Special Allowances for Sha'atnez

 The Allowance of Sha'atnez in the Priestly Garments and in Tzitzit

 

INTRODUCTION

 

            To complete our examination of the issue of colors, I wish to relate in this lecture to the special allowance which excludes priestly garments and tzitzit from the prohibition of sha'atnez/kil'ayim, wearing a mixture of wool and linen.

 

Moreover, you shall make the Mishkan with ten curtains of fine twined linen, and blue, and purple, and scarlet, with keruvim of artistic work shall you make them… And you shall make a screen for the door of the tent, of blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine twined linen, the work of an embroiderer. (Shemot 26:1-36)

 

            In previous lectures, we dealt with the relationship between the terms "ma'aseh choshev" – "artistic work" – and "ma'aseh rokem" – "the work of an embroiderer." When we examine the verses, we find that the terms "ma'aseh choshev" and "ma'aseh rokem" always appear in connection with a mixture of dyed wool and linen – a mixture that is ordinarily forbidden as sha'atnez. Such a mixture is found in the following places:

 

• In the inner curtains of the Mishkan.

 

• In the parokhet, in the screen of the door of the Ohel, and in the screen of the gate of the courtyard.

 

• In the priestly garments – in the efod, in the girdle of the efod, in the breastplate of judgment, in the hem of the robe of the efod in the pomegranates, and in the girdle.

 

Prof. Menachem Haran makes the following comment:[1]

 

According to the archaic view that settled in Scripture, every mixture of kil'ayim served as a sign of sanctity. And it is precisely for this reason that all traces of kil'ayim were forbidden in daily life, as the Torah admonishes in Vayikra 19:19 and in Devarim 22:9-11. From the ritual perspective, fabrics made of kil'ayim are superior to fabrics made of a single type.

 

            In this context note should also be taken of the understanding of Da'at Zekenim Mi-Ba'alei Ha-Tosafot. According to their explanation, the prohibition of sha'atnez stems from the fact that sha'atnez was found in the Mishkan. Since the parokhet in the Mishkan was sewn with wool and linen, we are forbidden to wear sha'atnez, as we must not take articles the likes of which were used in the Mishkan and use them for mundane purposes.

 

THE PROHIBITION OF KIL’AYIM

 

            In order to better understand the allowance of sha'atnez in the priestly garments and in tzitzit, let us briefly discuss the reason for the prohibition of sha'atnez. The prohibition of sha'atnez is spelled out in the Torah in two places:

 

You shall keep My statutes. You shall not let your cattle gender with a diverse kind; you shall not you sow your field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and wool come upon you. (Vayikra 19:19)

 

You shall not plow with an ox and an ass together. You shall not wear a garment of diverse kinds, of wool and linen together. (Devarim 22:10-11)

 

            The Torah relates to the prohibition of mixtures of diverse kinds in several contexts: in relation to the work of draft animals, in relation to the planting of food crops, and in relation to clothing. The Rishonim proposed several reasons for these prohibitions:

 

1. Some Rishonim (e.g., Rashi, ad loc.) argue that we should not search for the reasons of these commandments. (This is also the position of the Ibn Ezra with respect to grafting diverse species and wearing sha'atnez.)

 

2. The Ramban explains:

 

 

And the reason for kil'ayim is that God created the different species in the world for all the different kinds of souls, in plants and in those that have the animative soul, and he gave them the power of reproduction, that the species should exist for eternity, for as long as He should desire the existence of the world, and He ordered that that power should reproduce the species and never ever change, as is written concerning each (species), "le-mineihu" (for its species)… But one who intermixes two species changes and negates the act of creation, as though he thinks that God did not complete His world sufficiently, and he wishes to assist creation by adding creatures to it. (Vayikra 11:19)

 

3. The Rambam explains:

 

This is also the reason for the prohibition of mingled stuff, for this was a usage of these priests, as they put together in their garments vegetal and animal substances bearing at the same time a seal made out of some mineral. (Guide of the Perplexed III:37)

 

4. The Recannati connects the prohibition against wearing sha'atnez to the story of Kayin and Hevel: Linen grows from the earth and symbolizes the "fruit of the ground" that Kayin brought as an offering to God, while wool, which is derived from sheep, symbolizes the firstlings of the flock that were brought by Hevel. God's acceptance of Hevel's offering and rejection of that of Kayin led to the first act of murder in human history. From here we learn that linen and wool symbolize two contrary elements that cannot be reconciled.

 

The basic understanding that connects the prohibition of sha'atnez to Kayin and Hevel originates in the Zohar to Parashat Kedoshim (Kedoshim 86b).

 

The Zohar first offers a linguistic explanation of the word kil'ayim, arguing that it stems from the root kuf-lamed-alef, "imprison," like one who puts his friend in jail so that he will not be able to do anything. Similarly, kil'ayim denotes prohibition, prohibiting the forces from their performances. Kil'ayim denotes confusion, because it causes confusion in the supernal forces and denies the fame of the King, as it says: "Neither shall a garment mingled of linen and wool come upon you" (Vayikra 19:19).

 

The Zohar continues with an interpretation of the story of Kayin and Hevel in this context. Kayin's offering was linen, while that of Hevel was wool. Kayin (himself) was kil'ayim, a mixture from the Other Side (sitra achra), not of the same species as Adam and Chava (apparently the reference is to the serpent who infected Chava with moral impurity). Hevel was of the same species as Adam and Chava, i.e., the side of sanctity, and the two joined in Chava's womb, two different species. Because they were joined together, nothing good came from them, and they were destroyed.

 

The Zohar adds that the destructive force of Kayin and Hevel still exists today. One who creates a union of wool and linen awakens this mixture of Kayin and Hevel. He may get hurt and cause an inappropriate spirit to hover over him. When a priest enters the Temple, the place of perfection, we need not fear a mixture of wool and linen, because all the heavenly species are joined together there and all are the vessels of the Temple.

 

6. Rabbeinu Bachye continues this line of thought (Vayikra 19:19):

 

And needless to say, in the Temple during the time of the service, which embraces all the forces, because everything in the earthly Temple corresponds to something in the heavenly Temple, [it is permissible].

 

According to the Zohar and Rabbeinu Bachye, in the Mikdash, the site of perfection that embraces everything, there is no contradiction between wool and linen, and there is room for the two forces that they symbolize to operate together.[2]

 

R. S.R. Hirsch, in his commentary to the Torah and in his book, Ha-Mitzvot Ki-Semalim, expands on the significance of this point:[3]

 

We see that the prohibition has various reasons: Man is not to intervene in the created world in a manner that will change the laws of nature in an arbitrary manner. One must respect the laws of the Creator that He gave to His creatures, and one must also keep the laws of nature and everything that depends upon them, in sanctity and in purity, and one must especially preserve the existence of the creatures. If we delve just a bit into these laws, we will understand their reasons. Surely, the grafting of trees of different species and the mating of animals of different species constitutes interference in creation on the part of man, in an unnatural manner. Natural forces and seeds would become joined and mingled, and forces foreign to each other would be mixed up by force, things that would never have become mixed freely on their own. These forces are separated and distinguished one from the other…

These laws were given so that every plant, even the most modest, would develop without change, and thus demonstrate its obedience to the Creator, to the point that the fields and gardens of the Holy Land continuously bring to mind He who established the law and order of the world. All creatures develop exclusively in accordance with the great principle of creation, "after its kind," and according to its understanding it freely recognizes its obligation, understands it, and fulfills its commandments. This warning is found wherever man goes: in the field, in the raising of livestock, in working with animals, in his food, when he eats of cattle or fowl, and also in his clothing he recognizes the great principle in accordance with which nature was created. To the extent that the organic materials of nature serve man, care must be taken that this use should not involve a contradiction to the laws of nature.

Now we shall consider the prohibition of sha'atnez, using wool and linen together.

This prohibition does not apply in general to the mixture of different materials in the fashioning of fabrics, but only to wool and linen. Accordingly, the intent of the prohibition is not to remind us of the great order that the Holy One, blessed be He, implanted in His world in general, but rather that this mixture stands in special connection to this preeminent law of nature. It is assigned a special role within this law for man…

Man is distinguished from animals also by way of his clothing, by way of his external appearance that expresses itself in the covering of his body, and in particular we see the intention underlying the prohibition of sha'atnez, when we see the special relationship between this prohibition and the mitzva of tzitzit.

When we examine the intention of the prohibition of sha'atnez, we must keep in mind man's purpose in general, because of which he is man, and the mixing of the two species was liable to bring man down to the level of animals. Therefore, there are two factors that distinguish man from animal, both concealed in the body, which man presents only when it is covered in clothing, and he also covers himself with it in order to protect himself from outside influences. The goals of clothing are symbolized by the tzitzit.

Wool and linen are not two types of the same species; they do not grow in the same area. The relationship between them is like the relationship between plant and animal. Linen is the typical material worn from the plant kingdom, and wool from the animal kingdom. Accordingly, it would have been possible to assume that a person's clothing made of wool and linen symbolizes the relationships between man's body and the plant and animal kingdoms.

Surely, man's body is comprised of these two factors, the plant and the animal. Alimentation and reproduction and all that stems from them belong to vegetative part of his body, while feeling, will, and movement belong to the fleshly part of the essence of man's body. In animals, the fleshly part is subject to the vegetative part – will, movement and reproduction serve alimentation. The two factors are mingled one with the other; both of them constitute the essence of the animal, a creature that has but alimentation, reproduction, movement, and will. An animal has wool that serves the linen, "wool and linen together."

Man, however, has a higher destiny. His vegetative dimension does not rule over his fleshly part. The fleshly part serves the vegetative, but the two of them serve the image of God in man, the Divine dimension, which is the third factor, and it alone turns man into a creature worthy of that name. Man does not want his senses exclusively for alimentation and reproduction, but rather he nourishes himself and reproduces in order to place his will and actions at God's disposal.

Three levels complete creation: plant, animal and man; and above all of them stands God. Plant and animal are intermingled in animals. The rule of the fleshly over the vegetative part, and the subjugation of the two of them to God and His holy will is called "sanctification," as in: "And you shall sanctify yourselves and be holy" (Vayikra 11:44)…

We therefore assume that the prohibition of sha'atnez symbolizes for us the severe warning that we not allow man's fleshly nature to descend to the area of vegetative stimuli that intermingle with the fleshly part and subjugate the body. Just the opposite: the vegetative part of the body should bear our fleshly life, and that should bear the image of God, the Divine dimension on earth, so that man should be worthy of that description. Here we see the same warning that Chazal issue elsewhere: "His heart sees his nakedness" (Berakhot 25b). Man's nakedness symbolizes the animal dimension of his life in a most demonstrable manner, and the heart is directed upwards towards holiness. Therefore, a person is forbidden to occupy himself in holy matters, such as a blessing, as long as there is no separation between heart and nakedness. It is in this sense that Chazal explain the concept of sha'atnez. They say: "R. Shimon ben Elazar says: [The word sha'atnez suggests that] he [the transgressor] is naloz and causes his Father in heaven to meliz from him" (Mishna Kil'ayim 9:8). Rabbeinu Ovadya interprets the root "loz" based on the verse: "My son, let them not depart [yaluzu] from your eyes" (Mishlei 3:21). According to this, R. Shimon ben Elazar says: He separates himself and causes his Father in heaven to separate from him, that is to say, his Father in heaven that is found in his heart. A person who fulfills his destiny in the world is a footstool of the Shekhina (adam [man] = hadom [footstool]), as Chazal said: "The patriarchs themselves are the chariot, as it is stated: 'And God ascended from upon Avraham' (Bereishit 17:22); 'And God ascended from upon him in the place where He spoke with him' (Bereishit 35:13); "And behold, the Lord was standing upon him and said' (Bereishit 28:13) (Bereishit Rabba 47:8)." Therefore, he is called man, when he keeps his sanctity, when he rules his passions and lusts and dedicates all his powers to God's service as a free man, and his entire goal is to fulfill His holy will….

 

THE ALLOWANCE OF SHA’ATNEZ IN TZITZIT AND IN THE PRIESTLY GARMENTS[4]

 

            R. Hirsch explains:

 

We were only commanded to restrain and restrict the demands of our desires when our spirits and corporeal lives are not yet totally dedicated to the will of God. But when we are dedicated to the Holy One, blessed be He, in every fiber of our bodies, even in our basest impulses, as such impulses are found even in plants, when we dedicate even our carnal lives to the elevation of the name of God, and not to our own pleasure and delight, we are similar to the High Priest. Accordingly, we, together with our bodily and even vegetative impulses, are close to God, holy and pure; there is no contradiction or aspiration to go down from that moral virtue. We are free in our spirits and in our Divine morality, and all directions of life stand at the same level before God. It is therefore possible to understand that there is no prohibition of sha'atnez at that level, as Chazal say: "Everyone agrees that the girdle of the high priest on Yom Kippur was made of fine linen, and during the rest of the year of kil'ayim" (Yoma 12b).

Following this examination of sha'atnez, we return to the examination of the value of wool and linen as materials that were used in the Temple. Based on our examination, we can say: The concept "Mikdash" teaches us what we must give and to what we must dedicate ourselves in order to fulfill His great and holy will, by way of which we ourselves will become sanctified. The concept "Mishkan" shows us the blessings that God will bestow upon us, after we have fulfilled His holy will. Therefore, wool and linen can serve as symbols of all that clothing symbolizes. (ibid.)

 

            According to R. Hirsch, when we succeed in living in such a way that our spirits and physical lives are fully dedicated to the will of God, even in our basest impulses, we will be like the High Priest. In that state, mixing wool and linen will no longer be a problem, for even in our bodily impulses, and even in our vegetative ones, we will be close to God.

 

GOATS

 

            To conclude our discussion of the colors in the Mishkan, I wish to discuss the color of the "goats."

 

            In the introduction listing the materials needed for the construction of the Mishkan, the Torah says as follows:

 

And this is the offering which you shall take of them: gold, and silver, and brass, and blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine linen, and goats' hair, and rams' skins dyed red, and tachash skins, and shittim wood. (Shemot 25:3-5)[5]

 

            Rabbeinu Bachya writes in his commentary (ad loc.):

 

And it mentions "goats," which is wool, which is why Onkelos did not translate with "ve-azya" ("and goats"), but rather with "u-me-azi" ("and from goats"), which means: something that comes from goats, namely, wool.

 

            That is to say, in contrast to the blue, purple, and scarlet, which are dyed wool, the goats' wool was not dyed, but rather was in its natural color. What was the natural color of the goats' wool?

 

            The matter is not at all clear from the verses. Goats' wool is usually black, although some goats are gray and some are spotted or patched.

 

            Prof. Felix,[6] in his discussion of the animals mentioned in Shir Ha-shirim, writes as follows:

 

Of the domestic animals, mention is made here of goats and sheep. Sheep are white, especially after they come up from the washing… The goats in Eretz Yisrael are black. Therefore, the rolling hair of the maiden is likened to a flock of goats cascading down Mount Gil'ad (Shir Ha-shirim 4:1).

 

            If we accept what Prof. Felix says, we come to a very interesting conclusion regarding the colors of the coverings of the structure of the Mishkan:

 

• The innermost and most expensive and splendid of the covers was of various colors: blue, purple, scarlet, and linen.
• The cover above it was of goats' hair, black in color.
• The cover above it was:[7]

A red cover of rams' skins dyed red.

A multi-colored cover of tachash skins.

 

            In addition, if indeed the two upper covers only covered the upper portion of the structure and not its sides, the sides of the structure of the Mishkan were black, whereas the roof was red and assorted colors.

 

            The Tanchuma brings a disagreement between the Tanna'im regarding the source of the cover of goats’ hair:

 

R. Yehuda says: There was a large clean beast in the wilderness, from which the curtains were fashioned. R. Nechemya says: It was a miracle; it was created for the moment and then buried away. (Tanchuma Yashan, Parashat Teruma 9)

 

            On the other hand, the gemara in Shabbat (74b) says that the wool was spun and the curtains woven directly on the goats themselves, this being an art that required superior skill.

 

This is based on the verses in the Torah, which describe the offering of the women:

 

And all the women that were wise-hearted did spin with their hands, and brought that which they had spun, both of blue, and of purple, and of scarlet, and of fine linen. And all the women whose heart stirred them up in wisdom spun goats' hair. (Shemot 35:25-26)

 

            The gemara says:

 

… and greater wisdom [skill] is mentioned in connection with the upper than in connection with the lower. For whereas of the lower ones it is written: "And all the women that were wise-hearted did spin with their hands," in reference to the upper ones it is written: "And all the women whose heart stirred them up in wisdom spun the goats." And it was taught in the name of R. Nechemya: It was washed [direct] on the goats and spun on the goats. (Shabbat 99a)

 

            Rashi in his Torah commentary writes:

 

They spun the goats – this was an art that required superior skill, for they spun [the wool] on the backs of the goats themselves. (Shemot 35:26)

 

            The Seforno also makes an interesting comment (ad loc.):

 

They spun the goats – on the goats, as the Rabbis, of blessed memory, said, So that it be an additional expression of splendor. For the quality of many things slightly diminishes when they are removed from the place that they are produced, e.g., as what happens with bees' honey… and other things.

 

            Cassuto comments in his commentary to the book of Shemot:[8]

 

The relationship between the inner curtain, the curtain of the Mishkan, to the curtain above it, the Ohel – the curtain of goats' hair – is like the maiden of Shir Ha-shirim – black like the tents of Kedar, but comely like the curtains of Shlomo. Thus, the Mishkan was black from the outside, like the tents of Bedouins, but splendid and beautiful with its curtains on the inside, as is fit for the dwelling place of the King.

 

            We have here inside and outside; the more magnificent is hidden on the inside, whereas the simpler is exposed to the outside, and serves also to shield the inner curtain against rain, wind and sand. And above them are the rams' skins dyed red and the tachash skins.

 

(Translated by David Strauss)

 

, full_html