Messianic Education Trust
		Living in Exile     Sh'mini   (Lev 9:1 - 11:47)

Vayikra/Leviticus 10:1   And the sons of Aharon, Nadav and Avihu, each took his fire-pan and they put fire in them and they put incense on it; and they brought before the L-rd strange fire that He had not commanded them.

View whole verse and interlinear translation ...

This unsettling piece of narrative, coming so soon after the anointing of these same sons of Aharon as priests, qualifying them to serve as priests, nevertheless ends in disaster: "And fire came forth from the L-RD and consumed them; thus they died at the instance of the L-RD" (Vayikra 10:2, NJPS). How strange, since the verbs of our text - וַיִּקְהוּ took, וַיְּתְּנוּ put, וַיְּתְּנוּ placed, וַיַּקְרִיבוּ offered - resonate with those used for priestly work and functions throughout the previous chapters (8-9). Even the noun קְטֹרֶת, incense, is derived from the verb used for 'burning' sacrifices on the altar, וַיַּקְטֵר, vayakteyr, the Hifil 3ms prefix form of the root קטר, to burn or offer in smoke:¹ "[Aharon's sons] passed the burnt offering to him ... and [Aharon] turned it into smoke on the altar" (9:13, NJPS). What went wrong? How did Aharon's sons draw down the wrath of Adonai that resulted in their deaths? To answer that, we need to look at the last phrase in our text: "they offered before Adonai strange fire that He had not commanded them." Many commentators focus on אֵשׁ זַרַה, the 'strange' fire that they brought near before Adonai, while others point to HebrrewBodyText(אֲשֶׁר לֹא צִוָּה אֹתָם), that the action was not commanded.

What is אֵשׁ זַרַה, "strange fire"? The noun אֵשׁ is the Hebrew word for 'fire' and, according to David Clines,² encompasses six categories: 1) supernatural fire, such as the burning bush and the pillar of fire; 2) fire of sacrifice, used on the altar to make offerings go up in smoke; 3) destructive fire, for capital punishment; 4) cleansing fire, for rendering metal objects ritually clean; 5) domestic fire, used in homes for heating and cooking; 6) symbolic fire, representing anger or prophetic inspiration. A derivative noun, אִשֶּׁה denotes a fire offering, often translated, "an offering made by fire". The incense offered by Nadav and Avihu, placed on burning coals taken from the altar, in a censer or fire-pan, would seem to fall in the second category of אֵשׁ - fire of sacrifice - if not אִשֶׁה, an offering made by fire. So far, then, so good. Nadav and Avihu had been ordained as priests and their remit for worship or service of HaShem as priests included burning incense.

However, אֵשׁ is immediately followed by the qualifying adjective זָרָה. This is derived from the root זור, to be strange, estranged from; to be strange, foreign or forbidden; to be unfamiliar or unrelated. Richard Elliott Friedman explains that "The term zarah never has the meaning of 'foreign' in any other occurrence in the Torah's law or narrative. It rather denotes a person or thing that is outside a particular group. In any context dealing with priests, for example, it refers to a lay-person." We find it being used in Moshe's instructions for the incense altar inside the Tabernacle - "You shall not offer קְטֹרֶת זָרָה  alien incense on it, or a burnt offering or a meal offering; neither shall you pour a libation on it" (Shemot 30:9, NJPS) - on which Aharon is to burn incense twice each day: every morning when he tends the lamps and every evening when he lights the lamps. In this verse, Friedman continues, "'strange incense' is included in the list of things which should not be brought on the incense altar. There is no suggestion that it means anything foreign, but simply something that is outside the realm of what is permitted."

Although we cannot be absolutely certain, since our text speaks of "strange fire", while the earlier one talks of "strange incense", Baruch Levine suggests that Nadav and Avihu broke this decree by offering incense other than the twice-daily incense offering. John Hartley goes a little further, asking whether it is "possible that the root זור, which frequently stands for aliens suggests the presentation of fire according to the ritual of a foreign cult?" Certainly the word is used, Gordon Wenham points out, to refer to people who are not priests (e.g., Shemot 30:33, B'Midbar 17:5) or to outsiders (D'varim 25:5).³ This might mean that the incense was offered in a way that resembled pagan worship in the surrounding nations. In any case, Hartley concludes, "the adjective זָרָה, 'alien, strange, deviating, unauthorised, illicit', means that their fire was other than that specifically prescribed for use in the cult."⁴ Who Is ...

Abraham Ibn Ezra: (1089-1167 CE), born in Tudela, Spain; died in the South of France after wandering all around the shores of the Mediterranean and England; a philosopher, astronomer, doctor, poet and linguist; wrote a Hebrew grammar and a commentary on the Bible
Ibn Ezra tells us that it was "strange fire" because it was not the fire that "came forth from before the L-RD and consumed the burnt offering" (Vayikra 9:24).

While both the rabbinic world and Christian commentators offer multiple possible reasons - at least a dozen are easily assembled - why this action was not commanded, varying from bringing in fire from the kitchen or each acting on their own initiative without taking counsel even from one other (Vayikra Rabbah 20:8), offering the fire at the wrong time, in the wrong place or being improperly dressed,⁵ penetrating too far into the sanctuary or offering incense that did not contain the proper ingredients,⁶ to making a halakhic ruling in the presence of Moshe their teacher and Aharon their father (b. Eruvin 63a), of one thing we can be certain: "the offense is by no means accidental."⁷ As Friedman comments, "in the realm of the ritual, they have failed to observe a boundary, and so their fate is settled."

Brushing all this aside, Who Is ...

Nechama Leibowitz: (1905-1997 CE), born in Riga, graduate of the University of Berlin, made aliyah in 1931; professor at Tel Aviv University; taught Torah for over 50 years
Nechama Leibowitz claims that "Nadav and Avihu did not offend against any ritual precepts but sinned by reaching for G-d through the dictates of their own hearts rather than through the path set by G-d. Submission to the yoke of Heaven - the ultimate aim of Torah - was here supplanted by unbridled religious ecstasy. Hence their punishment." As Gunther Plaut points out, "the priestly ideal is one of conformity, not of innovation." Priests are to serve G-d, bring sacrifices and mediate atonement in precisely the way that G-d says - no more and no less - because "thus [or 'so'] he shall make atonement for the priests and for all the people of the congregation" (Vayikra 16:33). That is what they do, that is what happens and that is the result. It is possible that Nadav and Avihu wanted to demonstrate that they too were priests, as well as their father Aharon, to establish their identity on that important day or felt that something was missing that they rushed to supply. Rabbi Who Is ...

Hirsch: Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch (1808-1888 CE), German rabbi, author and educator; staunch opponent of the Reform movement in Germany and one of the fathers of Orthodox Judaism
Hirsch is uncompromising: "Not by fresh inventions even of G-d-serving novices, but by carrying out that which is ordained by G-d has the Jewish priest to establish the authenticity of his activities."

Perhaps the thing that stands out most is that Nadav and Avihu felt able to stand alone and act in this way. Hirsch suggests this shows that, despite their lineage and recent installation as priests, they were not suitable to serve in that role: "the mere fact that ... they could feel the urge for a separate offering of their own, showed that they were not filled with the true spirit of a Jewish priest. A priest is entirely at one with, and part and parcel of, the nation, is in no way separated from it, and only within the nation has his office any meaning before G-d." We can hear an echo of the Psalmist: "How good and how pleasant it is that brothers dwell together. It is like fine oil on the head running down onto the beard, the beard of Aharon, that comes down over the collar of his robe; like the dew of Hermon that falls upon the mountains of Zion. There the L-RD ordained blessing, everlasting life" (Psalm 133:1-3, NJPS). Whatever else they did, Nadav and Avihu violated that unity; their autonomous action put the blessing at risk and split the anointing. So The Name ...

HaShem: literally, Hebrew for 'The Name' - an allusion used to avoid pronouncing the Tetragrammaton, the so-called 'ineffable' name of G–d
HaShem responded with fire. This explains why HaShem said: "Through those near to Me I show Myself holy, and gain glory before all the people" (Vayikra 10:3, NJPS). Just as He is one - "Hear O Israel: The L-RD our G-d, the L-RD is One" (D'varim 6:4) - so He expects His priests and His people to be one.

There is much pressure on exiles today to conform to the majority culture and to compromise our expression of faith. In our efforts to reach out to the world, we are constantly tempted to innovate: by including values or practices from contemporary culture, by softening the absolute claims of the gospel, by blurring the distinctions the Scripture makes between the world and the kingdom of G-d, by obscuring the holiness and judgement of G-d, or by denying the divinity of Yeshua. In none of these areas do we have any freedom, licence or permission to innovate - that is strange fire and will be rejected by our Father as not true to His word and His heart. We must always and only be guided by the Spirit, consistent with the Word.

Does that mean we should all only worship using Latin plain-song chant, make everyone read the Bible in the original languages, or only pray using the 1662 Book of Common Prayer? Far from it! Anything that extends the reach of and access to the gospel must be welcomed and accepted provided that it maintains the integrity of the gospel and "contends for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints" (Jude 3). Our core must remain "one body and one Spirit ... one hope ... one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one G-d and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all" (Ephesians 4:4-6, ESV), with no negotiation, modification or change. That is why Rav Sha'ul "decided not to know about anything among you except Yeshua the Messiah - and Him crucified" (1 Corinthians 2:2, TLV).

1. - David J. A. Clines (ed.) The Concise Dictionary of Classical Hebrew, (Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press, 2009), page 393.

2. - Clines, page 34.

3. - Gordon J. Wenham, The Book of Leviticus, NICOT, (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1979), pages 155.

4. - John E. Hartley, Leviticus, Word Biblical Commentary, (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1992), page 132.

5. - Samuel E. Balentine, Leviticus, Interpretation, (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2002), page 84.

6. - Mark F. Rooker, Leviticus, The New American Commentary, (Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing Group, 2000), page 157.

7. - Walter C. Kaiser, "Leviticus" in The New Interpreter's Bible Commentary Vol I, edited by Leander E. Keck, (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2015), page 574.

Further Study: Luke 13:24-27; Galatians 6:14-16; Philippians 1:27; 1 Timothy 6:12-14

Application: Where do you stand on accommodation with the culture? Have you gone too far and compromised the gospel or are you reserved and unapproachable? Check out the Scriptures for yourself and ask the Spirit to show you where He wants you to draw the line.

Buy your own copy of the Drash Book for Leviticus/Vayikra now at Amazon US or Amazon UK.

© Jonathan Allen, 2025

Messianic Trust Home Page	Join Weekly Email	More Weekly Drashot
Last Week	Support the work of producing this weekly commentary	Next Week
Last Year - 5784	Scripture Index	Next Year - 5786