With the reading of the two Parshos this week we conclude the Book of
Vayikro. If it seems as if we only just began this middle Sefer of
Chumash, the perception is correct. In just seven weeks of readings we completed the entire Sefer. Those seven weeks spanned eight weeks because there was an intervening week of Pesach.
An entire Sefer cannot be completed any more quickly that was Vayikro this year due to the maximum number of Parshos that were joined together.
Because of this fact, as we come to its conclusion, the beginning of the
Sefer is not so removed from us. Vayikro is known as Toras Kohanim and as we began the Book the reason for that was obvious. The vast majority of subjects dealt with in the opening Parshos focused on either the sacrifices or the laws of tum’a and tahara.
However, as we come to the end of Sefer Vayikro, the justification for calling the entire book Toras Kohanim is less easy to understand. In
Parshas Kedoshim we read of Mitzvos that apply to all Jews. In Parshas
Behar we read of the laws of Shmitta, Yovel and interpersonal relationships. There does not seem to be anything unique about Kohanim about those laws. The ultimate Parsha of Sefer Vayikro is the second of this week’s readings. There is mention of Kohanim in a few specific
Mitzvos, but the blessings the Parsha’s beginning and the curses of the tochecho -rebuke that follow do not seem related to the Kohanim more than to anyone else.
Why then is the entire Book of Vayikro dubbed as Toras Kohanim ?
It seems that the Midrash (Tanchuma Yoshon Bechukosai 8) was bothered by this very same issue and it offers an answer which requires our attention and understanding.
Noting the opening verses of Vayikro, “…o’dom ki yak’riv mi’kem korban LaShem” (Perek 1/Posuk 2)-when a man offers an offering from you to Hashem, the scene is certainly set to discuss sacrifices.
Noting a verse in our Parshas Bechukosai, “…ish ki yaf’li neder b’erk’cho n’fo’shos LaShem” (Perek 27/Posuk 2), when a man vows the value of lives to G-d. We see that there has been a shift from the Kohen to everyman, or at least to every Jew.

The Midrash writes, “Im a’tem m’vi’im l’fo’nai a’ra’chim she’lo’chem a’ni ma’a’leh a’lei’chem k’i’lu hik’rav’tem naf’sho’sei’chem l’fo’nai.
Bi’z’chus ha’a’ra’chim a’ni ma’tzil es’chem meiGehinom…”
If you [B’nei Yisroel] bring before Me the [payments of] your vows I
Hashem will consider it as if you offered your lives [as sacrifices] before
Me. In the merit of the vows, I will save you from Gehinom.
This Midrash requires a great deal of elucidation in order to understand why it specifically picked the Mitzvah of Arachim to be a fitting partner for the sacrifices that we find in the beginning of Vayikro.
In order to understand this better we must first understand the laws of
Arachim (often pronounced “er’chin”).
In fact, the Torah tells us that there are two ways in which a person can pledge a person’s worth to support the Bais HaMikdosh.
The first way is by means of a standard vow-a neder . The Torah empowers a person to make a vow and that vow becomes binding, almost as if it was a Mitzvah from G-d Himself. “Ish ki yi’dor ne’der
LaShem…lo ya’chel d’vo’ro k’chol ha’yo’tzei mi’piv ya’a’seh”
(B’midbar Perek 30/Posuk 3). When a person vows to Hashem he may not profane his words, according to all that was said by him, he should do.
Thus, if a person would say “d’mei p’lo’ni o’lai”-I obligate myself to pay the value of a certain person to the Bais HaMikdosh-he has a Torah obligation to fulfill his promise. If he does not fulfill that promise then he has violated the Torah commandment in this verse-“lo ya’chel d’voro”.
He should not profane his words. Since the Torah imbued the neder with
Halachic value then the neder is imbued with sanctity and its nonfulfillment profanes that sanctity.
Since every person is worth a different amount, the Torah does not assign a value of how much the noder must pay. Chazal teach us that the value of the person about whom the vow was made is determined as if he was an eved ha’nim’kar ba’shuk -a non-Jewish slave who was being sold in the open market. Such a slave will be assigned a price based on his ability to work, his skills and other factors such as health.
On the other hand, as the P’sukim in our Parsha clearly indicate, if a person would said “e’rech p’loni o’lai”-I am vowing the erech of a

particular person, then there is a fixed amount to pay to the Bais
HaMikdosh based on age and gender, as is clearly explicit in the verses.
We must then investigate two issues. First, why did the Torah give two ways of donating a person’s value to the Bais HaMikdosh? One would certainly have been sufficient.
Secondly, why is there differential amount in the realm of arachim as there is by a standard neder?
Conceptually, assigning value to a person seems to be a most daunting task. How do you really evaluate a person’s worth? Is a person’s worth determined solely by the work output-by what he can produce?
What about the individual who can serve as a moral beacon? How is that to be factored? And what about the person who generates huge wealth but is despicable in his ethical behavior? Will he be worth more than the
Tzaddik because he delivers wealth?
Perhaps this is the reason that the Torah provides us with two means of assessing the value of a person (it could be yourself-it did not necessarily have to be someone else) and giving that money to hekdesh .
Seemingly a person wants to give himself to the Bais HaMikdosh. The first way is through the standard neder as above.
In such a scenario, the donation is not of the person himself but rather regards externalities. All we know how to measure is an estimation of his income-producing expectations.
If a person is truly serious regarding giving his true value to the Bais
HaMikdosh he is at a loss. How can he assess true value? He begins to consider some of the issues raised before and so many others and he comes to the conclusion that he is totally incapable of meeting the demands of the task. To meet the demands of such a task would require a full analysis of a person, from the inside and the outside, an ability to proportionately assess the value of each of the aspects, add on to that lifeexpectancy, health (and maybe even required retirement age).
Furthermore, one would have to know that assessments will be consistent and that there will be no abrupt and unexpected changes. Except, Chazal tell us “al ta’a’min b’atz’m’cho ‘ad yom mo’s’cho” (Masseches Ovos
Perek 1). Do not trust in your own integrity until the day of your death.
In Masseches B’rachos (27 a) we learned that “Yochanan Kohen Godol

shi’mesh b’k’hu’no g’do’loh sh’monim shonoh”. He was the Kohen
Godol for eighty years (!) and then became a Tzeduki-Sadducee who rejected Torah she’b’al Peh.
Of course, any sane person would raise his hands in defeat when considering the impossibility of coming to some valid conclusion.
It is for that precise moment that the Torah calls upon us to read Parshas
Arachim in this week’s Parsha. What seems at first glance to be a superficial evaluation of people’s worth turns out to be a profound statement of the true and real value of each and every human being.
The standardization of the evaluation of people in this section of the
Torah is rightfully called arachim . Precisely because the Torah does not assign value to people on any individual level, but makes a few classifications, we learn that the true valueerech of people is not measurable in any particular way that is part of our repertoire of understanding and comprehension.
This form of vow is rightfully referred to as evaluation, not just vows or promises. This is because arachim help us focus on true value that people possess, an assessment that is beyond our imagination.
If a person wants to do more than pledge (and pay) money to the Bais
HaMikdosh, then the neder is not the way.
If a person wants to give himself to the Bais HaMikdosh, then he must fathom how much he could be worth if he would strive to inner perfection.
The Midrash states that our section of Arachim is a proper culmination of
Sefer Vayikro which began with sacrifices.
The Midrash says that the opening verse of “Odom ki yakriv mikem korban” emphasizes the word mi’kem
. G-d wants the sacrifice if it is mikem -if it is from you. It is not a wonderful sacrifice if it only comes from your money. It has to be you .
That is why Ramban explains (Perek 1/Posuk 4) that one does semicha , leans with his complete weight on the head of the animal, to indicate that it should have been him as the sacrifice (because of all of his imperfections) and not the animal. The semicha makes the sacrifice mi’kem.

However, in such a case, it is still the animal that is being given. If you would give yourself that would certainly be mi’kem
, but the Torah forbids human sacrifice.
That is the role of arachim . That is why the Midrash has Hashem saying,
“arachim she’lo’chem”-the evaluations that are yours. In this case, submitting a payment that is nondescript and relatively non-specific shows that you recognize that only G-d knows your true value and thus you pledge to find yourself, investigate, analyze and set up a plan of action to serve Him Yisborach.
The Torah begins by telling us how the Bais HaMikdosh is sanctified for sacrifices. The Torah concludes this Sefer by telling us how that sanctification focuses on the Bais HaMikdosh but it is not exclusive to it.
When the Torah was given we were told to be “mam’le’ches ko’hanim v’goy ko’dosh” (Sh’mos Perek 19/Posuk 6). If sanctity was limited to the
Bais HaMikdosh how could the entire kingdom be of Kohanim and how could the entire nation be holy?
The answer is that the Bais HaMikdosh is certainly a concentration of holiness. But that holiness is only meaningful if it is not confined.
One the one hand “Boruch k’vod Hashem mi’m’ko’mo” (Y’chezkel
Perek 3/Posuk 12). Hashem’s glory is in its place, removed from us and distant. On the other hand, we remind ourselves of the praise of the angels that said, “…kodosh kodosh kodosh Hashem Tzvo’kos m’lo chol ho’o’retz k’vodo” (Y’shaya Perek 6/Posuk 3).
The fullness of the earth is His glory. It is not confined it is everywhere.
Our task to make sure that the sanctity does not stay confined.
How can we do that-by the admittance that we cannot know our own worth and thus we give ourselves over to G-d on His terms ?
When we let His terms of engagement override our terms-by pledging ourselves to Him the way He said to do it, then we are no longer sacrificing animals alone, we are making ourselves an offering to G-d.
Thus Arachim becomes an expression of the almost infinite worth of every Jew.

This idea is captured uniquely by Shem Mishmuel (Bechukosai 5671 d.h.
B’midrash).
Chazal frequently cite the verse in Parshas B’har in which G-d says, “Ki li B’nei Yisroel a’vodim, a’vo’dai hem a’sher ho’tzei’si o’som mei’Eretz
Mitzroyim a’ni Hashem E..lo’kei’chem” (Perek 25/Posuk 55).
B’nei Yisrael are slaves to Me, they are My slaves whom I Hashem took out of Egypt; I am Hashem your G-d.
Chazal say, “Avodai, v’lo av’dei avodim”. Since they are My servants, it is wrong for others to enslave them.
Shem Mishmuel points out that G-d claimed the Jewish People as His servants in the context of a Jew who was forced to sell himself in slavery to a non-Jew and who had to assist the non-Jew in the non-Jew’s religious services (see Rashi Perek 26/Posuk 1).
This Jew sold himself to a non-Jew. Is it not likely that he will assimilate? And not only is the non-Jew his master, the labor he performs for the non-Jew is idolatrous in and of itself. Will not this Jewish slave sink ever-lower into the abyss of assimilation and loss of self-identity?
It is precisely hear that G-d says, even regarding this Jew who is drifting far away, you are My servant. I still want you to worship Me.
Could there be a more powerful statement of the worth of the Jew when he is reminded of Hashem’s constant presence and Providence.
We do not have the means of Arachim anymore. We do have its lessons this week portrayed in a vivid manner. We can take in the message and incorporate it into our own lives as we seek to serve G-d in this world that could be suffused with His holiness.
Shabbat Shalom
Rabbi Pollock