Gifts to Talmidei Chachamim as Korbanos

(Sharing a humorous experience from last week. My father in law, Harav Reuven Feinstein, spent several days at our house and joined us for a Shabbos Sheva Brachos for my grandson. Wherever he goes, many people approach him with questions of halacha and hashkafa and life issues, and of course, for brachos. My responsibility is to him alone, so I often have to discourage what I deem excessive demands that jeopardize his emotional and physical safety. I remarked to other members of the family that Hungarians treat their Rebbes very differently than the Litvisheh. The Rebbes live like kings, while historically, Litvisheh gedolim starved. (My father in law said that this was not always the case. His grandfather was Rov in Uzdeh, and one man always chopped the wood for the Rov. As he grew older, his grandfather told the man that he should no longer do that, and that he would take care of it himself. The man said that he had a chazaka, and he would take Reb Dovid to a din Torah.)  I said there were two reasons for the difference. One, that when a Rebbe gives a bracha and it is fulfilled, the chosid says, thank you, Rebbe. When a Rov gives a bracha and it is fulfilled, the person says, thank you, Ribono shel Olam. Two, as my father once said, there is a fundamental issue at hand. A Rov has the position because he is a lamdan. Every baalabos in town thinks to himself, eh, I am a bigger lamdan. But a Rebbe is chosen on the basis of his being a holy man. There is no way to quantify 'holy." He is holy, you are not. This is doubly so if he is also a famous mekubal. That is absolutely hefker.

In any case, I said, quietly, to other members of the family that "Even Eisav knew that if you want a bracha, you bring matamim." The father of the girl who went in for the next bracha said to me "My daughter wants to know how to make out the check for Matamim." I guess I wasn't quiet enough.

I

 יומא עא ע"א

"ואמר רבי ברכיה הרוצה לנסך יין על גבי המזבח (בזמן הזה) ימלא גרונם של תלמידי חכמים יין שנאמר "אליכם אישים אקרא"

Rav Meir Arik (mechaber of Minchas Kena'os, rebbi of Rav Meir Shapiro and Rav Reuven Margolios,) asked the Imrei Emes why Rav Brachia said that one who wants to fulfil the mitzva of Nesachim should give wine to talmidei chachamim. Why wouldn't the universal rule of ונשלמה פרים שפתינו, that כל העוסק בתורת, from Menachos 110a and Taanis 27b suffice?  He said that he had this question for a long time, and had asked so many gedolei Torah, and not one could give a satisfactory answer. 

The Imrei Emes immediately answered by pointing out that the source of כל העוסק is the passuk in Tzav (Vayikra 7:38)

זאת התורה לעלה למנחה ולחטאת ולאשם ולמלואים ולזבח השלמים

which lists all the korbanos except Nesachim. So Rav Brachia davka was asking, bishlema chatas, olah, shelamim, yes, כל העוסק, you have the limud of זאת התורה. But what about Nesachim? (We are obviously talking where a person is bringing wine nesachim alone; generally, wine is part of a Korban Mincha, but one can be makdish and makriv wine alone, as it says in Zevachim 104b.)  (One assumes that the general limud in Taanis is just an application of the limud from the passuk in Vayikra.) To answer that question, Rav Brachia showed that there is another way of bringing a korban in our time, and that is by being mehaneh a talmid chacham. This method is not limited to the korbanos listed in Vayikra, it is a universal rule. Giving something to a talmid chacham that is mehaneh him is like bringing it on the mizbei'ach.

I was thinking that one could say the same thing about ההוא גברא's drasha in the Gemara in כתובות ק"ה ע"ב

 רב ענן אייתי ליה ההוא גברא כנתא דגילדני דבי גילי. אמר ליה: מאי עבידתיך? אמר ליה: דינא אית לי. לא קביל מיניה. אמר ליה: פסילנא לך לדינא. אמר ליה: דינא דמר לא בעינא, קבולי לקביל מר דלא למנען מר מאקרובי בכורים. דתניא: ״ואיש בא מבעל שלישה ויבא לאיש האלהים לחם בכורים עשרים לחם שעורים וכרמל בצקלונו״. וכי אלישע אוכל בכורים הוה? אלא לומר לך: כל המביא דורון לתלמיד חכם  כאילו מקריב בכורים. אמר ליה: קבולי לא בעינן דאיקביל, השתא דאמרת לי טעמא, מקבילנא.

Tosfos there says that the כאילו מקריב בכורים refers to the Minchas Ha'omer. 

וכי אלישע אוכל בכורים היה - אין צריך לדחוק כפי' הקונטרס דהכי פי' וכי אלישע אוכל בכורים היה והלא בשומרון היה ואין בכורים נאכלין חוץ לחומה כדמוכח בריש אלו הן הלוקין (מכות יז.) ובפ' בהמה המקשה (חולין דף סח: ושם) והכי איתא בהדיא בסדר אליהו זוטא דתלמידי חכמים כפרה להם לישראל בכל מקום מושבותיהם שנא' תקריב מנחת בכורים ואומר ואיש בא מבעל שלישה וגו' וכי אלישע אוכל בכורים היה והלא אין שם מקדש ולא מזבח ולא כהן גדול אלא אלישע ותלמידיו יושבין לפניו מכאן אמרו וכו':

and the passuk Tosfos brings, תקריב מנחת בכורים,  is the Minchas Ha'omer on Pesach. 

But Rashi, according to the Shitah there, learns that it refers to the regular Bikurim in Ki Savo, that you bring and say mikra Bikkurim.   Lefi Rashi, we can say that the כל המביא דורון לתלמיד חכם  כאילו מקריב בכורים is necessary because bikkurim is not listed in that passuk in Tzav, so you need an alternative alternative.

II

Rav Bergman, in Shaarei Orah, says a very nice thing about the Gemara in Kesuvos.

He says he always wondered, why is being mehaneh talmid chacham davka like Bikkurim. What isn't it like Truma or something else? 

He answers with Rashi in 26:3 from the Sifri ואמרת אליו. שֶׁאֵינְךָ כְּפוּי טוֹבָה:, that the yesod of Bikkurim is hakaras hatov. 

The Gemara in Cheilek says that one who denigrates the contribution of Talmidei Chachamim to mankind is an apikores and megaleh panim and אין לו חלק לעולם הבא. The most fundamental requirement of hashkafa is to revere and appreciate talmidei chachamim. So Bikkurim, the matanah of hakaras hatov, is the perfect match for a gift that expresses your hakaras hatov to a talmid Chacham. (He says much more there on the simcha one should have when doing this, and how the mitzva has no limit; unlike the chomesh of Tzedaka and the shiyare'ha nikarim of Truma, one can give his entire field as Bikkurim.) 

When I said this over to my shul, I added that this explains why the passuk says אל הכהן אשר יהיה בימים ההם and Chazal say אֵין לְךָ אֶלָּא כֹּהֵן שֶׁבְּיָמֶיךָ כְּמוֹ שֶׁהוּא. I said that everyone needs a talmid chacham that he sees as a great man who is a role model. You can not say oh, Reb Moshe, Ponivezher Rov, those were malachim, but nowadays, meh. This is a terrible thing. Asei lecha Rav means a living man, not a dead man, even if he is נקרא חיים. You have to have a living person that you respect, one you try to be mehaneh according to your ability. A mizbeiach is a mizbeiach, and you use the one you have in your time.

III

It would not be right to walk away without reminding myself what the Mesillas Yesharim towards the end of his sefer says regarding these maamarei Chazal.

והנה האיש המתקדש בקדושת בוראו אפילו מעשיו הגשמיים חוזרים להיות ענייני קדושה ממש, וסימניך אכילת קדשים שהיא עצמה מצות עשה, ואמרו ז"ל (ספרא): כהנים אוכלים ובעלים מתכפרים, ותראה עתה ההפרש שבין הטהור לקדוש: הטהור, מעשיו החומרים אינם לו אלא הכרחים, והוא עצמו אינו מתכוין בהם אלא על צד ההכרח, ונמצא שעל ידי זה יוצאים מסוג הרע שבחומריות ונשארים טהורים, אך לכלל קדושה לא באו, כי אילו היה אפשר בלתם, כבר היה יותר טוב.

אך הקדוש הדבק תמיד לאלהיו, ונפשו מתהלכת בין המושכלות האמתיות באהבת בוראו ויראתו, הנה נחשב לו כאילו הוא מתהלך לפני ה' בארצות החיים עודנו פה בעולם הזה, והנה איש כזה הוא עצמו נחשב כמשכן, כמקדש, וכמזבח, וכמאמרם זכרונם לברכה (ב"ר פפ"ב): ויעל מעליו אלהים, האבות הן הן המרכבה, וכן אמרו (רש"י בראשית ז): הצדיקים הן הן המרכבה, כי השכינה שורה עליהם כמו שהיתה שורה במקדש, ומעתה המאכל שהם אוכלים הוא כקרבן שעולה על גבי האישים, כי ודאי הוא שיהיה נחשב לעילוי גדול אל אותם הדברים שהיו עולים על גבי המזבח כיון שהיו נקרבים לפני השכינה, וכל כך יתרון היה להם בזה, עד שהיה כל מינם מתברך בכל העולם, וכמאמרם ז"ל במדרש כן המאכל והמשתה שהאיש הקדוש אוכל, עילוי הוא למאכל ההוא ולמשתה ההוא, וכאילו נקרב על גבי המזבח ממש.

והוא הענין שאמרו עליו ז"ל (כתובות ק"ה): כל המביא דורון לת"ח כאילו הקריב בכורים. וכן אמרו (יומא ע"א): ימלא גרונם של ת"ח יין במקום נסכים, ואין הדבר הזה שיהיו הת"ח להוטים אחרי האכילה והשתיה ח"ו שימלאו גרונם כמלעיט את הגרגרן, אלא הענין הוא לפי הכונה שזכרתי, כי הת"ח הקדושים בדרכיהם ובכל מעשיהם הנה הם ממש כמקדש וכמזבח, מפני שהשכינה שורה עליהם כמו שהיתה שורה במקדש ממש, והנה הנקרב להם כנקרב על גבי המזבח, ומילוי גרונם תחת מילוי הספלים (ספלים שהיו על גבי המזבח שהיו מנסכים לתוכם יין). ועל דרך זה כל תשמיש שישתמשו מדברי העולם אחרי היותם כבר דבוקים לקדושתו יתברך, הנה עילוי ויתרון הוא לדבר ההוא שזכו להיות תשמיש לצדיק, וכבר הזכירו ז"ל בענין אבני המקום שלקח יעקב ושם מראשותיו (חולין צ"א): אר"י מלמד שנתקבצו כולן והיתה כל אחת אומרת עלי יניח צדיק ראשו.

Noam Hashem

In Pekudei when they finished the keilim and in Shemini when the kehuna was handed over to Aharon, Moshe gave them the bracha.

Shemos 39:43 

וַיַּרְא משֶׁה אֶת כָּל הַמְּלָאכָה וְהִנֵּה עָשׂוּ אֹתָהּ כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְהֹוָה כֵּן עָשׂוּ וַיְבָרֶךְ אֹתָם משֶׁה

Rashi there

וירא משה את כל המלאכה את כל מלאכת המשכן אינו אומר אלא את כל המלאכה שהיה הכל כמעשה בראשית כמו שכתוב לעיל. מיד ברכם שנאמר ויברך אותם משה. מה ברכה ברכן? רבותינו אמרו ה' אלהי אבותיכם וגו' רבי מאיר אומר יהי רצון שתשרה שכינה במעשה ידיכם והם אמרו ויהי נועם ה' וכו' (תנחומא, פקודי יא)

Similarly Vayikra 9:23,

  ויבא משה ואהרן אל אהל מועד ויצאו ויברכו את העם וירא כבוד יהוה אל כל העם    

Rashi

יצאו ויברכו את העם. אָמְרוּ וִיהִי נֹעַם ה' אֱלֹהֵינוּ עָלֵינוּ, יְהִי רָצוֹן שֶׁתִּשְׁרֶה שְׁכִינָה בְמַעֲשֵׂה יְדֵיכֶם; לְפִי שֶׁכָּל שִׁבְעַת יְמֵי הַמִּלּוּאִים שֶׁהֶעֱמִידוֹ מֹשֶׁה לַמִּשְׁכָּן וְשִׁמֵּשׁ בּוֹ וּפֵרְקוֹ בְכָל יוֹם לֹא שָׁרְתָה בוֹ שְׁכִינָה, וְהָיוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל נִכְלָמִים וְאוֹמְרִים לְמֹשֶׁה, מֹשֶׁה רַבֵּנוּ, כָּל הַטֹּרַח שֶׁטָּרַחְנוּ שֶׁתִּשְׁרֶה שְׁכִינָה בֵינֵינוּ וְנֵדַע שֶׁנִּתְכַּפֵּר לָנוּ עֲוֹן הָעֵגֶל, לְכָךְ אָמַר לָהֶם זֶה הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר צִוָּה ה' תַּעֲשׂוּ וְיֵרָא אֲלֵיכֶם כְּבוֹד ה' — אַהֲרֹן אָחִי כְּדַאי וְחָשׁוּב מִמֶּנִּי, שֶׁעַל יְדֵי קָרְבְּנוֹתָיו וַעֲבוֹדָתוֹ תִשְׁרֶה שְׁכִינָה בָכֶם וְתֵדְעוּ שֶׁהַמָּקוֹם בָּחַר בּוֹ:

which explains why he gave them the bracha a second time.

Why the word Noam for Shechina?

Rav Bergman in maamarim (Tzav) says it's because hashra'as hashechina in the Mishkan davka required perfect middos, such as Aharon's when he saw Moshe made king and Moshe's when he saw Aharon given eternal kehuna. That's why Nadav and Avihu had to die, because their avoda had a lack of hachna'ah and joy at another's success, and it threatened the whole kedusha of the Mishkan.

The word appears in Tehillim 90, in Tefilla l'moshe, and in Zecharya 11, by the two maklos, and in Mishlei. The Malbim learns that noam is the satisfaction of knowing that you've completed your tafkid.

But it seems to me that the simple pshat is that the word Noam refers not to the prerequisite but to the Shechina itself.

I just saw something in the Teivas Goma (here and here) that makes sense of it all. The Pri Megadim says that b'etzem, all the avodos of making the Mishkan were our little hishtadlus and the Ribono shel Olam making the real creation. But to start the process, they had to make themselves a mikdash (b'socham), and for that, for Tikkun Hamiddos, or Yiras Shamayim, the ikkar is what the man does.

אגדה. וירא משה כל המלאכה כן עשו ויברך. עיין רמ"א יפה; והענין כי מלאכת המנורה השליכו לאש ויצאה מאליה. וכל מלאכה המשכן מה' היה והם סייעו לבד. ששת ימים תֵּעָשֶׂה מלאכה מאיליה, ולא נחסר מזהב וכסף ונחשת כלום כמ"ש רמ"א ז"ל, משכן העדות העיקר מה' והם סייעו, נראים כאלו הם עושים. אבל ושכנתי בתוכם שיעשו הם עצמם מקדש ויטהרו גופם להשראת שכינה, הם העיקרים והקב"ה סייעם. הכל בידי שמים כו'. ופ' תרומה ככל אשר אני מראה אותך וכן תעשו כו' ויהי נועם כו' יע"ש יפה. וקיי"ל מסייע אין בו ממש ונמצא במלאכת המשכן הם היו מסייעים והעיקר מה' ובלי סייעתם היה נעשה אבל שיטהר האדם גופו העיקר ממנו, ובלי סייעת ה' א"א לולי הקב"ה עוזרו כו'. וזה הוה סיוע שיש בו ממש ...

Mimeila, Noam is the perfect term, a word that captures everything that happened.  Noam means the shleimus hamiddos of Veshachanti b'socham that that makes it possible for us to do the beginning of a peula and Hashem then creates a perfect klei machzik bracha for Avodas Hashem, and Noam means the Shechina itself. The Noam is the machshir and the Noam is the totza'ah.  Ultimately, the Noam is knowing that you have fulfilled your tafkid of creating a matzav where the Ribono shel Olam is willing to bring His kedusha into this world.

This is not really a great novelty. It is pashut in the passuk itself. Look at the Malbim:

"ויהי נועם ה' אלהינו עלינו", (הנעימות הוא התענוג שישיג הפועל ממעשהו במה שהפיק ממעשהו את התכלית הנרצה), וע"י שאנו נשיג את השלמות, בזה ימצא ה' נועם בכלל הבריאה אשר ברא לכבודו, שישיגו הברואים את כבודו ויעבדוהו, וזה יתראה עלינו, כי נחנו נהיה תכלית הבריאה וחפץ ה' בעולמו, ובנו ימצא תכלית מעשיו ופעולותיו, "ומעשה ידינו כוננה עלינו", ר"ל כי מעשה ידי האדם בענינים השפלים אינם מכוננים עליו, דהיינו שהוא לא נעשה כן ובסיס אל מעשיו, למשל הבונה בית לשבת בו, הבית מכונן על יסוד אבנים, והאבנים מכוננים על עפר הארץ, לא על האומן הבונה, בהפך האומן יתכונן על ביתו לשבת בו ולמצוא מחסה מזרם וממטר, לא כן מעשה הטוב בענינים הנפשיים, נעשה הוא בסיס וכן למעשה ידיו, למשל הלומד תורה תורתו מכוננת על שכל האדם ונפשו, והעושה מצוה לשמה המצוה יש לה כן בנפש הפועל, וז"ש שמעשה ידינו יהיו מכוננים עלינו, לא על דבר שהוא זולת עצמותנו, "ומעשה ידינו" יהיו דברים אשר "כוננהו", שכל מה שנעשה יכונן ה' אותם מפני שיהיו טובים בעיניו, עד כאן דבר איש האלהים המתפלל, והיא תפלה כללית, וגם פרטית, שהתפלל גם על עצמו במה שנגזר עליו שלא יכנס לארץ, שאמר שאינו מבין עז אף ה' ולא עברתו, ובקש שה' ינחם על עבדו, ושיראו אליו פעולות ה' בעת יכנס לארץ להשיג שלימותו, והדר ה' יראה על בניו שהם יירשו מקומו אחריו, ושמעשה ידיו מה שהוציא עם ה' ממצרים יתכוננן עליו לא על זולתו. - ע"כ היא התפלה:

מעשה ידינו כוננה עלינו means that our efforts of self-improvement, to grow in ruchniyus, כוננה עלינו- may they be successful and make us what we want to be. מעשה ידינו כוננהו  asks Hashem "May we be worthy so that our efforts to make the world better should bear fruit and create a מדור לשכינה." The bracha, the tefilla, of נועם, has two steps. Step one,  עלינו. Step two, כוננהו. Step one, ועשו לי מקדש ושכנתי בתוכם. Step two, ועשו לי מקדש ושכנתי בתוכם. 

Tzav. Three He'aros on Zerizus

 1. Rashi in the beginning of the parsha:

צו את אהרן. אֵין צַו אֶלָּא לְשׁוֹן זֵרוּז מִיָּד וּלְדוֹרוֹת; אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, בְּיוֹתֵר צָרִיךְ הַכָּתוּב לְזָרֵז בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ חֶסְרוֹן כִּיס (ספרא):

Rashi in Devarim 1:16:

ואצוה את שפטיכם. אָמַרְתִּי לָהֶם הֱווּ מְתוּנִין בַּדִּין – אִם בָּא דִּין לְפָנֶיךָ פַּעַם אַחַת, שְׁתַּיִם, וְשָׁלוֹשׁ, אַל תֹּאמַר כְּבָר בָּא דִּין זֶה לְפָנַי פְּעָמִים הַרְבֵּה, אֶלָּא הֱיוּ נוֹשְׂאִים וְנוֹתְנִים בּוֹ (שם):

Rav Bergman (Ma'amarim here in Tzav) points out that Mesinus in the context of din means moving slowly - as in Brachos 20a,

כי הא דרב אדא בר אהבה חזייה לההיא כותית דהות לבישא כרבלתא בשוקא סבר דבת ישראל היא קם קרעיה מינה אגלאי מילתא דכותית היא שיימוה בארבע מאה זוזי א"ל מה שמך אמרה ליה מתון אמר לה מתון מתון ארבע מאה זוזי שויא:

Rashi there:

מתון מתון - לשון מאתן:

ד' מאות - ב' פעמים ב' מאות כלומר השם גרם לי לשון אחר מתון מתון לשון המתנה אם המתנתי הייתי משתכר ד' מאות זוז:

So what does Tzav connote? Alacrity or deliberation? Rav Bergman answers that there is physical atzlus and there is mental atzlus. A person that is mentally lazy will answer questions by rote. A person that is a mental Zariz will think through the question and the circumstances and quickly review the basis for the psak.

So Zrizus is always speed and alacrity. But in the case of psak, it means to be mentally agile and quick, and to use every iteration of a question as an opportunity to reexamine old certainties.

2.  From Reb Yerucham.  The word tzivui was used in regard to the exact same dinim in Tetzaveh. Two ziruzim were needed, exactly as the Mesillas Yesharim says in perek 7. I am widely known as something of an expert on atzlus, so trust me when I tell you that the Ramchal is right. Sometimes you decide something needs to be done, and somehow you congratulate yourself on your strength of character as demonstrated by your decision, and the self-congratulatory satisfaction replaces the actual motivation to get it done. The same happens when you begin a project that takes time and work, and after a day or two..... 

3.  Reb Moshe, in the new Kol Rom, says that the instruction of zerizus is particularly important in the parsha of Olah. A person brings an olah, which seems to yield very little practical benefit to anyone, and it reminds him that our efforts are not tied to our success. The Ribono shel Olam decides what will succeed and what we will have. A person might use this faith, this sharp spiritual perception, to justify sloth. So the Torah says No, whatever you choose to do for a parnassah, don't do it half heartedly. Do it with energy and diligence and focus - with Zerizus!

(You need to see it inside, but I can't quote it verbatim because A, it's copyrighted, and B, even if I decided it's ok to steal someone's hard work, it's not available online.)

Tzav: The Minchas Chavitin

I posted in Shemini on the Rishonim that say that a Kohen Hedyot on the day of his investiture, when he brings his Minchas Chavitin which is called a Minchas Chinuch, has certain dinim of a Kohen Gadol. This is based on the fact that the korban brought on by a young kohen on his first day is brought by the Kohen Gadol every day he is in office.  This is the shakla v'tarya Rabbi Avraham Bukspan (Miami, author of Classics and Beyond/אבני קודש/Parsha Pearls) and I had mei'inyan le'inyan.

From Rabbi Bukspan:

Tzav 2 — Kohanim and Korbanos and Klal Yisrael

זה קרבן אהרן ובניו אשר יקריבו לה' ביום המשח אתו עשירת האפה סלת מנחה תמיד מחציתה בבקר ומחציתה בערב:

הכהן המשיח תחתיו מבניו יעשה אתה חק עולם לה' כליל תקטר…

This is the offering of Aharon and his sons, which each shall offer to Hashem on the day he is inaugurated: a tenth of an ephah of fine flour as a meal-offering; continually, half of it in the morning and half of it in the afternoon…The Kohen from among his sons who is anointed in his place shall perform it; it is an eternal decree for Hashem; it shall be caused to go up in smoke in its entirety (Vayikra 6:13, 15).

            Often, a topic's location in the Torah speaks volumes, clueing us into wonderful lessons to learn and live life by. The placement of the korbanos the Kohanim brought upon being initiated into their holy service is such an instance. 

            Though the final third of Parashas Tzav describes the seven days of the inauguration of the Mishkan and the Kohanim, the minchas chinuch, the flour-offering brought by a Kohen on his first day of service, is found earlier in the parashah (between the korban minchah and korban chatas). If this is an inaugural sacrifice, why is it not placed near the laws that apply to the inauguration of the Kohanim?

             In general, a man of means would be the one to offer a large animal as a sacrifice, since that comes at a considerable expense. One with less disposable income would bring a less expensive bird, and one in the most dire straits would bring a minchah, a small amount of flour, scraped together from the free-for-the-taking leket, shichechah, andpe'ah.  

            Rav Zalman Sorotzkin (Oznayim LaTorah ad loc.) describes how feelings of worthlessness may shroud the pauper as he self-consciously, and with great embarrassment, brings what he perceives is the least of the korbanos. In Rav Sorotzkin's words, the poor person says to himself, "Everyone else brings animals and birds, while I, the poor man, have nothing with which to honor Hashem but a tenth of an ephah of flour!"

            For this reason, writes Rav Sorotzkin, right after the poor man's meal-offering, we find the meal-offering brought by the Kohen at his investiture into office. Hashem is showing the pauper who else is bringing a meal-offering: the Kohen, from the elite of Klal Yisrael. As Rashi explains (verse 13), though this korban was brought by all Kohanim only on the day of their inauguration, the Kohen Gadol brought it every day. In fact, he even brought it on Yom Kippur. Hashem was telling the pauper, "Even Aharon, on the day he enters the Kodesh HaKodashim, is to offer the same. What's more, the Kohen Gadol brings half of the measurement (of a tenth of an ephah) in the morning, and the other half at night, not even all at once — while yours is whole, offered all at one time. You have nothing to feel bad about."

            We can turn around the idea of the Oznayim LaTorah to demonstrate how it is also for the sake of the Kohen that he and the pauper bring the same korban. After undergoing a chinuch process and then waiting seven days (Vayikra 8), Aharon and his sons officially became Kohanim. From that point on, they were Klal Yisrael's elite. They were supported by the Klal, and had access to places that would render others guilty of a high crime. Bnei Yisrael needed their services and came to them with their problems. They were the holders of high office, with unique power and prestige. There is even a mitzvah to treat them with special honor (Vayikra 21:8).

            All of this could subtly induce feelings of superiority and unjustified importance. To preempt this, the Kohen, at the moment of his advancement, had to learn the lesson that only a minchas chinuch could teach. By bringing a poor man’s korban, he was making a statement: "I realize that I was not selected to lord over others but to serve, not to receive rewards but to help make life rewarding to others." At the very moment that he was elevated to high office, he had to be made aware that he should not feel elevated.

            The challenge facing the Kohen Gadol was far more serious, as he was the principal figure in the Beis HaMikdash. In contrast to the Kohen Hedyot, who served in theBeis HaMikdash for only two weeks a year, the Kohen Gadol served there all year long. And on Yom Kippur, he performed the special avodah of the day, even entering the Kodesh HaKodashim, the holiest place on earth. The other Kohanim, whom we have to honor, must themselves honor the Kohen Gadol. To thread the needle between accolades and humility could not have been easy for him.

             A Jewish king had to have a personal copy of the Torah strapped to his arms at all times:  "Le’vilti rum levavo mei’echav — So that his heart does not become haughty over his brothers” (Devarim 17:20).He may have been king, but he could not allow it to go to his head.  In order to uphold his moral and ethical compass, a Kohen Gadol also needed a tangible reminder.

            Yet one minchas chinuch, at the beginning of his career, would not have been sufficient. On a daily basis, the Kohen Gadol was to bring the same korban as the pauper did, to demonstrate that he may have merited high office, but he should not feel any higher than the people.  Like his forebear Aharon, who was praised for not allowing the office to change him (Bamidbar 8:3: Rashi, Ohr HaChaim), the Kohen Gadol had to maintain his spiritual equilibrium. As the Abarbanel (verse 13) explains, the Kohen Gadol had to offer a minchah every day, thereby bringing the feeling of humility into his heart, since after all, his offering was the same as the poor person's.

            Perhaps that is why he had to bring only half of the korban every morning and the other half every evening, taking the same tenth of an ephah as the most destitute person and dividing it into two. He thereby acknowledged that though he was the representative of the entire nation, he was not even giving as much as the poorest person at any one time.

            Rav Michel Zilber (cited in VeShalal Lo Yechsar ad loc.) has a far different pshat to explain why the Kohen Gadol brought what was essentially an inaugural korban every day.

As we saw in Rashi's explanation cited in the beginning of this piece, the pasuk weaves together the laws of the one-time minchas chinuch of the Kohen Hedyot with the dailyminchas chavitin of the Kohen Gadol. Why is this?

            Rav Zilber explains that even the daily korban of the Kohen Gadol was, to a certain extent, an inaugural one. The Kohen Gadol was supposed to be in a constant state of spiritual growth, with no ceiling or limits. As such, every day he was like a new person, different and greater than the day before. Consequently, his avodah on any given day was also new, filled with novel facets in his service to Hashem and the Klal. That is why he brought a daily meal-offering, which was essentially no different from a minchas chinuch, as he underwent a new inauguration on a daily basis.

            Rav Zilber concludes that this can serve as a lesson for us all. We need to constantly find new ways to grow and serve Hashem. The depth of our mitzvos and the care we put into them can always be improved and brought to the next level, as we constantly offer Hashem our personal minchah chadashah.

My response:

I would use a slightly different approach, based on an idea I heard from Reb Moshe innumerable times. Davka the Kohen Gadol, who has reason to think that he stands on the highest plateau, needs to be reminded that as far as what he might achieve, he is no farther along than a kohen hedyot on the first day he is doing the avoda.

So there are two lessons. One, that a kohen hedyot should realize that he must seize the new opportunity and that he has the ability to be as great as the Kohen Gadol, and Two, the great Kohen Gadol has to be reminded never to rest on his laurels, that he has great horizons that remain to be achieved.

The Hedyot needs to know that he has the potential to be a Gadol. The Gadol needs to be reminded that he is just a Hedyot.

(Or, if you apply it to a Bar Mitzvah, 

The Bar Mitzva bachur needs to know that he now has the opportunity to become the greatest man in Klal Yisrael, and the greatest person in Klal Yisrael must be reminded to have the humility and receptiveness of a Bar Mitzva bachur.

This reminds me of a Rashi in Melachim I 5:13 that I just learned with my wife the other day, which also relates to this week's parsha, Tazria. Speaking of the wisdom of Shlomo HaMelech, the passuk says

וַיְדַבֵּר֮ עַל־הָֽעֵצִים֒ מִן־הָאֶ֙רֶז֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר בַּלְּבָנ֔וֹן וְעַד֙ הָאֵז֔וֹב אֲשֶׁ֥ר יֹצֵ֖א בַּקִּ֑יר וַיְדַבֵּר֙ עַל־הַבְּהֵמָ֣ה וְעַל־הָע֔וֹף וְעַל־הָרֶ֖מֶשׂ וְעַל־הַדָּגִֽים׃

Rashi says

וַיְדַבֵּר עַל הָעֵצִים. מָה רְפוּאַת כָּל אֶחָד, וְעֵץ פְּלוֹנִי יָפֶה לְבִנְיָן פְּלוֹנִי, וְלִטַּע בְּקַרְקַע פְּלוֹנִית וְכֵן עַל הַבְּהֵמָה, מָה רְפוּאָתָהּ, וְעִקַּר גִּדּוּלֶיהָ וּמַאֲכָלָהּ. וּמִדְרַשׁ אַגָּדָה: מָה רָאָה מְצֹרָע לִטָּהֵר בְּגָבוֹהַּ שֶׁבַּגְּבוֹהִים, וּבְנָמוּךְ שֶׁבַּנְּמוּכִים. וְעַל הַבְּהֵמָה וְעַל הָעוֹף, מָה רָאָה זֶה לִהְיוֹת כָּשֵׁר בִּשְׁחִיטָה בְּסִימָן אֶחָד, וְזֶה בִּשְׁנֵי סִימָנִין, וְדָגִים וַחֲגָבִים בְּלֹא כְלוּם.

The classic drush about needing to be reminded of gavhus and of nemichus, עפר ואפר ובשבילי נברא העולם. Like the Chovos Halevavos in שער הכניעה פרק ב

Tzav. Influence of Tzadikim, Influence of Resha'im.

The lesson is universal.  The laws in our parsha from which it is derived are simple, albeit kodshim oriented:

1. A Kohen Gadol brings a Korban called Minchas Chavitin every day, including Shabbos. After his death, until his successor is inaugurated, the korban continues to be brought.
2. When something that has no kedusha absorbs flavor from a piece of a korban, the strict laws of the korban will then apply to the chulin.
3. When a piece of a korban touches something that is tamei, the korban becomes tamei. In fact, korbanos are more susceptible to tumah than anything else.

********************************************

From Rav Menachem Sachs (Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank's son in law) in his Menachem Tzion 
6:20. Kol hanogeia bivsara yikdash-כל אשר יגע בבשרה יקדש.   Zevachim 97-the din of yikdash, which requires that you treat the Chulin like Kodshim when it touches  (yiga) a piece of a korban, is only when it is bolei’a, when it absorbs the flavor of the meat of the Korban.  But later in this parsha, 7:19, when it says that if kodshim touches (yiga) a davar tamei it is passeled, that is even negia be’alma- והבשר אשר יגע בכל טמא לא יאכל, any contact at all.  How interesting!   אשר יגע by imparting kedusha means that it suffuses the piece it touches, but  אשר יגע by tuma means the slightest contact.  This is a remez to the effect of contact with an adam kadosh, and contact with an adam tamei— to be mushpa from a kadosh, you have to be bole’ah his torah and mussar.  To be mushpa from a rasha, simple contact with him is enough.

*************************************

From Lutzker Rov in Oznaim LaTorah.  
6:15.  After the death of the Kohen Gadol, the Minchas Chavitin is still brought.  In Menachos 51, there is a machlokes; Rav Shimon holds it is paid for by the tzibur, and Rav Yehuda holds it is paid for by the family of the late Kohen Gadol.  The machlokes, says Rav Sorotzkin, is whether this korban’s purpose in general is for the kapara of the Kohen Gadol or for the tzibur.  He brings a raya from the Rambam in Terumos Uma’asros, who says that the yorshim bring it “avur kaparaso.”  
He then goes into a discussion of the achrayos of a manhig, and his responsibility for the behavior of the tzibbur, which goes on until a successor is chosen.  His examples are the Gemara in Makos 11 that the klala of the people in the arei miklat is not chinam, because the occurrence of retzicha b’shogeg during the tenure of a Kohen Gadol shows that he wasn’t mispallel properly.  He also brings a vort from another rov that it says by Egla Arufa “al pihem yihiye kol riv vechol nega”, which he says means that if the kohanim would have duchenned properly, and given the proper bracha of shalom, such things as riv and nega would not happen, and it was because their bracho was superficial— “al pihem”-- that such things occur.  
It would be nice to be able to blame our failings on our Gedolim, but that's not the point and it's just not true. The point is that Gedolim have it in their power to influence their generation,  through their teaching and their example and their tefilla.  But nothing's going to help unless you pay attention to what they say and to what they stand for.  It's requires effort on both parts.

(With this he explains that a kapara for a meis is for the things he is responsible for through grama, and so tzdaka and mitzvos through grama, such as what his yorshim give on his behalf, are mechaper.
Regarding doing something for the sake of the neshomoh of a dead person: see Sefer Chasidim 450 and 1171 that it works, and see there 605 that it only helps to alleviate tzaar but not for reward, and see Beis Yosef OC 621.  See on the general topic Shimon Krasner's Shmuel II 2  32 regarding the benefits of kaddish and the such for a meis.)

***********************************

So between Rav Sachs and the Lutzker Rov, one can say that the lesson of Parshas Tzav is that exposure to Gedolim can make a tremendous difference, but only when there is tefilla and hard work on their part and the desire to change on your part.  Exposure to Reshaim, on the other hand, works without any effort at all. That's why after Birkos HaShachar we say והרחיקנו מאדם רע ומחבר רע.  If you want to be safe, stay far away. Just looking at a Rasha causes damage- 

מגילה כח, א  שאל רבי את רבי יהושע בן קרחה: במה הארכת ימים? אמר לו: מימי לא נסתכלתי בדמות אדם רשע. דאמר רבי יוחנן: אסור לאדם להסתכל בצלם דמות אדם רשע, שנאמר (מלכים ב, ג) "לולא פני יהושפט מלך יהודה אני נשא אם אביט אליך ואם אראך". רבי אלעזר אמר: עיניו כהות, שנאמר (בראשית כז) "ויהי כי זקן יצחק ותכהין עיניו מראת", משום דאסתכל בעשו הרשע.

True, looking at a tzadik is a tremendous thing, too.  Eiruvin 13b-

אמר רבי האי דמחדדנא מחבראי דחזיתיה לר' מאיר מאחוריה ואילו חזיתיה מקמיה הוה מחדדנא טפי דכתיב (ישעיהו ל, כ) והיו עיניך רואות את מוריך 

But that's only when you look at him because you want to be influenced by him, because you want to and are ready to be bolei'a.  Just looking at him means nothing.  You have to be a davar cham, you can't be shi'a velo bala, it has to be like a davar charif, and it has to be mefa'afei'ah. Then there will be a bli'ah. And if you are an anav and are bloei'ah like a kli cheres, then the effect will last forever.

How do I know that the din of not looking at a rasha is habata b'alma, while the mitzva of looking at a tzadik is only if you desire to be influenced by him?  The answer is obvious. The Gemara in Megila about looking at a rasha says  אסור לאדם להסתכל בצלם דמות אדם רשע.  But the Gemara in Eiruvin about Rebbi and Reb Meir says והיו עיניך רואות את מוריך. One is any צלם דמות אדם רשע, the other is davka מוריך, someone from whom you have learned and from whom you want to learn.  And that is the difference between the אשר יגע by Tuma and the אשר יגע  by kedusha.  Kloreh dibburim.

********************

Here's the Menachem Tzion:

כל אשר יגע בבשרה יקדש (ו כ)

 בזבחים צז אמרינן יכול אשר יגע ואעפ"י שלא בלע ת"ל בבשרה עד שיבלע בבשרה ולהלן (ז י'ט) נאמר והבשר אשר יגע בכל טמא לא יאכל בשניהם נאמרה אותה המלה "יגע" ובכל זאת יש חילוק גדול ביניהם בפסוק הראשון דמיירי בדבר חול שנגע בקודש הדין הוא שהחול איננו נעשה קודש בנגיעה בעלמא אלא בבליעה מגוף הקודש ואילו בפסוק השני דמיירי בדבר טהור שנגע בטומאה הטהור נטמא אפילו בנגיעה גרידא

הלכות הללו הנן לימוד גדול לדורות כי כח ההשפעה של אנשים טמאים ברוחם הוא חזק ומהיר להתעות ולהטעות אנשים הבאים עמם במגע להדיח אותם לדרכיהם הנלוזות יותר מאשר כח ההשפעה של אנשים קדושים וטהורים הבאים במגע עם אנשים חילוניים ומתירניים במגמה להנחותם ולהדריכם לאורח חיים של קדושה וטהרה שבמגע לבד עמהם פעולתם תהיה מאפע דרושים לזה יגיעה עצומה וסבלנות ממושכת עד שיצליחו להחדיר בתוך תוכם מהקדושה והטהרה שלהם 

He says that this was the basis of the argument between Avraham and Sara:

בזה יש לבאר את הדיון שהיה בין אברהם אבינו לשרה אמנו אודות ישמעאל דכתיב בראשית כא ותרא שרה את בן הגר המצרית יהיר ילדה לאברהם מצחק ותאמר לאברהם גרש האמה הזאת ואת בנה כי לא יירש בן האמה הזאת עם בני עם יצחק וירע הדבר מאד בעיני אברהם על אורת בנו שרה ראתה את ישמעאל מצחק עובר על ג' העבירות הכי חמורות ע"ז ג"ע ושפ"ד ובשמ"ר א א נאמר ששרה אמרה שמא ילמד בני יצחק אורחותיו היא חששה ופחדה שישמעאל יטמא את יצחק היא אמרה כי לא יירש עם בני עם יצחק הרי הוא ממאן לקבל עליו את המורשה המקודריה לנו והוא יטה את לב יצחק אחריו שרה לא ראתה כל מוצא אחר רק לגרש את ישמעאל להרחיק את יצחק מלבוא עמו במגע אולם אברהם חשב לגמרי להיפך הוא סבר כי על יצתה הצדיק לבוא במגע תכוף עם ישמעאל ולהשפיע עליו מרוחו הקדושה וזאת כוונת הפסוק וירע הדבר מאד בעיני אברהם על אודת בנו הדבר היה רע בעיני אברהם לגרש את ישמעאל מביתו שהרי מעולם לא גרש איש מביתו ואדרבה הוא הכניס אורחים והשפיע עליהם לקבל עול מלכות שמים ואיך יהין עתה לגרש את מי שיצא מחלציו אולם מה שהרע והציק לאברהם מאד היה אודות בנו יצחק הוא לא היה יכול להעלות על דעתו שיצחק בנו ההולך בעקבותיו לא יוכל לפי דעת שרה להשפיע על ישמעאל ולא עוד אלא שלפי דעתה יושפע יצחק מישמעאל היו איפוא חילוקי דעות בין אברהם ושרה מי ישפיע על מי הטומאה על הקדושה או הקדושה על הטומאה והקב"ה הכריע ביניהם ואמר אל אברהם כל אשר תאמר אליך שרה שמע בקלה כלומר דע לך אברהם ששרה צודקת כי הכח של הסטרא אתרא הוא חזק וקשה מאד להתגבר עליו כי ביצחק יקרא לך זרע ועליך להיות זהיר שנשמתו לא תפגם מן הרוח דמסאבותא של ישמעאל

אנו מתפללים לה' שתצילנו היום ובכל יום מאדם רע מחבר רע ומשכן רע מה מאד עלינו להרבות להתפלל שנינצל מאדם רע שהוא ג"כ חבר רע ושכן רע כולם באיש אחד ובנדרים פא מובא וכבר שלחו מתם הזהרו בערבוביתא  

Tzav. Poverty and Torah, Selling Chametz Absorbed in Your Keilim, and Iyov's Grave

1.  The Satmerer in Tzav (page 112) asks, why does the passuk (Vayikra 6:1-2) say

וידבר ה' אל משה לאמר. צו את אהרן ואת בניו לאמר זאת תורת העלה

which repeats the mitzva to impart these laws to Klal Yisrael three times- לאמר, and צו, and again לאמר?  I would add another question: these dinim are for the Kohanim, and that's why it says צו את אהרן ואת בניו.  So to whom is the following לאמר addressed?  צו את אהרן ואת בניו לאמר -  לאמר אל מי?י? He answers that one might think that when Reb Yitzchak says, in the end of Menachos, that one who is עוסק in the parsha of a korban it is as if he brings the korban,

זאת תורת החטאת וזאת תורת האשם כל העוסק בתורת חטאת כאילו הקריב חטאת וכל העוסק בתורת אשם כאילו הקריב אשם

that's only עוסק, if he delves and thinks and learns the dinim of the korban, but not if he just reads it.  So the passuk has to tell us that even simple "אמירה" counts as if one brings the Korban, it doesn't require "עוסק."  Even אמירה is called Toras Ha'Olah.  This answers my question as well.  The second לאמר is addressed not to the Kohanim, but rather to the non-kohanim that have to be mekayeim a korban through saying the parsha of the korban.
He then connects this to the Rashi here.  Rashi here says that the Tzav was necessary because of the costs involved in bringing a korban-

אמר ר' שמעון ביותר צריך הכתוב לזרז במקום שיש בו חסרון כיס

The Satmerer brings (Medrash Rabbah Shir Hashirim 2:5 and a fragment in Maseches Sofrim 16:4) a Chazal that says that when when parnassa is more readily available people will learn b'iyun, but when parnassa is tight, they will want only Aggadeta and brachos.

כי חולת אהבה אני

תני עד שלא יחלה אדם אוכל מה שמוצא כיון שחלה מבקש לאכול כל מיני תענוגים אמר רבי יצחק לשעבר היתה התורה כלל והיו מבקשין לשמוע דבר משנה ודבר תלמוד ועכשיו שאין התורה כלל היו מבקשין לשמוע דבר מקרא ודבר אגדה
אמר רבי לוי לשעבר היתה פרוטה מצויה והיה אדם מתאוה לשמוע דבר משנה והלכה ותלמוד ועכשיו שאין הפרוטה מצויה וביותר שהן חולים מן השעבוד אין מבקשין לשמוע אלא דברי ברכות ואגדה

He ties this Chazal together with his pshat and Rashi.  This is why Rashi says that the Torah had to emphasize the din in our passuk, because things that involve high costs require greater encouragement. When a man is so burdened by parnassa problems, when is faced with problems of חסרון כיס, that he doesn't have the head to learn the dinim of the Korban with Iyun, you might think that reading the parsha is not an adequate substitute for bringing the Korban.  So the Torah says that even אמירה is good enough.

I understand how the Rov is using the Chazal, I understand the pshat he's saying in the passuk.  But I don't understand what Chazal mean that when parnasa is tight people will lose interest in iyun.  What does he do with the Gemara (Sanhedrin 20a) that davka when there was little to eat did the madreiga of Torah reach a pinnacle?

דבר אחר שקר החן זה דורו של משה והבל היופי זה דורו של יהושע יראת ה' היא תתהלל זה דורו של חזקיה דבר אחר שקר החן זה דורו של משה ויהושע והבל היופי זה דורו של חזקיה יראת ה' היא תתהלל זה דורו של ר' יהודה ברבי אילעאי אמרו עליו על רבי יהודה ברבי אילעאי שהיו ששה תלמידים מתכסין בטלית אחת ועוסקין בתורה:

Rashi:

דורו של משה ויהושע. עסקו בתורה הרבה ודורו של חזקיהו יותר מהם כדכתיב (ישעיה י) וחובל עול מפני שמן ואמרינן בחלק (לקמן דף צד:) חובל עול של סנחריב מפני שמנו של חזקיה שהיה דולק בבתי מדרשות עד שבדקו מדן ועד באר שבע ולא מצאו עם הארץ: מתכסין בטלית אחת. עניים היו:

 People who learn with iyun will learn even if they're poor; The Ein Yaakov/Daf Yomi crowd will always find an excuse not to learn with iyun.

2.  Pesach is around the corner.  In this week's parsha, (6:21) it mentions that utensils that were used to cook a korban Chatas have to be purged, or, if made of a material that cannot be purged, then broken and discarded.

 וכלי חרש אשר תבשל בו ישבר ואם בכלי נחשת בשלה ומרק ושטף במים.

This is one of the two places in the Torah that mentions this concept, the other being Klei Midyan, assuming Klei Midyan is talking about taam ke'ikar.  But even if Klei Midyan is not talking about ta'am ke'Ikar, the din in our parsha is talking about taam ke'ikar, as Reb Aharon Kotler says.
Some shtaros of Mechiras Chametz say that they're also selling the taam of chametz that's balu'ah in their Keilim. I've heard some that said that our parsha is the source for this minhag: that either the bliyos create an obligation of תשביתו or that you'd be over on בל ימצא, just as you would if you had a תערובת where the chametz was  נותן טעם.
I say piffle.  There is absolutely no reason to sell the flavor of Chametz that is absorbed in Keilim.  Even if we were to learn the din of Klei Chatas is to avoid coming to nossar, that wouldn't apply to Chametz.  This is stated as a fact in numerous places:
Reb Akiva Eiger
the Chazon Ish, and again here
Mishna Berura 447 sk 4
Brisker Rov Maaseh HaKorbanos 8
Rav Sternbuch
So if you want to sell the bliyos in your keilim, go ahead, as long as you don't sell the utensils themselves, which would create a requirement that you are tovel them when you buy them back.  It makes no sense, both from a halachic and a legal-sale perspective, and it's מוקצה מן הדעת, but it doesn't cost you anything.

3.  Someone pointed out to me this morning that we ought to be celebrating the discovery of what pretty clearly appears to be the grave of the famous Iyov.  As you know, there has been a terrible controversy regarding the Goloventzitz construction site in Beit Shemesh. Rav Sternbuch paskened that there are no Jewish graves there and that construction may proceed.   Despite that psak, a group, with a long and hallowed tradition of delusion and wildness, decided that there are Jewish graves there, and, as is their tradition regarding persons with whom they disagree, while showing all due respect to the Av Beis Din of the Eida Chareidis, they violently and vituperatively oppose construction.  It was pointed out that there can be only one explanation for this dispute:  The Gemara (BB 16a) brings shittos that Iyov was a Jew, or that he was a non-Jew, or that he never existed at all.   In the spirit of אלו ואלו, the explanation is very simple and clear: the Goloventzitz site is the true grave of Iyov.  It is the kever of a Jew, it is the kever of a goy, and there is nothing there at all.

4.  Here's something else from the Satmerer, something unexpected and that I find difficult to understand.

ובזה יתפרשו דברי המדרש שאלו תלמידיו את ר״י בן קיסמא אימת בן דוד בא, השיב להם זאת תורת העולה, פירוש כשם שהעולה קרבה כולה כליל לה׳ ואין חלק בה לבני אדם, כך אם יהיה צדיק אחד שתהיה כל מגמתו וצערו על גלות השכינה, ולא יחשוב על צער בני אדם כלל, מיד תבא הגאולה.

Tzav: Drasha for Sheva Brachos (#4) The Korban for Newlyweds.

This is Drush, and not intended for analysis with scalpels.

Rabbeinu Bachay in Parshas Tzav says (second column sixteen lines from the bottom) that newlyweds bring a Korban Todah.   He says that anyone that experiences a special joyous event should bring a Korban Todah, and in particular he says that a Chassan and Kallah should bring this korban.  Most importantly, Rabbeinu Bachaya is telling us that when the passuk in Yirmiahu (33:11-12) says that people will once again  bring the Korban Todah, it is referring to the beginning of the passuk that talks about the joy of the Chasan and Kallah, and the passuk means that Chassanim and Kallos used to- and someday soon will again bring- a Korban Todah.

כֹּה אָמַר ה, עוֹד יִשָּׁמַע בַּמָּקוֹם הַזֶּה אֲשֶׁר אַתֶּם אֹמְרִים חָרֵב הוּא מֵאֵין אָדָם וּמֵאֵין בְּהֵמָה בְּעָרֵי יְהוּדָה  וּבְחֻצוֹת יְרוּשָׁלִַם, הַנְשַׁמּוֹת מֵאֵין אָדָם וּמֵאֵין יוֹשֵׁב, וּמֵאֵין בְּהֵמָה.   קוֹל שָׂשׂוֹן וְקוֹל שִׂמְחָה, קוֹל חָתָן וְקוֹל כַּלָּה, קוֹל אֹמְרִים הוֹדוּ אֶת ה' צְבָאוֹת כִּי טוֹב ה' כִּי לְעוֹלָם חַסְדּוֹ מְבִאִים תּוֹדָה בֵּית ה:, 

I understand that the exuberant Chasan and Kallah would sing  הוֹדוּ אֶת ה צְבָאוֹת כִּי טוֹב ה כִּי לְעוֹלָם חַסְדּוֹ.  But the idea that Chasan and Kallah bring a Korban Todah is interesting, because we usually associate the korban with having survived some mortal danger.  The Gemara (Brachos 54b,  and see Rambam 10 Brachos 8 and OC 219:1) specifies four people who are obligated to bring this korban, and all are people who were saved from danger.  In fact, this idea is reflected in our Tefilla.  One who was saved from this type of danger makes the Bracha Birkas Hagomel.  For general celebration, you can bring a shlamim or an olah, and the appropriate bracha is She'hechiyanu.  So it's interesting that Rabbeinu Bachay says that a Korban Todah is brought to celebrate a joyous occasion.  More importantly, why does Rabbeinu Bachay single out being newly married as the archetypal circumstance of bringing the Korban Todah?

The Gemara (Sota 2a) says אמר ר' יוחנן וקשין לזווגן כקריעת ים סוף שנאמר (תהילים סח) אלהים מושיב יחידים ביתה מוציא אסירים בכושרות, marrying people off is as "hard" as splitting the sea, as it says in Tehillim, G-d settles the solitary in a house; He frees those who are bound in "Kosharos," shackles.  (Rashi in Sotah, expanding on the interpretation of the verse as referring to the redemption from Mitzrayim, says that Kosharos means a season that is temperate, neither hot nor cold, because the geula from Mitzrayim was in the Springtime.)  The Gemara sees in this passuk a connection between marriage- "G-d settles the solitary in a house"- and the redemption from Egypt, "He frees those who are bound in shackles."  Thus, the Gemara equates a successful marriage and the splitting of the sea.

Rashi explains that the miracle of marriage is taking a boy, a yachid, and a girl, a yechida, and creating from these yechidim a completely new home, a new kingdom, and this is a miracle comparable to the splitting of the sea.  The ability of individuals to willingly and successfully cede their independence to a new mutual identity is only possible with divine assistance.

Although the Gemara focuses on the aspect of divine intervention- krias yam suf, one can see in the Gemara another thought.  The passuk is also telling us that that getting married is similar to being freed from a prison Motzi assirim.  In what sense is that true?  

Until someone is married, he is imprisoned by limited emotional horizons.  He suffers from the astigmatism of egotism; he has no idea what it means to care for someone else more than he cares for himself, he lacks the basic understanding of what it means to be a fully realized human being, he is in danger of being emotionally stunted, a Wagnerian Nibelung.  So, despite the Orwellian undertone, getting married really is like being liberated from prison.  

As the Netziv says, the Korban Todah is brought על שנחלץ מצרה; literally, the word צרה means travail, but it is related to the word צר which means tight and constrained.  So the best translation would be that the korban is brought on the occasion of "release from confinement."  That is certainly an apt description of marriage.    נחלץ מצרה means that he was granted expansion, an expansion that unbound him from his isolated strait.

That sentence deserves to be emphasized.   על שנחלץ מצרה means that he was unbound from his strait of isolation.  This is the foundation of the Korban Todah, and it is a perfect description of what marriage can give us.

People often talk of marriage as being bound, restricted.  Chazal tell us that marriage removes our bonds, it frees us.

(Update 3 22 24/Adar II pei daled: I just saw this in the Mirrer weekly. It's nice that he thinks of me as a Chacham.

(ואגב שמעתי מחכ"א לבאר דמה שחידש רבנו בחיי דחתן וכלה צריכים להביא קרבן תודה, יתכן שהוא נכלל בין הד' שצריכים להודות, והוא בכלל יוצא מבית האסורים. והטעם כי איתא במדרש )מד"ר ויקרא פ"ח א'( לגבי זיווגו של אדם וז"ל "קשה היא לפני הקב"ה כקריעת ים סוף, שנאמר )תהלים סח( 'אלוק' מושיב יחידים ביתה, מוציא אסירים בכושרות' מהו בכושרות בכי ושירות, דבעא אמר שירה, דלא בעא בכה, ומה הקדוש ברוך הוא עושה מזווגן על כרחן שלא בטובתן" הרי מבואר ש"מוציא אסירים בכושרות" נדרש הוא על זיווגו של אדם, דהיינו שכל עוד האדם יחידי הוא בבחינת "אסיר" וכאשר מוצא את זיווגו הוא בבחינת "יוצא מבית האסורים", ולכן שפיר נכלל חתן וכלה בכלל הד' שצריכים להודות.  ) 

GS point out that Rashi in Toldos, by Machalas bas Yishmael, brings the Yerushalmi that "Chasan mochlin lo."   If so, he says, the chasan certainly ought to bring a korban Todah.  So for one thing, he was spared the onshim of his aveiros.  Secondly, a spiritual hatzala is comparable to a physical hatzala.  (Similar to Megilla 14, where the Gemara says a kal vachomer, if from avdus to cheirus you say Shira, KV from death to life, so Chazal were kovei'a Megillas Esther as part of Kisvei HaKodesh.)

UPDATE, JUNE 2014
I recently prepared to speak at a SB, and said this over to my wife, Malkie shetichyeh.  She pointed out that I should emphasize something that's evident in the Gemara, especially in the way I'm learning the Gemara.  People naturally think of marriage as being bound, restricted, tied up.  You lose the freedom you had as a single, you have to answer to someone that knows what you're doing, you become responsible for someone else's welfare, and so on.  There is definitely an aspect of lost freedom when you get married.  But Chazal are telling you exactly farkert.  The passuk the Gemara in Sotah brings is (Tehillim 68:7)

 אלהים מושיב יחידים ביתה מוציא אסירים בכושרות 

The Gemara is darshening that the end of the passuk refers to Yetzias Mitzrayim; kosharos are chains, or it means Springtime, when the season is pleasant.  The first half of the passuk refers to marriage, and the Gemara says that the passuk teaches us a hekesh, an equation, between the two halves of the passuk.  So the passuk is telling you, you think marriage is a shibud?  You're wrong.  The marriage that the Torah envisions is liberating, just as Yetzias Mitzrayim was a the great liberation of Klal Yisrael.  I just have to find a good way to explain how marriage is liberating.  I do explain it here, but I think it can be done better.

As I mentioned above, the classic use of the Korban Todah is for a person that has has one of the following four experiences:  These can be remembered with the mnemonic Chayim, חיים..  That is, Chavush/freed from prison; ; Yeshurim/recovered from illness; Yam/returned from an ocean voyage; and Midbar/returned from travel in the desert.  Homiletically, one might say that all the elements of obligation for the Korban Todah are present when one gets married.  He was a is a choleh, because if a person doesn’t get married, the Gemara says (Kiddushin 29b), he deteriorates physically (tipach.)  He is like a traveler in the desert, as Hashem said that He remembers the love of our first relationship, when we followed Him into the desert, zacharti lach...lechteich acharai bamidbar, the willingness to risk everything because you love and trust your spouse..  He is like a prisoner freed from jail, because he has freed himself from the emotional prison of yechidus.  And he is like one who has returned from a sea voyage, because after the long and lonely odyssey as he searched, he has finally come into his home port.

In our time, a person who survives a danger stands at the Bimah (or a woman does this at home with a minyan) and makes the Bracha Hagomel.  One could support the notion that a Chassan and Kallah should do the same.  Of course, there is no such minhag.  But certainly, when they say Modim in Shmoneh Esrei, they should express their gratitude to Hashem for bringing them together and helping to create a new household.  It doesn't hurt to also have your marriage in mind when you say "Sim Shalom."

Note:  Besides the Korban Todah, in the time of the Beis Hamikdash, a Chassan would come to the Beis Hamikdash especially on Shabbos, because on the east side of the structure there was a gate made of white glass through which only newlywed men would enter.  When people would see a man come in through that gate, they would all bless him, saying "He Who dwells in this house, may he bless you with sons and daughters!"  (From Pirkei D'Rebbi Eliezer 17.  Although there is no mention of this gate in the Mishna in the first perek of Middos, which enumerates and describes all the entrances to the Beis Hamikdash, it is mentioned in Maseches Sofrim 19:12.)  As it says in Pirkei D'Rebbi Eliezer, even though now we have no Beis Hamikdash, we should do the same when the Chassan comes to Shul on Shabbos.

הנכנס בשער חתנים היו יודעים בו שהוא חתן והיו אומרים לו השוכן בבית הזה יברכך בבנים ובבנות

~

Tzav, Vayikra 7:12. Korban Todah: Man was created to struggle.

This post has two sections.  The first deals with the Korban Todah, and the feelings one should have when bringing a thanksgiving offering.  The second part was brought up in the comments when I first posted this, and discusses the meaning of 'Todah' as used in Korban Todah and in Shmone Esrei.

Part I

(Based in part on the Ksav Sofer, Beis Halevi, Tzidkas Hatzadik)

The Korban Todah (Todah meaning gratitude or acknowledgment) is an offering that one brings when he lives through a life-threatening experience.  Chazal (Brachos 54) say, for example, that four events create an obligation to bring this korban: recovery from illness, release from prison, finishing a trip through the desert, and reaching land after a sea voyage.



Tehillim 50:23:

זֹבֵחַ תּוֹדָה יְכַבְּדָנְנִי  וְשָׂם דֶּרֶךְ אַרְאֶנּוּ בְּיֵשַׁע אֱלֹהִים.  

One who slaughters a Korban Todah honors Me, and [I will] prepare the way; I will show him the salvation of God."
The word 'yechabda'ne'ni' would normally be written 'yechabdeini'.  It seems to have a superfluous "nun". The Medrash (sort of like the Gemara Sanhedrin 43b) says that the double ‘nun’ tells us to double our appreciation, to offer “kavod achar kavod”  to Hashem.  What does that mean, Kavod achar kavod, honor after honor?  A person who is saved from a danger and brings a korban todah should recognize that even the tzaros were intended for his benefit; he should praise Hashem for both the tzaros and the yeshuos, the danger and the salvation.  This is why the end of the passuk says be’yesha Elokim”-- the salvation of Elokim.  But Elokim is midas hadin, the trait of strict judgment, not mercy!  The answer is that when the person looks at the gezeira of the midas hadin, and he is “sahm derech”--that is, that it makes a lasting impression on him and he is chozer beteshuva or it is memarek his aveiros, then he will see that the Elokim itself is part of his yeshua.

Sanhedrin 43b:

אריב"ל כל הזובח את יצרו ומתודה עליו מעלה עליו הכתוב כאילו כיבדו להקב"ה בשני עולמים העולם הזה והעולם הבא דכתיב זובח תודה יכבדנני 

Medrash Vayikra 9:2

דבר אחר זובח תודה יכבדנני, ר' הונא בשם ר' אחא יכבדני אין כתיב כאן אלא יכבדנני, כבוד אחר כבוד, דבר אחר זובח תודה יכבדנני, ר' ברכיה בשם ר' אבא בר כהנא כבדני אין כתיב כאן אלא יכבדנני, כבדני בעולם הזה, יכבדני בעולם הבא

וישב יעקב. בקש יעקב לישב בשלוה קפץ עליו רגזו של יוסף. לא דיין לצדיקים שמתוקן להם העוה״ב אלא שרוצים לישב בשלוה בעוהיז.

The Medrash in Vayeisheiv (brought in Rashi there) says, Tzadikim should know that life is not about tranquility and peace.  Life is about conflict and tests, and we are expected to bravely face them and overcome them.  Not only are we expected to win our battles, but when we do win, we bring a korban today and thank the Ribono shel Olam for testing us.  Ke'sheim she'mevorchim....

What was the essential difference between Shaul Hamelech and David Hamelech?  Why did Shaul's reign die with him, while David began an eternal dynasty? 

In I Shmuel 16:11-12 David Hamelech is described as

 אַדְמוֹנִי, עִם יְפֵה עֵינַיִם וְטוֹב רֹאִי

rubicund, though with beautiful eyes and handsome appearance.

The Malbim there explains that there was an innate conflict in David's personality.  He was driven by very powerful human urges, but he was so spiritually strong that he not only overcame them, but he incorporated those carnal and aggressive forces into his service of Hashem.  When Shmuel came to Yishai to find the king that would replace Shaul, he first saw Eliav.  He saw in Eliav the same characteristics he saw in Shaul--  who is described as being head and shoulders higher than any other person (I Shmuel 9:2):

מִשִּׁכְמוֹ וָמַעְלָה, גָּבֹהַּ מִכָּל הָעָם.

The same words are used to describe Eliav:

יַּרְא אֶת אֱלִיאָב; וַיֹּאמֶר אַךְ נֶגֶד ה' מְשִׁיחוֹ.    וַיֹּאמֶר ה' אֶל שְׁמוּאֵל אַל תַּבֵּט אֶל מַרְאֵהוּ וְאֶל גְּבֹהַּ קוֹמָתוֹ כִּי מְאַסְתִּיהוּ  כִּי לֹא אֲשֶׁר יִרְאֶה הָאָדָם כִּי הָאָדָם יִרְאֶה לַעֵינַיִם וַיהוָה יִרְאֶה לַלֵּבָב

David was not like Eliav or Shaul.  He was not a perfect, tranquil, natural tzadik.  His life was constant battle against a roaring lion of a Yetzer Hara.  He won every single battle, but the war raged on almost his whole life.  This distinguished David from his brother Eliav and from his predecessor, Shaul.  It was precisely this trait, this weakness/strength, that Hashem wanted in His warrior-king. (It's interesting to think about the difference in perspective between the Greek trope of the hero's 'fatal flaw' that ultimately results in the protagonist's downfall, and the Torah idea of the 'enlivening flaw,' the flaw one strives to overcome, and, by doing so, makes himself a true hero.)

As Reb Tzadok says in his Tzidkas Hatzadik #244, (a chapter very much worth reading in the entirety)

כל מלחמותיו הי׳ בניצוח היצר.   כפי מה שנצח ליצר, כך נצח לאומות שהכל אחד

All David's battles were to vanquish his yetzer hara, and concomitant with winning that battle he vanquished other nations in war, for all is one.

(Thank you to R' Moshe Eisemann in his "Music Made in Heaven" for the mareh makom.)

We find anecdotal examples of this happening all around us. Chazal pointed out the tragic irony of how holy geirim, who have voluntarily chosen to take on the obligations and burdens dangers of Judaism, so often face terrible and unending challenges-מפני מה גרים בזמן הזה מעונין ויסורין  באין עליהן.  We see this happen to Ba'alei Teshuva as well. You would think that they would be rewarded with some peace and quiet, that they earned a period of tranquility during which they could fortify and deepen new spiritual circumstances. But nebach, most often they are beset with hard times- physical, financial, and personal.

So the passuk in Iyov (5:7), כִּי אָדָם לְעָמָל יוּלָּד וּבְנֵי רֶשֶׁף יַגְבִּיהוּ עוּף, is not a curse; it is Hashem's will that we overcome challenges and win battles.  Our name itself proclaims this purpose: Yisrael-- ki sarisa- vatuchal.  Having faced the challenge, and having overcome it, we thank Hashem for both, "al hamilchamos ve'al hayeshu'os."  (Beis Halevi on Az Yashir Moshe.)

~

Reb N.G. wrote about a closely related idea, and its connection to Pesach, here.

 ~

I can't help but to put in a story about George Orwell on this topic.  Its relevance will become apparent.

Finally, eight or nine days after leaving the front, I had my wound examined. In the surgery where newly-arrived cases were examined, doctors with huge pairs of shears were hacking away the breast-plates of plaster in which men with smashed ribs, collar-bones, and so forth had been cased at the dressingstations behind the line; out of the neck-hole of the huge clumsy breast-plate you would see protruding an anxious, dirty face, scrubby with a week's beard. The doctor, a brisk, handsome man of about thirty, sat me down in a chair, grasped my tongue with a piece of rough gauze, pulled it out as far as it would go, thrust a dentist's mirror down my throat, and told me to say ‘Eh!’ After doing this till my tongue was bleeding and my eyes running with water, he told me that one vocal cord was paralysed. ‘When shall I get my voice back?’ I said. ‘Your voice? Oh, you'll never get your voice back,’ he said cheerfully. However, he was wrong, as it turned out. For about two months I could not speak much above a whisper, but after that my voice became normal rather suddenly, the other vocal cord having ‘compensated’. The pain in my arm was due to the bullet having pierced a bunch of nerves at the back of the neck. It was a shooting pain like neuralgia, and it went on hurting continuously for about a month, especially at night, so that I did not get much sleep. The fingers of my right hand were also semi-paralysed. Even now, five months afterwards, my forefinger is still numb — a queer effect for a neck wound to have.
The wound was a curiosity in a small way and various doctors examined it with much clicking of tongues and ‘Que suerte! Qye suerte!’ One of them told me with an air of authority that the bullet had missed the artery by ‘about a millimetre’. I don't know how he knew. No one I met at this time — doctors, nurses, practicantes, or fellow-patients — failed to assure me that a man who is hit through the neck and survives it is the luckiest creature alive. I could not help thinking that it would be even luckier not to be hit at all.

- George Orwell, from "Homage to Catalonia", where he describes his hospital stay after being shot in the neck.

~

Part II

What does the word "Todah" mean in, as used in Korban Todah and in Modim in Shemoneh Esrei?

UPDATE, DECEMBER 2011:
I found that the Oneg Yomtov, in his Hakdama, brings a very relevant Maharit as follows:
אמר בתפילתו כי אף שהוא עבד ה' בן אמתו, יליד ביתו ולאמקנת כספו, כי הוא אביך עשך ויכוננך, וברא אותנו יש מאין, וכל
כוחות הגוף והנפש הנמצאים בנו הלא הוא יתברך אשר נתנם לנו, וכל קיומם כל ימי היותנו על האדמה, אך ממנו יתברך, כאמור
"ואתה מחיה את כולם".  ובדין היה שלא נוכל לעשות גדולה או קטנה נגד רצון הבורא יתברך. כי איך נרים יד ורגל לפעול פעולה המתנגדת לרצונו אחרי שכל כוחות ותנועות האיברים שבנו וחיותם הוא מרצונו, והתנועה הזאת היא נגד רצונו. 
אולם זאת היא מנפלאות תמים דעים לתת לנו כח לעשות נגד רצונו בכדי שתהיה לנו לצדקה כי נשמור לעשות כל אשר ציונו. 
וזהו שאמר "פתחת למוסרי". שאני אסור בעבותות רצונך לבלתי סור מהם ימין ושמאל מחמת שרצונך הוא כל חיות
וכוחות נפשי. ואתה פתחת מוסרות האלו ונתת לי כח לעשות נגד רצונך.  ועל כן אמר "לך אזבח זבח תודה ובשם ה' אקרא", שעל ענין זה אזבח זבח תודה, כי קרבן תודה הוא לשון הודאה, ואין ענין הודאה נופל אלא על מה שאדם יכול לכפור ומודה בו, כי רק זה נקרא הודאה, אבל מה שאינו יכול לכפור לא מיקרי הודאה כמבואר בחו"מ (סי' פ"ז) לענין מודה במקצת. ולזה אמר אחרי שפתחת למוסרי לעשות נגד רצונך לכן לא כן אנכי רק אזבח לך זבח תודה ובשם ה' אקרא, להודות כי הכל ממך עילת כל העילות וסיבת כל הסיבות)

1.  Great Unknown pointed out that in the Gemara in Sanhedrin, which is similar to the Tanchuma, the Gemara uses the double nun to mean that one who shechts his yetzer hara honors Hashem in both this world and the next; there, Rashi explains "todah" to mean "confession," like every viduy on an aveirah.
Rashi in Sanhedrin-

זובח את יצרו. לאחר שהסיתו לחטוא הוא זובחו והורגו ושב בתשובה ומתוודה עליו שני נוני"ן דריש לשני כבודים:

However, I said that the Tanchuma (like the Medrash Rabba) is very different than the Gemara in Sanhedrin.  (As you will see, it turns out that the difference between the Gemara and the Tanchuma is a big and widespread machlokes.)

2.  Eli told us that there are many sources that indicate that one who brings a korban Todah must say "vidui," though exactly what the viduy contains is unclear. (I believe that the organizing principle for Eli's mekoros is the machlokes that will become clear in a moment.)

Taanis 23, re: Chony Hame'agel. הביאו לי פר הודאה and Rashi says להתודות עליו (however, it seems from Rashi there that it was Shlamim, not Toda; see Gevuras Ari and Maharsha there). See also Mitzpe-Eytan there.

Rashi Iyov 33:27 -- יעשה שורות של אנשים כשניצול מחליו ויתודה ליוצרו

Rashi Divrey-Hayamim 2:33:16 "ויזבח עליו זבחי שלמים ותודה" - שהביא קרבן תודה והתוודה להקב"ה שהשיבו לירושלים ולמלכותו

Rashi Hulin 12 says that אשר כופר בהם refers to Shlamim. Same in Hulin 130 and Erchin 21. All say that even Shlamim has an aspect of Kapara, thus probably requiring Viduy (compare with Rambam Maase-Hakorbanot 3:15)

So, it seems Toda requires Viduy also. This could go either way: Viduy might just mean "to acknowledge", like in Viduy Maaser, which is a strange kind of Viduy, saying לא אשמתי, לא בגדתי. So the Viduy in Toda is just acknowledging the טובה coming from Hashem. Or we could say that there is an aspect of Kapara in Shlamim, and maybe in Toda too, unlike the the Tanchuma. At least be-derech drush one could argue that the two are not that far away: being thankful requires acknowledgement of not being worthy of what you got. That's why we say "הגומל לחייבים", not just out of Anava, but this is actually part of giving thanks.

Nafka-Mina to this drush is that the Viduy of תודה, even if we accpet it's a Viduy על חטא, does not require תשובה.

3.  I said that...
It is certainly clear in the context of the Modim in Shmoneh Esrei that the word means acknowledgment, just as 'appreciate' means to recognize and to be grateful. מודִים אֲנַחְנוּ לָךְ. שָׁאַתָּה הוּא ה, and then נודֶה לְּךָ וּנְסַפֵּר תְּהִלָּתֶךָ עַל חַיֵּינוּ הַמְּסוּרִים בְּיָדֶךָ. and וְעַל נִסֶּיךָ שֶׁבְּכָל יום עִמָּנוּ. And of course, the expression is to be "מכיר טוב," to recognize the good that was done for you.

I wonder, though, if someone recognizes that he got a valuable gift from someone, but doesn't feel or exhibit gratitude. He is technically מכיר טוב, but in the real sense, he is a כפוי טוב.

4. Then, great unknown said...

I rather thought that if i gave you enough time, you would back into the gemora in megilla: i.e., the limud that modim comes after avoda from zoveach todah. in fact, there rashi says: אחר זביחה תן הודאה

an extensive study of the connection between vidui and hoda'ah can be found in r mattis wienberg's patterns in time on chanukah, based primarily, iirc, on the sefas emes. i however do not have either available to me to verify that.


5.  Then I said...
I wish I thought of the Gemara in Megilla, on 18a. The Gemara is talking about the order of the brachos in Sh'moneh Esrei, and it goes like this:

וכיון שבאת עבודה באתה תודה שנאמר (תהילים נ) זובח תודה יכבדנני ומה ראו לומר ברכת כהנים אחר הודאה דכתיב (ויקרא ט) וישא אהרן את ידיו אל העם ויברכם וירד מעשות החטאת והעולה והשלמים אימא קודם עבודה לא ס"ד דכתיב וירד מעשות החטאת וגו' מי כתיב לעשות מעשות כתיב ולימרה אחר העבודה לא ס"ד דכתיב זובח תודה מאי חזית דסמכת אהאי סמוך אהאי מסתברא עבודה והודאה חדא מילתא היא

Rashi there:

זובח תודה. אחר זביחה תן הודאה: חדא מילתא היא. אף הודאה עבודה של מקום הוא

in other words, that Modim/Hoda'ah, is a twin of the avodas hakorbanos, they are basically the same thing, and so it should be right next to it, and only then do we say Birkas Kohanim.

6. I said....
Eli, I just read your comment more carefully. I agree. A sense of entitlement is incompatible with hakaras hatov. A craftsman is not makir tov for being paid for his work, and a malveh is not makir tov for being repaid. Actually, a malveh probably is.

As far as the issue of Choni Hame'agel's korban that Eli brought from the Gemara in Taanis 23a, Eli also brought the Gvuras Ari on that Gemara. Here's someone (Zivchei Efraim, a sefer on Zevachim,) who brings the whole Gevuras Ari and the Rambam:

He holds the Todah was a simple Todah, that Choni was saying "Ribono shel Olam, thank you for the fine rain You sent. We've had enough."

Reb Yosef Engel says the same thing in Rosh Hashanna 30a.

7.  Then, I remembered that R' Chaim Brown had written about a very similar matter some months ago at Divrei Chaim.  The bottom line of the discussion there is that there's a machlokes Bavli and Yerushalmi whether Mizmor LeSoda is about the Korban Todah or just about the concept of Vidui by other korbanos, or viduy in general.  He brought Yerushalim Shevuos 6b in the Vilna print that says it refers to the vidui of Korban Chatas, and he connected this Yerushalmi to a Magen Avraham in OC 51:10.  I brought the Bavli in Shevu'os 16b that it was sung when a person brought a personal Korban Todah.

8.  Then R' David Guttman of the Yediah blog brought the Yalkut Shimoni in Tehillim 100 that says that the word Todah means admission, and the Otzar Hatefillos on Modim that says that because Modim means 'admit,' that's why the next word is vocalized "sha'ata" (meaning 'that') instead of 'she'ata' (meaning 'because'.)  I think that even though the Abudraham clearly agrees with that, it's wrong anyway.

The Abudraham: says that you have to say modim yourself, you can't be yotzei with a shliach, because it's kabalas ol malchus shamayim, and KOMS can't be done with shlichus.  If it was thanks, it would have no connection with KOMS.  He must hold it's not Thanks, but rather acknowledgment.

But I think he's wrong.  It means Thanks.  My proof is from Sotah 40a, where it says Modim....ahl.  Ahl means 'for.'  Modim for....doesn't make sense if it means acknowledgment, but it makes sense if it means thank you for....

9.  I later saw that the pirush on the side of the Yerushalmi there, the Tzion vi'yerushalayim, in Shavu'os brings that this is indeed a machlokes what Mizmor LeSodah refers to, and he brings from a sefer Magen Giborim that it's a pervasive machlokes (Radak and Rashi in Tehillim, the Tur and the Beis Yosef in OC 281, and so on) whether it refers to the Korban Todah or the concept of Viduy, and the mefareish says Ha, he didn't remember this Yerushalmi.  But I say that he should have realized that the Tanchuma also says like the Bavli in Shavu'os, and he should have brought the Gemara in Sanhedrin that is like the Yerushalmi.

10.  I sent a letter to Eli, saying the following:

Although the introduction of prakim in Tehillim doesn't always have a lot to do with the content, here it says "de'u ki Hashem...."  I think it's a little unusual, the word "de'u."  But if Todah means acknowledgment, then "de'u" makes perfect sense.  Realize.  Don't live just out of habit.  Don't walk around without an awareness of what you owe and to whom you owe it.  Then the perek ends by saying "hodu lo," now that you remember who made you and what you owe him, you will naturally be grateful for what he's done for you.

11.  So: If you hold like the Yerushalmi in Shavuos and the Bavli in Sanhedrin, you can go ahead and say Mizmor Le'Sodah on Pesach.  According to them, it has nothing to do with the Korban Todah, it's just about the concept of Viduy.  It might be hard to agree with, but you can't argue with the Gemara.


And so that's the mussar haskeil of this piece.  Astonish your friends and neighbors, say Mizmor LeSodah aloud on Pesach, and tell people it's because you hold like the Yerushalmi in Shavuos and the Bavli in Sanhedrin, and that the Tanchuma has no halachic status.  It's wrong le'halacha, but it's no worse than saying "she'hotzi lechem min ha'aretz" (Brachos 38a).

12.  An interesting addition: when we make a birkas hagomel, we say "hagomel lechayavim tovos shegmalani kol tov."  After knowing the above, the odd insertion of lechayavim makes wonderful sense. Vidui and Hoda'ah.

13.  And here's the prize.  Thanks to Eli who noticed it right before the Tanchuma I brought down:
http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14123&st=&pgnum=291
Second to last line.

שאין תשובה לפני הקב״ת יותר מן הודייה

UPDATES NOVEMBER 2014.
14.  I have been told that Rav Hutner on Chanuka says that in Modim, the word Hoda'ah changes meaning.  מודים אנחנו לך, שאתה הוא  means admission, or declaration.  But נודה לך
 ונספר תהלתך means gratitude.  He says this is true throughout the words of tefilla- מודים שאתה means admission, and  נודה לך means thanks.  This would seem to apply to the Modeh Ani we say in the morning- that it means admission, not thanks.

15.  There's a great Medrash Rabba in Vayeitzei (71:5) that goes like this:

לאה תפסה פלך הודיה, ועמדו הימנה בעלי הודיה. 

יהודה (בראשית לח) ויכר יהודה ויאמר צדקה ממני. 

דוד אמר (תהלים קלח) הודו לה' כי טוב. 

דניאל אמר (דניאל ב) לך אלהא אבהתי מהודא ומשבח אנה. 

You see the Medrash is using the word in two entirely different ways- acknowledgment and gratitude!

I'm not sure how this fits in, but I have to have it here:

 ויקרא רבה · כז · יב

יב "וכי תזבחו זבח תודה לה'" ר' פנחס ור' לוי ור' יוחנן בשם ר' מנחם דגליא לעתיד לבא כל הקרבנות בטלין וקרבן תודה אינה בטלה לעולם כל ההודיות בטלין והודיות תודה אינה בטלה לעולם הה"ד (ירמיה לג, יא): "קול ששון וקול שמחה קול חתן וקול כלה קול אומרים הודו את ה' צבאות כי טוב" אלו ההודיות "מביאים תודה בית ה'" זה קרבן תודה וכן אמר דוד (תהלים נו, יג) "עלי אלהים נדריך אשלם תודות לך" תודה אינו אומר אלא תודות ההודיה וקרבן תודה.

and a Medrash Tadshei

מדרש תדשא:

שלשה מינין יש בזבחים, שלמי תודה, נדבה, נדר, ונקרבין על ג' דברים, על לשעבר, ועל דבר העומד ועל שעתיד לבא. זבח תודה נקרב על הודיית עסק טוב שכבר בא עליו, לכן נקרא שמו תודה, שהוא מהלל ומודה ומברך את המקום על הטובות שקיבל הימנו, וקרבן תודה חביב לפני המקום, שנאמר (תהלים נ') זובח תודה יכבדנני, לפיכך אתה מוצא אותה מלאה מכל דבר בסעודה מלאה, כל מאכל יש בקרבן התודה, חלות, חלת לחם חמץ, לחם מצה, יש בה שמן ויש בה רקיקין ועוד. (פרק יט)

which is similar to the M Rabba in Vayikra 9:7,

ר' פנחס ור' לוי ור' יוחנן בשם ר' מנחם דגליא, לעתיד לבא כל הקרבנות בטלין וקרבן תודה אינו בטל, כל התפילות בטלות, ההודאה אינה בטלה, הדא דכתיב (ירמיה ל"ג) קול ששון וקול שמחה קול חתן וקול כלה קול אומרים הודו את ה' צבאות וגו' זו הודאה, מביאים תודה בית ה' זה קרבן תודה