Some of the laws relating to Kohanim are quite familiar to us. They are not allowed to marry divorcees or converts, nor are they allowed to come into close contact with the dead. This is why they occupy a separate room at a funeral and keep their distance from graves at a cemetery. The only exceptions to this rule are at a funeral for a next-of-kin: father, mother, brother, unmarried sister, wife, son, daughter. Many of the other laws are only applicable in Temple times.

The section on festivals then follows. It begins with a restatement of Shabbat, which seems a little strange. We note however, two main differences between Shabbat and the festivals: the first is that Shabbat follows a clear cycle, independent of human activity: six days of work, followed by Shabbat, always. Not so the festivals. The Torah stresses asher tikre'u bemo'adam - which you shall declare in their appointed times. From here we learn that it was up to the Beth Din to declare leap years and leap months, thus indirectly affecting the time - and day - on which the festivals would fall.

The second difference between Shabbat and the festivals is that on Shabbat, the prohibition against work is classed as melachah, whereas for the festivals, it is melechet avodah, usually termed as servile work. This is not the space for a detailed shiur on the subject, but briefly, cooking and carrying are prohibited on Shabbat (and Yom Kippur), whereas they are permitted on other festivals.

What makes this portion on the festivals different to others?

• It is only one of two portions in the Torah to include Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur and Shemini Atzeret, along with Pesach, Shavuot and Succot.
  
• It is the only one to mention the counting of the Omer in any detail.
  
• It mentions the festival at the end of the Omer period (Shavuot), but does not refer to it by name.
  
• It is the only place in which the mitzvoth of Succot are mentioned.
  

The third section of the sedra includes the laws of lighting the Menorah, and the making of the show-bread. It also includes the story of a man who blasphemed G-d, and was stoned to death for his sin. He was born of a mixed marriage, an Israelite lady to an Egyptian man. Interestingly, the name of the blasphemer is not mentioned , but the name of his mother is. Our commentators say that she was too busy involving herself in other people's business and in idle chatter, to devote herself sufficiently to her child's upbringing.

Points to Ponder

1. Who believes in the The Oral Torah?
There are (at least) three cases in the sedra, which are easy to misunderstand without the Oral Torah. Moses was taught the Oral Torah at the same time as the Written Torah. In fact the Written Torah is written cryptically, and is often impossible to comprehend without the Oral Torah. Some 1300 years after the giving of the Torah, our sages worried that the Oral Torah would become forgotten, and so it was committed to writing in the form of the Mishna and the halachic midrashim.

The first case which comes to mind is regarding the counting of the Omer, which the Torah describes as commencing on the 'day after Shabbat'. A literal translation would mean that the Omer counting should commence on a Sunday - but which Sunday? The Saducees, one of the Jewish groups who lived in the Second Temple era, did not believe in the Oral Torah. They understood this phrase to mean that the Counting of the Omer should begin on the Sunday following the first day of Pesach, since the previous paragraph dealt with the festival of Pesach. Thus according to them, Shavuot would always fall on a Sunday.

The Pharisees, who were the bearers of the authentic Jewish tradition, knew that the word Shabbat referred to in this verse, was in fact the Yomtov of the first day of Pesach. Thus, the Omer counting always begins on the second day of Pesach. The Talmud brings a number of proofs that this is indeed the case. Ultimately, however, they knew that this was how it had always been, dating back to the time the Oral Torah was received.

The second case is the four species, which we take on Succot. The Torah does not explain exactly what they are, nor how many we take of each kind. The Oral Law explains the details.

THE LAST CASE NEEDS A CAPITAL INTRODUCTION!
The very end of the Parsha contains one of three references in the Torah to the principle of an 'eye for an eye'. How many of us cringe when we read this, especially when it appears in a national newspaper! Yet, anyone who has done some serious research on the subject would realise that the Oral Torah teaches us that financial compensation is intended. No Jewish court ever sanctioned the punishment of an 'eye for an eye' in the literal sense.

What I find amazing is that even those who claim not to believe in the Oral Torah and the Rabbis of the Talmud, would not dispute any one of the above laws!

2. The Sanctification and Desecration of G-d's Name.
In Chapter 22 verse 32, we read: Do not desecrate my Holy Name, but sanctify Me in the midst of the Children of Israel. On this subject, Maimonides writes:

A person with a reputation for piety does an action which appears in the eyes of the masses to be a sin. Even if the act is intrinsically permitted, if such a person does this act - it could be a Desecration of G-d's Name (Chilul HaShem).

The Chafetz Chaim once sent his son on a mission. He warned his son to be careful as to how he acts, to avoid the possibility of a Chilul HaShem by a Torah scholar. The son responded, but I am not a Talmid Chacham! To which his father respnded: "For this purpose, you are enough of a Talmid Chacham".

And who is a Talmid Chacham? I would like to suggest that we all are - in the eyes of those who know less than we do. And in the eyes of the gentiles, possibly every Jew is a Talmid Chacham. For if a Jew commits an offence which is brought to public knowledge, the negative impact is felt by Jews everywhere. This is a Chilul Hashem. But when a Jew commits a meritorious deed, bringing credit on ourselves and G-d - this is a Kiddush Hashem, which is ultimately our purpose here on Earth.

3. Spending money on a mitzvah.
One of the laws in Emor is that a sacrifice should not contain a blemish. Although not currently applicable, the principle is of course highly relevant. We should not regard mitzvot cheaply. One example which springs to mind is tefillin. Parents may happily spend many thousands on a lavish barmitzvah function which is over in the course of an evening, but are reluctant to part with a couple of hundred pounds on a good pair of tefillin, which will last a lifetime. There are of course many other examples.

Shabbat Shalom