Tanach · Rishonim on Tanach · Ramban · Torah

Ramban on Leviticus 10:9/רמב"ן על ויקרא י׳:ט׳

איַיִן וְשֵׁכָר אַל תֵּשְׁתְּ - יַיִן דֶּרֶךְ שִׁכְרוּתוֹ, לְשׁוֹן רַשִׁ"י (רש"י על ויקרא י':ט'). וּפֵרוּשׁוֹ שֶׁאִם הִפְסִיק בּוֹ אוֹ שֶׁנָּתַן לְתוֹכוֹ מְעַט מַיִם פָּטוּר. וְדַעְתּוֹ שֶׁל הָרַב שֶׁלֹּא הֻזְהֲרוּ אֶלָּא עַל הַיַּיִן, לֹא עַל שְׁאָר הַמְשַׁכְּרִים. וְנִלְמֹד שֵׁכָר מִן הַנָּזִיר (נזיר ד). וְכֵן הַדָּבָר לְפִי דַּעְתִּי. אֲבָל עַל דַּעַת הָרַב ר' מֹשֶׁה (בס' המצות ל"ת ע"ג ובהל' ביאת המקדש פ"א ה"ב) עַל שְׁאָר הַמְשַׁכְּרִים בְּאַזְהָרָה, וְשֵׁכָר כִּפְשׁוּטוֹ. וְהַטַּעַם בַּצַּוָּאָה הַזֹּאת עַתָּה, שֶׁלֹּא יִתְעֶה הַכֹּהֵן בְּשִׁכְרוּת הַיַּיִן וְיָבֹא לִידֵי מַחְשָׁבָה שֶׁאֵינָהּ כַּהֹגֶן וְיָמוּת בָּהּ כַּאֲשֶׁר עָשׂוּ בָּנָיו. וְיִתָּכֵן כִּי מַה שֶׁדָּרְשׁוּ (ויקרא רבה יב א) שֶׁהָיוּ נָדָב וַאֲבִיהוּא שְׁתוּיֵי יַיִן, לוֹמַר כִּי מִפְּנֵי יֵינָם טָעוּ בְּאֵשׁ זָרָה. לֹא שֶׁיִּהְיֶה הָעֹנֶשׁ מִפְּנֵי הַיַּיִן, כִּי עֲדַיִן לֹא הֻזְהֲרוּ מִמֶּנּוּ, אֲבָל עָנְשָׁם שֶׁטָּעוּ בְּאֵשׁ ה' כַּאֲשֶׁר רָמַזְתִּי (רמב"ן על ויקרא י':ב').

1DRINK NO WINE NOR STRONG DRINK. “[Do not drink] wine to such an extent that it has an intoxicating effect.” This is Rashi’s language. The meaning thereof is that if he paused during the drinking [of a fourth of a log of wine], or if he mixed a little water into it, he is free from punishment. The opinion of the Rabbi [Rashi] is thus that the priests were only prohibited from drinking wine, but not from other intoxicating drinks, the meaning of the term sheichar (strong drink) mentioned here being derived from the law of the Nazirite [where a similar expression appears,¹⁰⁹ (strong drink) (Numbers 6:3). and only wine is forbidden to him].¹¹⁰ must not therefore be understood as strong drink [as it is found in all English translations], but rather as “strong wine.” The vav in the Hebrew yayin v’sheichar (literally: “wine and strong wine”) is thus to be understood as if it said yayin k’shehu sheichar — you must not drink “wine when it is strong wine,” or “when it is intoxicating” (Mizrachi). Rambam’s opinion, however, as mentioned further on in the text, is that sheichar means “strong drink,” and the priests were warned against both — wine and strong drink, although the punishment for violation was different for each. This is correct according to my opinion. But in the opinion of Rabbi Moshe [ben Maimon],¹¹¹ 1:2. however, other intoxicating drinks are prohibited [through a negative commandment, without being punishable by death, and the Service performed after drinking them is not invalidated, whereas for drinking wine the punishment is death by the hand of Heaven, and the Service is invalidated]; thus sheichar is to be understood in its plain sense [i.e., strong drink]. The reason why this commandment was given at that time, was in order that the priest should not go astray through the intoxicating effect of wine, and thus come to entertain some improper thought which might cause his death, as happened to [Aaron’s] sons. It is possible that when the Rabbis interpreted¹¹² that Nadab and Abihu died because they entered the Sanctuary whilst intoxicated by wine, they meant to say that it was because of the wine they had drunk that they erred in the matter of the strange fire,¹¹³ but not that their punishment actually was because they had drunk the wine, since they had not yet been warned against it. Rather, their punishment was because they erred with respect to the fire of G-d, as I have alluded to.¹¹³

בבְּבֹאֲכֶם אֶל אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד - אֵין לִי אֶלָּא בְּבוֹאָם לַהֵיכָל, בְּגִשְׁתָּם לַמִּזְבֵּחַ מִנַּיִן? נֶאֱמַר כָּאן בִּיאַת אֹהֶל, וְנֶאֱמַר בְּקִדּוּשׁ יָדַיִם וְרַגְלַיִם בִּיאַת אֹהֶל (שמות ל כ). מַה לְהַלָּן עָשָׂה גִּישַׁת מִזְבֵּחַ כְּבִיאַת אֹהֶל, אַף כָּאן עָשָׂה גִּישַׁת מִזְבֵּחַ כְּבִיאַת אֹהֶל. לְשׁוֹן רַשִׁ"י (רש"י על ויקרא י':ט') וְתוֹרַת כֹּהֲנִים (פרשה א ד). וְהַנִּרְאֶה לְפִי הַהֶקֵּשׁ הַזֶּה שֶׁאֵין הַכֹּהֵן חַיָּב מִיתָה בְּגִישַׁת הַמִּזְבֵּחַ וְלֹא בְּבִיאַת הָאֹהֶל, אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן עָבַד שָׁם עֲבוֹדָה, כְּדֶרֶךְ קִדּוּשׁ יָדַיִם שֶׁאֵין הָאַזְהָרָה שָׁם אֶלָּא שֶׁלֹּא יַעֲבֹד, כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמות ל כ) "אוֹ בְגִשְׁתָּם אֶל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ לְשָׁרֵת לְהַקְטִיר אִשֶּׁה לַה'". וּבַלָּשׁוֹן הַזֶּה שָׁנוּי שָׁם בְּסִפְרָא: רַבִּי אוֹמֵר, נֶאֱמַר כָּאן "בְּבֹאֲכֶם אֶל אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד", וְנֶאֱמַר לְהַלָּן (שם) "בְּבֹאָם אֶל אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד", מַה לְהַלָּן עָשָׂה אֶת הַיְּצִיאָה כְּבִיאָה וְאֶת הַמִּזְבֵּחַ כְּאֹהֶל מוֹעֵד, וְאֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא בִּשְׁעַת הָעֲבוֹדָה, אַף כָּאן עָשָׂה אֶת הַיְּצִיאָה כְּבִיאָה וְאֶת הַמִּזְבֵּחַ כְּאֹהֶל מוֹעֵד, וְאֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא בִּשְׁעַת הָעֲבוֹדָה. כְּלוֹמַר, שֶׁאֵין הַחִיּוּב אֶלָּא שֶׁלֹּא יַעֲבֹד, בֵּין שֶׁנִּכְנַס שִׁכּוֹר אוֹ שֶׁשָּׁתָה שָׁם וְעָבַד. וְשָׁם (א ח) אָמְרוּ: "חֻקַּת עוֹלָם" - לְרַבּוֹת הַיְּצִיקוֹת וְהַבְּלִילוֹת וְהַתְּנוּפוֹת וְהַהַגָּשׁוֹת הַקְּמִיצוֹת וְהַהַקְטָרוֹת הַמְּלִיקוֹת וְהַהַזָּיוֹת. כִּי מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאָמַר הַכָּתוּב "לְהַקְטִיר אִשֶּׁה לַה'" (שמות ל כ), הֻצְרְכוּ אֵלּוּ לְרַבּוֹתָם. וְנִרְאֶה עוֹד שֶׁאֵין הַחִיּוּב הַזֶּה בְּמַקְרִיב בְּבָמָה, וּלְכָךְ אָמְרוּ שָׁם: אֵין לִי אֶלָּא אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד, מִנַּיִן לְרַבּוֹת שִׁילֹה וּבֵית עוֹלָמִים? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר "חֻקַּת עוֹלָם". כִּי הָאַזְהָרָה לַכֹּהֲנִים בַּעֲבוֹדָתָם, וְאֵין כֹּהֵן בְּבָמָה. וְהִנֵּה פֵּרוּשׁ "בְּבֹאֲכֶם" - כַּאֲשֶׁר תַּעַבְדוּ עֲבוֹדָה, וְאָמַר בַּלָּשׁוֹן הַזֶּה כִּי כָל הָעֲבוֹדוֹת שָׁם הָיוּ אוֹ בְּתוֹךְ הָאֹהֶל אוֹ בְּמִזְבַּח הָעוֹלָה אֲשֶׁר פֶּתַח אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד. וְהַכְּלָל, כִּי הָאַזְהָרָה וְהָעֹנֶשׁ בְּאֵלּוּ אֵינָם אֶלָּא שֶׁלֹּא יַעֲבֹד שְׁתוּי יַיִן אוֹ שֶׁאֵינוֹ רְחוּץ יָדַיִם וְרַגְלַיִם, וְכֵן מְחֻסָּר בְּגָדִים. אֲבָל עַל הַכְּנִיסָה אֵין בָּהּ בַּתּוֹרָה שׁוּם מְנִיעָה מֵאֵלּוּ. וּמַה שֶׁשָּׁנִינוּ (כלים פ"א מ"ט) רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: בַּחֲמִשָּׁה דְּבָרִים בֵּין הָאוּלָם וְלַמִּזְבֵּחַ שָׁוֶה לַהֵיכָל, שֶׁאֵין בַּעֲלֵי מוּמִין וּפְרוּעֵי רֹאשׁ וְשֶׁלֹּא רְחוּץ יָדַיִם וְרַגְלַיִם נִכְנָסִין לְשָׁם וְכֻלָּהּ מַתְנִיתִין מַעֲלוֹת דְּרַבָּנָן הֵם. וְעַל דַּעַת הָרַב ר' מֹשֶׁה (הל' ביאת המקדש פ"א הט"ו הט"ז) יֵשׁ בִּכְנִיסָה בְּלֹא עֲבוֹדָה לָאו שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ מִיתָה.

2WHEN YE GO INTO THE TENT OF MEETING. “From this verse I know only [that they are forbidden to drink wine and strong drink] when they go into the Sanctuary. Whence do I know that this applies also whenever they approach the altar? Entering the Tent of Meeting is mentioned here, and entering the Tent is also mentioned in connection with the washing of hands and feet.¹¹⁴ (Exodus 30:20). Now just as there the Torah made approaching the altar similar to entering the Tent of Meeting, so here too it made approaching the altar like entering the Tent of Meeting.” This is Rashi’s language, and that of the Torath Kohanim.¹¹⁵ 1:4.It would appear from this analogy that a priest [drunk with wine] is not liable to death for approaching the altar or for entering the Sanctuary, unless he performed there some [Divine] Service, just as in the case of washing the hands and feet, where the admonition is only against performing the Service [without washing], as it says, or when they come near to the altar to minister, to burn a fire-offering unto the Eternal.¹¹⁴ (Exodus 30:20). In this form it is taught there in the Sifra:¹¹⁶ “Sifra” is another name for the Torath Kohanim. See in Seder Vayikra, Note 121. “Rabbi¹¹⁷, “our holy teacher,” or simply “Rabbi.” states: Here it says, when ye go into the Tent of Meeting, and there [in connection with the law of the priests washing their hands and feet] it says, when they go into the Tent of Meeting.¹¹⁴ (Exodus 30:20). Now just as there He made going out [of the Sanctuary] similar to going into it,¹¹⁸ and the altar similar to the Tent of Meeting, and the penalty of death [by the hand of Heaven] is only if he performed the Service [without washing], so here also He made going out [of the Sanctuary] similar to going into it,¹¹⁹). and the altar similar to the Tent of Meeting, and the punishment is only if he performs the Service [whilst intoxicated].” That is to say, the liability [to punishment] is only if the priest performs the Service, whether he entered while drunk, or drank there [after he had come in] and then performed some Service. There [in the Sifra]¹²⁰ 1:5. the Rabbis have said: “It shall be a statute forever.¹²¹ This includes the pouring of oil [upon the flour of a meal-offering], mixing it, waving it, bringing near [the meal-offering to the altar], removing the handful and burning it, pinching a bird’s head, and sprinkling the blood,” [so that all these acts must not be done by the priest while drunk, and if he did any of them in that state, he is liable to death by the hand of Heaven]. For since Scripture stated, to burn a fire-offering unto the Eternal,¹¹⁴ (Exodus 30:20). [I might have excluded these acts from this law since they are not “a fire-offering”], therefore it was necessary to include them [here in the verse before us].It further appears that this liability [to punishment] does not apply where one offers up on a bamah.¹²² were permitted until the eighth day of consecration when the Tabernacle was erected, but from that day onwards they were prohibited until the people came into the Land of Israel, when for a period of fourteen years comprising the conquest and division of the Land, the Tabernacle was at Gilgal, and bamoth were temporarily permitted. Then a central Sanctuary was built at Shiloh, which lasted for 369 years, and during that time the bamoth were again prohibited. After the Philistines destroyed the Sanctuary at Shiloh, the bamoth were once again permitted. This period [covering also the reigns of Saul and David] lasted 57 years, and is known as that of Nob and Gibeon. Then finally the Sanctuary at Jerusalem was built, and from then on the bamoth were prohibited forever, since that is “the Eternal House,” so that even when it was destroyed, the place is still holy. — From this account it is thus clear why as stated in the Torath Kohanim [mentioned further on in the text] the central Sanctuary at Shiloh and “the Eternal House” at Jerusalem were alike as far as the prohibition to perform the Service while drunk is concerned. In both only a priest could perform the Service, while at a bamah even an Israelite was permitted to do it. That is why the Rabbis said there [in the Torath Kohanim]:¹²⁰ 1:5. “From this verse I know only that it is prohibited [to perform the Service] in the Tent of Meeting [while drunk]. Whence do I know to include the Sanctuary at Shiloh and the Eternal House at Jerusalem? Scripture therefore says, it shall be a statute for ever.” For this prohibition applies to the priests performing their Services, and it was not necessary that it be a priest who performed the Service at a bamah;¹²² were permitted until the eighth day of consecration when the Tabernacle was erected, but from that day onwards they were prohibited until the people came into the Land of Israel, when for a period of fourteen years comprising the conquest and division of the Land, the Tabernacle was at Gilgal, and bamoth were temporarily permitted. Then a central Sanctuary was built at Shiloh, which lasted for 369 years, and during that time the bamoth were again prohibited. After the Philistines destroyed the Sanctuary at Shiloh, the bamoth were once again permitted. This period [covering also the reigns of Saul and David] lasted 57 years, and is known as that of Nob and Gibeon. Then finally the Sanctuary at Jerusalem was built, and from then on the bamoth were prohibited forever, since that is “the Eternal House,” so that even when it was destroyed, the place is still holy. — From this account it is thus clear why as stated in the Torath Kohanim [mentioned further on in the text] the central Sanctuary at Shiloh and “the Eternal House” at Jerusalem were alike as far as the prohibition to perform the Service while drunk is concerned. In both only a priest could perform the Service, while at a bamah even an Israelite was permitted to do it. [therefore the prohibition did not apply there].Now the meaning of the expression when ye go into the Tent of Meeting, is “when you perform Service,” and He used this expression because all the Services were done there, either inside the Tent or at the altar of the burnt-offering which was at the door of the Tent of Meeting. The general principle then, is that the prohibition and punishment in these matters are only to the effect that the priest should not perform the Service while drunk with wine or with hands and feet unwashed, likewise if he lacks any of the required priestly garments; but merely for entering the Sanctuary in these conditions, there is no prohibition in the Torah. Thus that which we have been taught in the Mishnah:¹²³ “Rabbi Yosei says: In five things is the space between the Porch [of the Sanctuary] and the altar equal to the Sanctuary: that those priests may not enter there who have a blemish, or who have dishevelled hair,¹²⁴ or who have hands and feet unwashed” and the whole Mishnah there — all these are gradations of Rabbinic enactment [and are not matters prohibited by Scriptural law]. In the opinion, however, of Rabbi Moshe [ben Maimon],¹²⁵ 1:15-16. See “The Commandments,” Vol. II pp. 68, 72-73. one who [wilfully] enters the Sanctuary [in the above-mentioned conditions] without performing the Service, [has also violated] a negative commandment, for which the punishment is not death [by the hand of Heaven but whipping].