Return To TorahWeb.org Homepage
The Torah (Vayikra 23:9-22) presents the mizvah of sefirat ha-omer by linking it to the korbon ha-omer and the korbon shetei ha-lehem, each of which brackets the counting imperative. This presentation spurred most halachic authorities to conclude that sefirat ha-omer is only a rabbinic obligation in the aftermath of the destruction of the Temple. Ameimar (Menachot 66a) explicitly argued that only days (not weeks) should be counted in the post-destruction era as a zecher le-churban. Rashi (s.v. Ameimar) explains that the absence of the korban ha-omer renders the mitzvah a derabanan (see also Baal ha-Maor and Ran, end of Pesachim). Indeed, the Tosafists (Menachot 66a s.v. zecher) rule that one could count sefirah during twilight (bein ha-shemashot) since we are lenient regarding rabbinic obligations.
Yet, the Rambam disputes this contention. He (Temidim7:22) emphasizes that sefirat ha-omer is a biblical obligation in all eras. Evidently, he considers Ameimar's contrary view to be exceptional, as the Kesef Mishneh notes. Indeed, the midrash (Parshas Emor) and many rishonim (Chinuch and others) perceive the counting of the omer as marking a transition from yeziat mizrayim to mattan Torah, something seemingly independent of the requirement of korbonot. Moreover, the fact that the period of sefirat haomer is detailed in the parshat ha-moadim of Emor establishes it as an important bridge between the festivals of Pesach and Shavuot, as the Ramban (23:36) remarks. However, this challenges us to better comprehend the Torah's explicit connection between the mitzvah of counting the omer and these korbonot, particularly as the mitzvah applies according to the Rambam even in the absence of the korbonot.
The very presence of these two korbonot in the context of the festival chapter in Emor may provide a clue to our enigma. Typically, the details of the festival offerings are discussed in parshat Pinchas, not in Emor, as the Ramban (23:2) also notes. The Ramban (23:15) and other commentators were troubled by this exception. Perhaps these korbonot are integrated into Emor because their special features effectively embody the character of the transitions involved and, by extension, they convey the goal of the counting process and period.
The Aruch ha-Shulchan (Orach Chaim 489:3) certainly adopts this approach in his explanation of the Rambam's controversial view. He notes that the korbon haomer is unusual (like the korban minchat sotah) in being a barley-based korbon, while the wheat-based shetei ha-lehem serves as a sharp contrast. He posits that the transition from the crude barley staple of an animal's diet to the refined human consumption of wheat symbolizes the process of spiritual refinement and the attainment of human potential that is the telos of mattan Torah and that is achieved only by a commitment to Torah and mizvot.
There is perhaps another dimension to this transition reflected by the timing and substance of the two korbonot. It is surely significant that the Shavuot offering of shetei ha-lehem alone consists of chametz (even korban todah only contains one part chametz; other korbonot are disqualified by the presence of any chametz), while the omer is sacrificed in the context of Pesach, the holiday that demands an absolute eradication of even the presence of chametz. The Torah appears to be conveying that while the political freedom of yeziat Mizrayim requires strict discipline (shemirah of matzah) and rejects the theme of unfettered growth symbolized by chametz, authentic growth and creativity can only really flourish in the context of the commitment to Torah.
The interaction between personal growth and the forging of a national identity based on common spiritual aspirations may also be relevant to the process of spiritual growth between Pesach and Shavuot, and highlighted by omer and shetei halechem. The gemara (Menachot 65b) establishes that each individual must count the sefirah. Some poskim even conclude that the principle of shomeia ke-oneh does not apply to this personal requirement. Yet, the obligation to count is defined by the korbon ha-omer and korban shetei halachem, two korbonot tzibbur (public sacrifices). Moreover, these two sacrifices share an unusual common denominator: the requirement that they stem from the produce of Eretz Yisrael. This requirement is actually cited in the mishneh (Keilim 1:6) as exemplifying the special sanctity of Eretz Yisrael! The commentators (see Mishneh Achronah and Eliyahu Rabah and the emendation of the Gra) note that omer and shetei ha-lechem (alongside bikkurim- see Gra and Eliyahu Rabah) were selected rather than the classical mizvot ha-teluyot ba-aretz (Kiddushin 36a) such as terumot and maasrot that technically depend on the soil of Eretz Yisrael precisely because they underscore a broader principle. There is ample evidence in other contexts to suggest that the broader halachic requirement of Eretz Yisrael signifies a national dimension. It is highly appropriate then that Eretz Yisrael be featured prominently in the korbonot that mark the transition from the yeziat Mizrayim experience of a collection of individual refugees to the moment of kabbalat ha-torah, the event that established Jewish national identity - "ha-yom ha-zeh nihiyeita la-am."
Perhaps the link to the two korbonot further stresses that while the act of sefirah requires the personal involvement of each individual, the ultimate purpose is to forge a nation of committed individuals that identify with the both the common and contrasting themes of these korbonot and the holidays that they represent. This message, according the Rambam, remains biblically viable and compelling in all eras, even when the actual implementation of the korbonot is, alas, unattainable.