Acharei Mot - Kedoshim 5781

Question: Why are the rules of פיגול repeated from פרשת צו?


Approach: it may be possible to explain that the context in our parsha is to lead us into certain areas of law whereby parts of one’s own food is to be left aside. And so we are enjoined to note that this is specifically NOT the case when it comes to קורבנות.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Pinchas 5781

Question:  Why are מנשה counted before אפרים, in distinction to most of the rest of the time when the two are mentioned? Approach: It's possible to suggest that the reason is based on the relative sizes of the counts of the two tribes; משנה being larger than אפרים (the opposite to the count in במדבר). Alternatively, we can suggest that the wish to mention the בנות צלפחד - apart from being a preview of the upcoming subject - gave מנשה more importance.
Read more

Ki Tavo 5779

1. How does the לוי have cause to be happy with ביכורים? 2. When was the תורה meant to be written on the stones? 27:3 implies before moving them to הר גריזים והר עיבל, but 27:8 implies afterwards 3. In all other cases where the לויים are separated out from the rest of the nation, מנשה ואפרים replace יוסף. Why not with the ceremony on הר גריזים ועיבל? 4. Why are the punishments of bodily ailments split?
Read more

Re'eih 5783

Question:  Why are the laws of בכור not written together with the other קרבנות rules earlier in the פרשה? Approach: The rule of בכור being only allowed to be eaten in המקום אשר יבחר ה' is mentioned in the earlier section. This section comes to teach us the rule of the בכור בעל מום, and the special leniencies that apply, allowing the animal to still be eaten - and anywhere. It thus could be viewed as similar to the released slave, who no longer is limited to his master's domain (the rules mentioned just before).
Read more