Earlier on in the Torah - don't ask me to quote it right now - there was a fascinating verse about the proper intent being maintained while shechting a peace-offering. And that if anyone had even the intent of eating it after the third day, the entire korban was to be rejected. Fascinating that, still to this new parasha of Kedoshim, the idea of intent makes its first (and only) appearance in the Torah in this context.
The idea of the third day arises again in VaYikra 19:7 - this time with a slightly different twist. Here, instead of having an intent to eat from this offering after the designated time (which renders the korban spiritually rejected), we have an example where the offering is actually eaten. And if that happens, we learn that not only should the korban be rejected but the person who eats from it is to be "cut off from his people."
The commentary in my edition talks about how the intent behind performing a mitzvah must also be commensurate with the mitzvah. While a nice idea, that commentary does not make sense in this context since it was action (eating it) not intent (thinking about eating it) that occurred in this verse.
Instead, yet another layer of lesson emerges here. Even if the mitzvah was performed with the proper intent and mechanically correctly, the entire purpose of the mitzvah can and must be rejected if, later on down the line, the entire mitzvah somehow gets sullied. So if a peace-offering is eaten after the third day, the entire offering is now impure, and this impurity has a retroactive effect.
This has incredibly powerful implications in a mind-boggling number of contexts. How many times does something start off so pure, and well-intentioned, but not only well-intentioned but actually executed properly as well? A friendship, a business, a band, a lifelong relationship, a job - anything. It is easy to start fresh with the right intentions. But the Torah says that is not enough - no, the entire venture, relationship, or idea must stay pure - otherwise it will spoil not only that venture when the impurity occurs but in fact all the way back to the very beginning of it. It's a terrifying thought, because how often we do excuse something when it turned sour but still commemorate its beginnings? Taken to its logical extreme, VaYikra 19:7 comes to tell us we shouldn't.
A powerful lesson indeed - it is not enough to start holy and then hope for the best - the entire thing must stay holy throughout its entire lifetime. And if not, was it even worth it in the first place?
Comments
Post a Comment