Parashat Tetzaveh (5760)

With God's help. On the eve of the holy Sabbath, Parashat Tetzaveh, 5760

On the contemporary implications of the incense

Our portion concludes with the obligation to burn incense twice each day on the inner incense altar

in the Tabernacle: 'a continual incense before the Lord throughout your generations' (Exodus 30:8). In the next verse appears:

'You shall not offer upon it unauthorized incense' (Exodus 30:9), and Rashi explains that in all the offerings we find obligatory offerings and freewill offerings; however,

with incense there is only obligatory incense, and any other incense that we volunteer to bring is

considered unauthorized incense before the Holy One, blessed be He. We shall try to offer some explanation for this exceptional law.

As stated in the first chapter of tractate Keritot (6a), the incense was composed of eleven ingredients

(spices): balsam, onycha, galbanum, and frankincense, etc. All these ingredients were aromatic spices

with a pleasant fragrance, except for the galbanum, whose smell was unpleasant. To the question why galbanum was included as an ingredient

essential to the incense, the holy Ari answers in the book Etz Chaim, saying: 'Let the galbanum repair what

the frankincense does not repair.' There are things that only galbanum, despite its bad smell, can rectify.

It is commonly said, following these words of the Ari, that there are elements within the Jewish people whose apparent 'odor

is bad,' yet they are indispensable elements of the people, and there are matters that only they can rectify, not those

whose 'odor is good.' These things recall the midrash of the Sages on the Four Species that we are commanded to take

on Sukkot: the citron has taste and smell; the palm branch has taste (in the dates, which are its fruit)

and no smell; the myrtle has smell and no taste; and the willow has neither taste nor smell. The Sages

liken the Four Species to four types of people: the righteous-those who possess commandments

and good deeds; the intermediate-those who possess only one of the two; and the wicked-those who possess neither

commandments nor good deeds. All of them we must bind into one bundle, and the Jewish people as a whole is composed of them all.

Apparently there are tasks of the Jewish people that could come to fruition only through the elements of the fourth type. This too, among other things, is the Ari's intention in the words cited above.

At the time of the controversy regarding the proper attitude to the Zionist movement that arose between Rabbi Kook

and other leading Torah authorities who led the ultra-Orthodox camp, the Gerrer Rebbe came on behalf of

rabbis from Europe to examine what the dispute concerned, and whether there was room for compromise and reconciliation between the sides.

After he examined the situation, it is said that he remarked that the controversy revolved around the interpretation of the Ari's words

quoted above. What he meant was that although every element in the Jewish people has a unique role, and no one should be excluded

from the collective, this does not mean that one should relate to the wicked within Israel

in a way equal to the attitude toward the more positive elements. The dispute was, and remains to this day,

about the proper proportion between an embracing attitude and a rejecting attitude (as the Sages said: 'One should always let the left hand push away and the right hand draw near' [Sotah 47a]), and

where the line passes that distinguishes a proper attitude toward transgressors from one that is not.

Already in the Four Species themselves we see a qualification to the obligation of unity within the Jewish people. The citron

is not bound together with all the other elements. The righteous person, symbolized by the citron, must preserve

an ambivalent relation toward the other elements: he is united with them, but not as one of them.

Rabbi Kook taught that it is better to err through baseless love than through baseless hatred, and this is self-evident and agreed upon by

all. The question under dispute was whether more can be done than that: not to err at all, neither in this

nor in that. Rabbi Kook argued that distancing oneself from one of the elements within the people will inevitably also lead to

prohibited hatred, whereas the leaders of the ultra-Orthodox public argued that precisely 'love upsets the proper order,' and one must maintain a certain distance. Even regarding what history later proved, opinions remain divided, and the matter

is by no means unequivocal.

For our purposes, baseless hatred is the removal of the galbanum from the incense; baseless love is an attitude

that treats the galbanum like the rest of the ingredients, and both constitute a deviation from the Torah's command. Not every

interpretation of Judaism is legitimate, and this must find expression in the appropriate attitude toward the different positions.

We see that determining the proper proportion regarding the correct attitude toward the various parts of the people, and the proper degree of integration

with them (socially in general, within the governmental system, and within the educational system in particular) is

'among the difficult Temple services'; that is, this is a very complex issue whose consequences are highly significant.

I am too insignificant 'to put my head between the mountains' and decide this controversy, and I also see no reason

to express a position here on the question of where exactly that line passes. Yet it seems to me that the common denominator for all is

that there are forms of incense that certainly are not accepted before the Holy One, blessed be He. The incense is a very delicate

compound in which all the ingredients must be combined, but in correct and precise proportions. Incense that comes

as a freewill offering may differ in its composition from what we were commanded precisely in the Torah, and enormous distortions can be caused

because of it. The prevalent mantra about unity and love of Israel cannot

be implemented in a sweeping, superficial, and automatic manner.

Perhaps this is what the Torah meant when it said: 'You shall not offer upon it unauthorized incense' (Exodus 30:9). The incense has a

delicate and precise proportion from which one must not deviate, and therefore it must be prepared exactly according to the instructions

and commandments in the Torah.

Some readers will say that this is not the platform for discussing an 'intra-religious' issue of this kind, but in my best

judgment it is important that even the public that does not observe the commandments be aware of the dilemma that lies at the root of the attitude

toward it in all its complexity.

Have a peaceful Sabbath

It may be consigned to respectful disposal in any synagogue or religious academy. Comments and responses will be welcomed.

Biton25.doc