Leviticus 16:1

And the Lord spake with Mosheh, after that the two sons of Aharon the high priest had died (or, the priests the two elder sons of Aharon had died) at the time of their offering extraneous fire (aisha baria) before the Lord; died they by the flaming fire.

after the death After warning Israel not to die [15:31], God now tells Moshe to warn Aaron not to die as his two sons died [10:2].

they drew near The heh at the end of this verbal noun (which appears in, “to approach the work” [Exodus 36:2]) here reverts to a tav , following the pattern for the feminine heh . Rabbi Abu al-Faraj Furqan ibn Asad erred when, in his system of thought, he classified the word as a noun.

AND THE ETERNAL SPOKE UNTO MOSES, AFTER THE DEATH OF THE TWO SONS OF AARON. The meaning of the phrase after the death of the two sons of Aaron, is that immediately after the death of his sons He had warned Aaron against [drinking] wine or strong drink [when going into the Tent of Meeting], so that he should not die, and now He told Moses in addition to warn him so that he should not die when he draws near the Eternal [even in a sober condition, but at a time when he is not commanded to do so]. It is likely that these two commandments were both conveyed on the day after the death of Aaron’s sons, for on the actual day [when the deaths occurred, Aaron] was a mourner, and the holy spirit does not rest upon man in moments of sadness, and the communication concerning the prohibition against wine came to Aaron, and in that selfsame day this commandment [stated in the section before us] was also told to Moses. does not mean immediately after their death, since it was preceded by G-d’s command to Aaron. For had the phrase meant “immediately following their death,” then it would have been possible that this command came to Moses on the day of the death of Aaron’s sons. But now that the Divine command to Aaron preceded it, and that could not have taken place on the day of the tragedy [for the reason explained in the text], but only on the following day, it follows that the Divine command given to Moses, as contained in this section, was also communicated to him on the day after the death of Aaron’s sons. Ramban’s stressing of this is obviously intended to take exception to what Chizkuni clearly writes in his commentary, that it was on the selfsame day that the death occurred that the command contained in this section was communicated. On this Ramban commented: “The holy spirit does not rest upon man in moments of sadness.” Scripture, however, preceded the prohibitions with which He warned Israel that they die not in their uncleanness, when they defile My Tabernacle that is in the midst of them, [before dealing with the commands specific to Aaron], and only afterwards He wrote the warning [applying to] the individual [i.e., this section, which was to be conveyed by Moses to Aaron, as the verse states: And the Eternal said unto Moses: ‘Speak unto Aaron thy brother etc.’]. But in my opinion the whole Torah is written in consecutive order, and in all places where He changed the order, placing an earlier event in a later position, …

אחרי מות, G’d told Moses to warn Aaron so that he would not die as had his sons because of unauthorised entry into the Temple.

וידבר ה' אל משה אחרי מות, normally, the expression וידבר in the Holy Tongue is not used to describe specific parts of the verbal message but applies to the entire speech, characterising its nature. This is the reason why we find so many times the word לאמור, i.e. אמירה after the introduction וידבר. This is why verse 2 continues with ויאמר אליו דבר אל אהרן אחיך, He said to him: “say to your brother Aaron,” without a change of subject between the two verses. Seeing that the thrust of the message, i.e. its being connected to the immediately preceding death of the two sons of Aaron, Nadav and Avihu, had not changed, there was no need to once again identity the speaker, i.e. G’d, by adding the words ויאמר אליו, “He said to him,” as is customary in similar constructions in the Torah. However, according to a minority of our sages (Torat Kohanim 1,3) there were two separate addresses by G’d and we would then have to understand the verse as follows: one concerned the prohibition for Aaron not to enter the sanctuary any time he felt like it otherwise he would be courting death. The second time was after Aaron’s sons had died; Aaron was to enter only at G’d’s command. The warning this time was more urgent, warning that G’d’s presence in the sanctuary would be visible from the outside by means of the cloud hovering over the Tabernacle. At that point the voice of G’d addressed itself to Moses again, issuing instructions concerning the conduct of prophets and High priests in future generations. We find a reference to such matters in Samuel I 3,3-4 where Samuel is reported as lying down in the sanctuary of the Lord when G’d called to him.

אחרי מות, “after the death;” when we read in Kohelet 9,2: כטוב כחוטא, “as is the good man so is the sinner,” this is a reference to the two sons of Aaron who died only on account of having arrogated to themselves the right to preempt their elders Moses and Aaron in issuing a religious ruling. This is the meaning of the Talmud, tractate Yuma, folio 53, where Rabbi Eliezer explained the word חוטא as referring to their having done so. What precisely was the “new” ruling that they revealed? They interpreted the line: ונתנו בני אהרן הכהן אש על המזבח, ”the sons of Aaron the priest placed fire (man made) on the altar;” (in addition to the fire that came down from the heaven). (Leviticus 1,7) Their sin was basically the same as that of Korach and his congregation, and that is why both were burned to death by heavenly fire. (Compare Tanchuma on our portion, section 1) Rabbi Acha son of Ze-ira adds (in the Tanchuma) that this is also the meaning of Job 37,1: אף לזאת יחרד לבי ויתר ממקומו, “also on account of this my heart quakes and leaps from its place;” he compares what happened to the staff of Aaron when it was placed inside the Sanctuary which sprouted almonds, whereas his sons when they entered the Sanctuary were burned to death. (Numbers 17,23) He also contrasts the fact that the Roman general Titus dared to enter the Holy of Holies, and he left it unharmed although surely he was less qualified to have entered such sacred grounds. He had entered in order to blaspheme, whereas the sons of Aaron had entered in order to offer incense to the Lord. (Tanchuma section 4 on our portion) [No wonder at the reaction of Job when he reflected on this phenomenon. Ed.] This phenomenon is also the subject of Psalms 78,63: בחורי אכלו אש ובתולותיו לא הוללו, “Fire consumed their young men and their maidens remained unwed.” The psalmist explains the reason that the sons of Aaron had to die as being that they had failed to get married. They had described themselves as so superior that no one was good enough to become their wives. They overestimated the value of having been born into such prominent families as their father and uncle. The result of their haughtiness was that they died without leaving behind any children. (Tanchuma section 6) In other words, no one remembered them.