Parshat Tetzaveh is to Parshat Terumah as the fashion designer is to the architect. In Parshat Terumah we were taught the architectural design of the tabernacle, depicting the dimensions of the tabernacle and all that was contained within. Parshat Tetzaveh, however, is primarily dedicated to describing the clothing worn by the priests who served in the tabernacle.
Nevertheless, upon further analysis we find an exception to this rule. The altar, located inside the main sanctuary of the tabernacle (it was a 'vegetarian' altar, used only for burning spices and incense), is not recorded in Parshat Terumah. The spice-altar is not mentioned among the other vessels of the tabernacle and is only cited at the very end of Parshat Tetzaveh. Why?
The Sforno, one of the most classical commentaries on the Bible, suggests that the purpose of the tabernacle was to attract the glory of G-d to rest among the Jewish people. The spice-altar did not contribute to this goal. Contrary to the other vessels in the tabernacle, such as the ark, the table, and the menorah, the spice-altar was not essential in drawing the divine presence to the tabernacle. The purpose of the spice- altar was to “welcome the presence of G-d after it had arrived.” The cryptic words of the Sforno need further clarification.
The Talmud, in Tractate Yoma 44a, explains that the spices that were burned on the altar were an atonement for the 'loshon hora' (gossip) spoken among the Jewish people. The Talmud explains that the spices were burned in the private confinement of the tabernacle, in order to atone for the secret gossip spoken in private about one another. The Netziv, in his commentary on the Torah, expounds upon this Talmudic passage and suggests that the spice-altar represents kindness and compassion, which is the antithesis of 'loshon hora.' It is for this reason that the spice-altar is used to achieve atonement for the sin of 'loshon hora'.
Kindness and sympathy, by definition, cannot be motivated by personal gain. Those who are involved with the burial of the dead are considered to be performing a 'chesed shel emet,' the ultimate kindness. Why is this the ultimate form of kindness? People who are involved in burial demonstrate kindness even to the deceased, who are unable to compensate for the benevolence shown to them. True kindness refers to benevolence without any ulterior motives. Similarly, the burning of the spices upon the altar, which was symbolic of kindness, cannot be motivated by a personal goal. The spices could not be used as a method of drawing the presence of G-d to the tabernacle. The spices had to be brought as a benevolent gift, from the heart, to “welcome the presence of God after it had arrived.” The Sforno suggests that for this reason the spice-altar could not be listed among the other vessels, because it differs from the other vessels in its very essence. All the other vessels and priestly clothing were used as a means of drawing God to the tabernacle through the sacrifices. The spice-altar, on the other hand, was an altruistic gift to greet the glory of God after it had arrived.
Upon further inspection into the Torah's discussion of the spice-altar, we find something rather peculiar. The burning of the spices upon the altar seems to be closely associated with the lighting of the menorah. The Torah writes, “And Aharon should burn the spices every morning at the time when the candles of the menorah are prepared” (30:7). What is the connection between the menorah and the burning of the spices on the altar?
Seemingly, the concept of benevolence and humanitarianism are not Biblical concepts. They are concepts recognized in every civilized society as the epitome of good. In other words, they are human characteristics, not Jewish characteristics. However, the Chazon Ish (prolific writer and posek par excellence of the 20th century) explains that benevolence and compassion cannot exist independently from the Torah. They are completely intertwined with the fabric of the Torah. Humanitarianism will teach to sympathize and actively support the ‘victim’ while maintaining opposition toward the aggressor. Practically, however, it is not always clear who is to be classified as the ‘victim’ deserving of our support and assistance. The first step in helping and aiding one party over another is to identify which of the two warrant our support. The ‘victim’ is not the underdog, he is the one who is legally just. The man with the weapon in pursuit of an unarmed individual may not be the aggressor; he may in fact be the ‘victim’ trying to maintain law and order. Often aid and support are misdirected. We must turn to the Torah, our legal system and moral compass, to guide us in determining who is the one deserving of our support and acts of kindness. Only through the acute eyes of the Torah can we determine which of the two is the ‘victim’ and which of the two is the aggressor. At that point, humanitarian objectives may take control to sympathize with the oppressed victim and act accordingly.
We can now understand why the spice-altar, which represents kindness and compassion, is so intimately connected with the menorah. The light of the menorah is representative of the Torah (seeTractate Baba Basra 25b). The compassion symbolized by the spice-altar can only be realized through the illumination of the Torah’s light. In the absence of the Torah, represented by the menorah, there is no place for compassion and benevolence, because we may be sympathizing with the oppressor rather than with the victim.
