of celebration, the Simchat
Beit Hashoeva, would follow Yom Kippur by a week.

It was said, he who never saw the Simchat Beit Hashoeva never saw joy in
his life. (Mishna Sukka 5:1)

The balance between fear of G-d and strict adherence to the details of observance
on the one hand, and joyous celebration of the love between G-d and man on the
other, is highlighted by this festival. The Rambam in his Mishna Torah (Sukkah
8:14) limits the active celebration in the Simchat Beit Hashoeva to great sages
and scholars; all others attended as spectators. The archtypical example of the
ecstatic expression in front of G-d was King David:

And it was told King David, saying, ‘The Lord has blessed the house of
Obed-Edom, and all that belongs to him, because of the Ark of G-d. So
David went and brought up the Ark of G-d from the house of Obed-Edom to
the city of David with gladness. And it was so, that when those who carried
the Ark of the Lord had gone six paces, he sacrificed an ox and a fatling.
And David danced before the Lord with all his might; and David was girded
with a linen ephod. So David and all the House of Israel brought up the Ark
of the Lord with shouting, and with the sound of the shofar.(Shmuel 2, 6:12-
15).

But David also possessed a profound sense of fear of G-d, as the entire book of
Psalms bears witness.

As a response to the passion of Nadav and Avihu, we see the detailed, intricate,
serious service of Yom Kippur. The incense which they offered is replaced by the
incense which Aharon is commanded to offer, and one error in the performance of
this task could be fatal. The food and drink of the sons of Aharon is replaced by a
day of complete abstinence from food and drink. Similarly, the details of the
service of Yom Kippur service take on new meaning when contrasted with the
actions of Nadav and Avihu.

The central worship of the day involved two goats, one offered in the Temple, the
other sent toward the desert. This practice would seem to be a response to the
different types of worship we have been discussing: the first, in the Temple, for G-
d, and the other which had no place--neither in the Temple, or among the living at
all, sent to a place of desolation. This second goat was destined for Azazel. Upon
consideration, this worship seems quite bizarre. Why would we take a goat, only
to reject it and send it away? The law seems to teach us about the stark
difference between service of G-d which is accepted and beloved to G-d, versus
the “scapegoat” which represents that which has been rejected by G-d. What
could be more different than service for G-d and Avodah Zarah? These are surely
diametrical opposites.

Yet are they? The Mishna provides some details about the goats.

“The two goats on Yom Kippur; the Mitzvah is for them to be identical in
appearance, size, and value, the two shall be chosen together” (Mishna
Yoma 6:1, Talmud 62a)

The Mishna teaches that these two goats should look identical - like twins. This
seems strange, considering that their fates and the ideas they represent are so
different. Yet the theme of twins--twins who are opposites-- is a familiar one in the
Torah. The most famous twins are Ya’akov and Esav. They were complete
opposites, one good the other evil. No one could ever confuse them. On the other
hand, perhaps they did possess some similarities. Rashi tells us that until the age
of thirteen they were indistinguishable, at least in behavior (Breishit 25:27). In the
words of the Midrash:

Esav was worthy to be called Ya’akov, and Ya’akov was worthy to be called
Esav. (Midrash Zuta Shir HaShirim 1:15)

They were so similar that at times their similarity caused confusion. One dressed
as the other, his brother in turn at times spoke like him. It is strange that the
Divine plan required twins, when perhaps just being siblings would have been
enough. Evidently the Torah wanted these two, Ya’akov and Esav, to be almost the
same. Perhaps their similarity represents the thin line between acceptable
behavior and idolatry, between good an evil. Rav Yitzchak Hutner noted this
parallel, and suggested that when things look alike from the exterior, it is a sign
that one must look within, at the essence, in order to discern the difference
(Pachad Yitzchak, Purim page 43).

The idea of the two goats is intrinsically related to the personalities of Ya’akov and
Esav, identical on the outside but so different in terms of their essence. The origin
of the two goats themselves may very well be found in that famous episode when
Ya’akov is persuaded by his mother to dress up like his brother. Rivka instructs
him:

Go now to the herd and bring me two good goats…(Breishit 27:9)

The Midrash expands on this idea:

How do we know that it was in the merit of Ya’akov (that we take the two
goats)? These are the goats that his mother referred to, “Go now to the
herd and bring me two good goats…” (Breishit 27:9) Why are they called
“good”? Rabbi Brechia said in the name of Rabbi Chelbo: They are good for
you and good for your children. They are good for you when you enter, and
take the blessings from your father, and they are good for your children,
when they soil themselves in sin all year round. They will bring these two
goats, and offer them and be cleansed. (Pesikta Rabbati section 47)

Ya’akov’s entrance to his father may be paralleled with the once-yearly entrance
of the Kohen Gadol into the Kodesh Kodashim on Yom Kippur. Ya’akov prepared
for this appearance with the two goats, as his descendants would in the future.
The Yom Kippur offering of the goat to Azazel serves to atone for the recurring sin
of “dressing up” like Esav instead of behaving like the Ya’akov/Yisrael we are.1

While we may now understand the symbolism of the two goats, we have not
gained any insight into Azazel.2 Rabbi Menachem Azarya DeFano, in his work Sefat
Emet, explains that the name Azazel is an acronym for “ze le’umat ze asa
Elokim”, a verse in Kohelet:

“In the day of prosperity be joyful, in the day of adversity consider: G-d has
made the one as well as the other .(Kohelet 7:14)

According to Rabbi DeFano, the contrast between good and evil, with the
recognition that both emanate from G-d, is encapsulated by the verse “G-d has
made one as well as the other,” encoded in the word Azazel. The Midrash explains
this idea:

“G-d has made the one as well as the other”: G-d has made Righteous men
and evil men, as it is written, “And then his brother emerged and his hand
grasped the heel of Esav” {Bereshit 25:26} (Pesikta D’Rav Kahana Chapter
28)

1
Esav, whose other name is “Edom” which means “red” is the symbol of blood and strictness. It is interesting that the
Gemara associates the forgiveness on Yom Kippur with the red string turning white
2
In Parshat VaYishlach, I discussed the association between Azazel and the angel or spiritual power of Esav.
It is fascinating that the quintessential example brought to illustrate that both
righteousness and evil are from G-d is none other than the case of Ya’akov and
Esav. We understand from this that, in a sense, good needs evil in order to exist,
if for no other reason than to be rejected. It is the contrast with evil which allows
good to shine. This idea is illustrated in the Zohar:

“With all thy soul”-the “all” includes all aspects of the soul, viz. nephesh,
ruah, and neshamah. As “with all thy possessions”, these also have various
aspects, each one different from the other. True love to the Holy One,
blessed be He, consists in just this, that we give over to Him all our
emotional, intellectual, and material faculties and possessions, and love
Him. Should it be asked, How can a man love Him with the evil inclination?
Is not the evil inclination the seducer, preventing man from approaching the
Holy One to serve him? How, then, can man use the evil inclination as an
instrument of love to G-d? The answer lies in this, that there can be no
greater service done to the Holy One than to bring into subjection the “evil
inclination” by the power of love to the Holy One, blessed be He. For, when
it is subdued and its power broken by man in this way, then he becomes a
true lover of the Holy One, since he has learnt how to make the “evil
inclination” itself serve the Holy One. Here is a mystery entrusted to the
masters of esoteric lore. All that the Holy One has made, both above and
below, is for the purpose of manifesting His Glory and to make all things
serve Him. Now, would a master permit his servant to work against him,
and to continually lay plans to counteract his will? It is the will of the Holy
One that men should worship Him and walk in the way of truth that they
may be rewarded with many benefits. How, then, can an evil servant come
and counteract the will of his Master by tempting man to walk in an evil
way, seducing him from the good way and causing him to disobey the will of
his Lord? But, indeed, the “evil inclination” also does through this the will of
its Lord. It is as if a king had an only son whom he dearly loved, and just for
that cause he warned him not to be enticed by bad women, saying that
anyone defiled might not enter his palace. The son promised his father to
do his will in love. Outside the palace, however, there lived a beautiful
harlot. After a while the King thought: “I will see how far my son is devoted
to me.” So he sent to the woman and commanded her, saying: “Entice my
son, for I wish to test his obedience to my will.” So she used every
blandishment to lure him into her embraces. But the son, being good,
obeyed the commandment of his father. He refused her allurements and
thrust her from him. Then did the father rejoice exceedingly, and, bringing
him in to the innermost chamber of the palace, bestowed upon him gifts
from his best treasures, and showed him every honor. And who was the
cause of all this joy? The harlot! Is she to be praised or blamed for it? To be
praised, surely, on all accounts, for on the one hand she fulfilled the king's
command and carried out his plans for him, and on the other hand she
caused the son to receive all the good gifts and deepened the king's love to
his son. Therefore it is written, “And the Lord saw all that he had made, and
behold it was very good”, where the word “very” refers to the angel of
death (i.e. the evil inclination). Similarly, if it were not for this Accuser, the
 righteous would not possess the supernal treasures in the world to come.
Happy, therefore, are they who, coming into conflict with the Tempter,
prevail against him, for through him will they attain bliss, and all the good
and desirable possessions of the world to come; concerning which it is
written: “What eye hath not seen... he hath prepared for him that waiteth
for him” (Isa. LXIV, 3). (Zohar, Shemoth, Page I63a)

The problems arise when man adopts the ways of evil, identifying with them
instead of rejecting them. This path is a rejection of G-d and the image of G-d
within us, as is illustrated by another detail of the Yom Kippur service: Lots are
drawn to determine which of the two identical goats will be sacrificed in the
Temple and which will be for Azazel. The idea of drawing lots is apparently a
concession to the “random” element of human existence. The word “goral” itself
is translated both as “lots” and “fate”. When the Torah describes the attack of
Amalek on the Jewish nation,

Remember what was done to you by Amalek on the way as you left Egypt.
When they happened upon you… (D’varim 25:17,18)

Rashi explains “they happened” as “coincidence”. In his brief comment, we can

discern the philosophical difference between Judaism and “Amalekism”: We
believe in a G-d who is involved in history, while for Amalek, life is no more than a
series of coincidences. Haman, one of the most famous descendants of Amalek,
used lots to determine the best day to attack and destroy the Jews. The Jews, for
their part, turned to G-d and put their faith in His involvement in history, just as
Moshe lifted his hands heavenward in prayer while the battle against Amalek
raged around him, signaling to the Jews that faith in G-d is the only ammunition
against Amalek.

When the Jew has sinned and has begun to act like Esav, worshipping the
worthless ideas of “coincidence” and “fate” that are represented by Azazel,
forgetting G-d who is constantly involved in history, G-d invites him to enter the
Temple, represented by the Kohen Gadol. The lots drawn force us to examine our
behavior and the underlying philosophy of “chance”, “coincidence”. The breeding
ground for sin is in this forgetfulness. Therefore, on Yom Kippur, every detail is
important. Every detail is recognition of G-d’s involvement in our lives. The day
is filled with awe and fear, a fear which can only spring from the understanding
that G-d is intimately involved in our lives. This fear, in turn, gives birth to the joy
which can only spring from the understanding that this same G-d is a G-d of
forgiveness and unlimited love.

The cathartic power of Yom Kippur lies in this: We are all guilty, at
times, of dressing up like Esav and deluding ourselves. On Yom Kippur
we banish our “evil twin” to the empty desert, as we redouble our
efforts to serve G-d. When we succeed, the result is celebration and joy.3

3
This also explains the “Dressing up” on Purim, based on the idea of Yom Kippur being a “Yom Kippurim; a day like
Purim.