Tzav - Leviticus 6:1-7:36

This portion is named after the 6th word, "Tzav" (צו).

Now, the Rabbis had a lot of problem with this verb, because it is in the 1st-person-singular imperative form. In other words, Moses is being told by YHVH to "COMMAND Aaron and his sons..." on the the steps that YHVH requires in order so that the olah offering, as described last week and takes up all of the first chapter.

In that version, the details of the olah were not called a "law" or "instructions" as they are this week, and this week, there are some additional details, especially concerning changing the clothes and how to dispose of the remains.

So what is the problem with the leader of Israel commanding the priesthood to perform these actions?

According to Rashi, the priesthood might be reluctant because they would get no benefit from the burnt offering. They don't get to keep a portion of the meat like some of the other ones, for example.

It's an odd statement to make, because nowhere else is such a comment made. For example, in being told to leave a corner of the farm available for the poor to take food from, or any other commandment where someone is not going to gain, tzav is not used to indicate, "you need to do this even if you don't like it."

Also, "tzav" appears a total of 14 times in the entire Tanach.

Leviticus: 6:2, 24:2
Numbers: 5:2, 28:2, 34:2, 35:2

(Notice that all of these are in the second verse? But the pattern now changes:)

Deut. 2:4
2Kings 20:1
Isaiah 28:10 (twice), 28:13 (twice)
Hosea 5:11

In the case of the Torah, all uses of tzav are early into the chapter, as if to being with a command.

So, if we ignore the attempt by commentators to reduce the intensity of tzav when it comes to the relationship between Moses and Aaron, what can we get from the use of such a word?

Last week, the first word, vayikra, was used, with a small aleph which is often interpreted to signify humility, and a close relationship between YHVH and Moses. Even so, YHVH doesn't speak with Moses, but talks to Moses. Despite their close relationship, never forget that YHVH is still #1, and Moses, even though he is, essentially, the chief leader/prophet, is yet he is still an underling.

I find it quite likely that we have YHVH establishing an order of importance here as well. Yes, the priesthood is all important (at least to the Levitical authors), but they are still the underlings of the king, and even if the high priest is the brother of the chief leader/prophet, the high priest must remember his place and bow to the wishes of the chief leader.

There are a few times when YHVH speaks to both Moses and Aaron, but they are not equals.

So when YHVH is is speaking to Moses, as the One in authority, and telling Moses to command the priesthood, the order of importance has been established.

But the idea that the priesthood would refuse an commandment from God because there was no profit in it - that's just...odd!