Getting Your Goat Or Let it Stew and More Zevachim 90-92

90 — Getting Your Goat Or Let it Stew

Our Gemara on Amud Beis discusses what sacrifice takes precedence — the more holy (mekudash) sacrifice or the one that is brought more often (tadir)? For example, what gets sprinkled first: the blood from the daily Tamid sacrifice or the blood from a chattas?

Mei Shiloach (I, Mishpatim 5) relates this to the idea of what middah, what character trait, is more appropriate: patience or zealotry. Tadir — consistent and continuous action — represents patience, while mekudash represents the occasional need to act immediately and not be judicious or circumspect. Each middah has value, and the default is patience and reflection except in rare instances. In those rare instances, which are judgment calls, overthinking and caution will cause more harm than good.

Mei Shiloach derives this allegorically from the verse (Shemos 23:19): “The choice first fruits of your soil you shall bring to the house of your God. Also you shall not boil a kid in its mother’s milk.” The juxtaposition of these seemingly unrelated verses can be understood in light of this discussion.

A goat represents impetuousness, as it jumps about and often in the Gemara is a symbol of an animal that breaks boundaries (Succah 14b). Holding back from eating the first fruits until a portion is dedicated to God represents patience. Therefore, the entire verse is a discussion of boundaries. Generally speaking, be prudent and follow a process; recognize and thank God before jumping to your gratifications. But if there is a need for speed and action, don’t let the goat stew at a slow boil. I will add: “Don’t cook the goat in its mother’s milk” is symbolic of mother’s love and nurture which, at times that require courage and decisiveness, become a regression and indulgence. Be ready to take a leap of faith.

91 — A Time to Declare: When Moed Beats Shabbos

Our Gemara on Amud Aleph continues its discussion of what takes precedence — the more holy (mekudash) sacrifice or the one that is brought more often (tadir)?

The Gemara attempts to bring a proof from the beraisa which rules that the Musaf sacrifices of Shabbos precede the Musaf sacrifices of Rosh Chodesh. If we are to assume the Musfei Rosh Chodesh are more sanctified than the Musfei Shabbos, but the Musfei Shabbos are tadir (frequent and continuous), then this proves that tadir takes precedence over holiness.

The Gemara refutes this proof, which we will not discuss right now. What is interesting, though, is the assumption that the Rosh Chodesh offering is holier than Shabbos. Most people would assume that Shabbos is the holiest day — perhaps second to Yom Kippur, which even overrides Shabbos. How can Rosh Chodesh, which hardly has any observances or prohibitions, be holier than Shabbos?

Rashi cryptically explains: Rosh Chodesh is called a moed, an “appointed time.” Even so — how does that boost it above Shabbos?

Peri Tzaddik (Rosh Chodesh Av 2.1) offers an explanation that also provides an amazing insight on the value of steady consistency versus the value of holiness. Constancy and consistency — tadir — represent the heavenly emanations. God does not change His mind nor does He get tired. Since He is perfectly wise, what He sees fit to do now is something He always did and always will do. Kedusha, holiness, while it is a recognition of ways in which the world becomes filled with Godly manifestations, is based on human declaration and human perception.

Shabbos represents the creation of the world, which is God’s emanation. However, Rosh Chodesh is man’s domain — the declaration of the new month pronounced by the Sanhedrin, which establishes all of the holidays. Rosh Chodesh is holy because it represents human initiation  and sanctification. This is what Rashi meant by moed — appointed time.

Peri Tzaddik brilliantly finds a hint for this in a well-known adage from the Gemara, Bava Metzia (38a): “A person prefers a Kav (a measure) of his own produce over nine Kav of his friend’s produce.”

This has applications where a watchperson has an opportunity to save someone’s produce that is beginning to spoil by preemptively selling it. There is an argument that he should leave it alone because the owner would still prefer his produce, even if inferior, over somebody else’s. Psychologically speaking, we understand the pride of ownership and the meaning of eating from produce that one toiled to grow.

Peri Tzaddik wonders about the language of nine to one. The aphorism simply means that a person prefers his own produce over a much larger amount of someone else’s. It is true that aphorisms may contain exaggeration, but usually exaggeration uses round numbers like 10, 50, 100, etc. Why use the number nine?

Rather, this is hinting at the spiritual emanations. Mystically speaking, the 10th is the combination of all the preceding emanations that become manifest in the physical world to produce the final desired outcome. This desired outcome comes from human beings reaching upward toward the spiritual — which is another way of saying that holiness is made by human declaration.

The aphorism is both literal and metaphoric. It is saying that the final 10th emanation is the last ingredient — the human recognition that activates everything prior. And why is it so sweet and significant? Because it comes from us, which is a spiritual enactment of the same psychological principle that makes the work of one’s own hands more dear than a much larger work done by someone else.

92 — Stains of the Soul: Laundering With Teshuva Energy

Our Mishna and Gemara on Amud Aleph discuss the principle of blood from a chattas offering that was designated for sprinkling on the altar but ended up on an article of clothing. The garment must be laundered within the Temple courtyard to remove the blood.

What is the significance of the power of this blood? Toras HaOlah (III:35) says that the blood that is sprinkled represents the penitence for the sin. This is considered exceedingly powerful and holy. This is based on the principle that the penitent is even holier than the pure Tzaddik, as his efforts at repair drive him to higher states. (We discussed this in Psychology of the Daf 82 — that the thirst for an item intensifies desire and experience. The Baal Teshuva’s desire to return intensifies the holiness and longing. Berachos 34b and Tanya 16, Perek 7.)

Toras HaOlah adds a fascinating point. The Asham Taluy sacrifice, which is also brought for a sin, does not have this rule. Why not? He explains that since the Asham Taluy is brought when the person is in doubt whether he committed a sin or not, the repentance is not with the same intensity and drive. Therefore, the blood does not carry the same sacred energy.

Mei Hashiloach (II Likkutei Shas, Sanhedrin 99a) makes a similar observation about the Baal Teshuva from a different law. We learned on daf 89a that though the blood of the chattas takes precedence over the blood of the Olah, the limbs of the Olah take precedence over the limbs of the chattas. Why? The Gemara says because the meat of the Olah is fully consumed on the altar, unlike the chattas, which has parts eaten by the cohanim.

Mei Hashiloach adds this dimension: True, the blood of the chattas takes precedence over the Olah because the drive of the Baal Teshuva is more intense and supersedes that of the ordinary righteous person. But the deeds and actions of the righteous — represented by the limbs (which perform) — are superior to the Baal Teshuva. The righteous, who have not sinned, have performed more actions of mitzvos in both quality and quantity that are superior to those of the Baal Teshuva. This is why the limbs of the Olah take precedence.

From these analyses we gain a nuanced insight into what makes the Baal Teshuva great — but, to be fair, we also see what the continuously righteous have that is superior as well. The longing and the intensity are the gift of awareness and dedication that only a person who hit bottom can achieve. Nevertheless, the wholeness and consistency that a fully righteous person brings into his actions and mitzvos remains superior.