 |
|
|
The Israel
Koschitzky Virtual Beit Midrash
Mikdash Shiur #22: The History
of the Resting of the Shekhina (Part
XII) The Mishkan –
Le-Khatchila or Be-di'eved (Part I) Rav Yitzchak
Levi And let them make Me a
sanctuary, that I may dwell among them. (Shemot
25:8)
The command to build a sanctuary – Mishkan/Mikdash –
dedicated to God raises a fundamental question regarding the relationship
between God and the created world in general, and between Him and His people in
particular. Is His appearance in one particular place the ideal way that He
chose from the outset to dwell in the world (le-khatchila)? Or does He
perhaps constrict His Shekhina and revelation to one place only because
of man's spiritual state and in accordance with his ability to absorb the Divine
presence (be-di'eved)?
I will not discuss in this framework the philosophical aspects of the
issue, and not even the question of why God chose to rest His name only in one
place. My goal in the coming lectures will be to examine from an exegetical
perspective when the command to build the Mishkan was issued and what the
relationship between the building of the Mishkan and the sin of the
golden calf is. In light of these questions, I will also examine several other
issues, such as when were the priests and Levites were chosen to serve in the
Mishkan, what the primary objective of building the Mishkan was,
and what the attitude of the Rishonim to the sacrificial service was.
Through a clarification of these issues, I will try to answer whether the
construction of the Mishkan and its auxiliary mitzvot (who served
therein and the sacrificial service) were le-khatchila or
be-di'eved. I.
WHEN DID GOD COMMAND MOSHE ABOUT THE
MISHKAN? This lecture will be
devoted to the question of when God commanded Moshe, "And let them make Me a
sanctuary, that I may dwell among them." This question has two different
dimensions: 1) the time of the command; 2) the significance of the
command. We find diverse opinions
on this issue in the Midrash and among the Rishonim. In order to
fully understand the differences between them, I will first present in schematic
form what happens from the time of the revelation at Mount Sinai (Shemot
19) until the end of the book of Shemot:
The time
line:
As is evident from the
table,[1]
the part of the book of Shemot that spans from the revelation at Mount
Sinai to the end of the book is comprised of four main units: the revelation at
Sinai, the command regarding the building of the Mishkan, the sin
involving the golden calf, and the construction of the Mishkan. There is
a certain substantive continuity between the various units. The first unit – the
revelation at Mount Sinai and the giving of the first set of tablets – continues
with the giving of the second set of tablets in unit 3, following the atonement
achieved for the sin involving the golden calf; unit The main question raised
by Chazal and the commentators relates to the time of unit 3, which
Scripture places between the first and second sets of the tablets. Midrash
Tanchuma deals with the matter explicitly: "And let them make Me a
sanctuary, that I may dwell among them." When was this portion dealing with the
Mishkan stated? On the very day of Yom Kippur. Even though the
portion dealing with the Mishkan is recorded before the incident
involving the [golden] calf, Rabbi Yehuda bar Shalom said: There is no
chronological order in the events of Scripture, as it is stated: "Her paths
wander, and she is ignorant" (Mishlei 5:6) - the paths of the Torah and
its portions are confused. On Yom Kippur, Moshe was told: "Let them make Me a
sanctuary." From where [do we know this]? For Moshe went up on the sixth of
Sivan and spent forty days and forty nights [on Mount Sinai], and then another
forty, and then another forty, altogether a hundred and twenty. And you find
that on Yom Kippur they achieved atonement, and on that very day the Holy One,
blessed be He, said, "And let them make Me a sanctuary, that I may dwell among
them," so that all the nations should know that that they achieved atonement
for the incident involving the [golden] calf. And therefore it is called the
"tabernacle of testimony" (Shemot 38:21), for it serves as testimony
to all of mankind that the Holy One, blessed be He, dwells in your sanctuary.
(Tanchuma Teruma, 8)
Based on the rule that there is no chronological order in the events of
Scripture, the Midrash establishes that the command regarding the
building of the Mishkan was given to Moshe on Yom Kippur,[3]
at the end of the one hundred and twenty day period (three times forty days)
that began on the 6th of Sivan, that is to say, after the sin
involving the golden calf and the pardon issued in its regard, described in
Parashat Ki-Tisa. The command to build the Mishkan was thus a
consequence of that sin and its atonement. According to this approach, the
events are not recorded in the Torah in chronological order. Among those who
followed in the footsteps of this Midrash were Rashi (Shemot
31:18, s.v. va-yiten el Moshe; ibid. 33:11, s.v. ve-shav el
ha-machaneh) and the Seforno (ibid. 24:18) (Seforno maintains that the
command regarding the building of the Mishkan was not given on Yom Kippur
itself, but during the third forty day period, that is, between the
1st of Elul and Yom Kippur).
In contrast, the Ramban argues that the events in question are recorded
in chronological order[4]
in accordance with the plain sense of Scripture. This is also the understanding
of the Ibn Ezra (in his short commentary to Shemot 33:17) and Shadal (in
his commentary to Yirmiyahu 7:22). The Ramban expresses his position in
several places (Shemot 25:2; 35:1; Vayikra 8:1); here I shall cite
his words in his commentary to Vayikra 25:1: At the beginning of the
first forty days of the first tablets, Moshe wrote in the book of the covenant
all the words of God and all the judgments stated there. And he sprinkled the
blood of the covenant on the people (Shemot 24:5). And when they sinned
with the [golden] calf and the tablets were broken, it was as if the covenant
with the Holy One, blessed be He, was cancelled. And when the Holy One, blessed
be He, was appeased by Moshe [and gave him] the second tablets, He commanded him
about a new covenant, as it is stated: "Behold, I make a covenant" (Shemot
34:10). And He restored the severe mitzvot that had been stated in
Mishpatim in the first covenant… And at the time of the first
covenant, which was during the first forty days, Moshe was commanded about the
Mishkan. And when the Holy One, blessed be He, was appeased by
him and commanded him to make a second covenant for them, Moshe went down and
commanded them all that God had commanded him on Mount Sinai, including the
building of the Mishkan. Then Moshe assembled the entire congregation of
the people of Israel and said to them as at first: "These are the things which
the Lord has commanded that you should do them" (Shemot 35:1) with
respect to the work of the Mishkan.
According to the Ramban, the command regarding the building of the
Mishkan was issued before the sin of the golden calf and without any
connection to it. The events occurred in the order that they appear in
Scripture. Moshe went up to Mount Sinai and stayed there for forty days, during
the course of which he was commanded about the building of the Mishkan;
then he went down from the mountain with the tablets at the time of the sin of
the calf; following the forty days of prayer for a pardon regarding that sin and
the forty days of receiving the second set of tablets, Moshe went down and
commanded Israel about the building of the Mishkan – the very same
command that he had received during the first forty days on the
mountain. II.
PROOFS IN SUPPORT OF EACH OF THESE POSITIONS I will now present the
exegetical proofs in support of each side of the disagreement (the substantive
significance of each position will be discussed later). 1)
The Position of the Ramban As stated, this is the
simpler position, for there is no hint in the portion dealing with the command
to build the Mishkan of anything that would lead us to assume that the
events are not reported in their chronological order. In addition, the Torah
mentions a sanctuary even before the command recorded in Parashat Teruma;
in the previous lecture we noted the mention of the Mikdash in the Song
of the Sea, and in the command regarding first-fruits, it is stated: "The first
of the firstfruits of your land you shall bring to the house of the Lord your
God" (Shemot 23:19). The many linguistic and
substantive parallels between the revelation at Sinai and the Mishkan,
which are noted by the Ramban in several places (his commentary to Shemot
25:2; 40:34; and in his introduction to the book of Bamidbar), teach us
that the two stories constitute a single continuum. So, too, the repeated
emphasis that Moshe must do as God had showed him on the mountain (Shemot
25:40; 26:30; 27:8) suggests that a command was issued le-khatchila
to build an earthly Mishkan similar to the heavenly Mishkan.[5] 2)
The Position of the Tanchuma and Rashi This is the novel
position; it is difficult to find anything in the plain sense of the verses that
implies that the sin of the golden calf preceded the command to build the
Mishkan; indeed, neither the Tanchuma nor Rashi adduce textual
proofs to their position. Several suggestions may be made as to what brought
them to this conclusion: a)
The sin involving the
golden calf is a continuation of the story of the revelation at Mount Sinai.
In the description of
Moshe's ascent of the mountain (Shemot 24:12-18), it is stated that the
objective is to give him "the tablets of stone, and the Torah, and the
commandments" (ibid. v. 12). The fulfillment of this objective is described in
the opening verse of the account of the incident of the golden calf – "And He
gave to Moshe, when He had made an end of speaking to him upon Mount Sinai, two
tablets of the Testimony, tablets of stone, written with the finger of God"
(ibid. 31:18). The description of Moshe's descent from the mountain together
with Yehoshua, which is also found in the story of the sin of the calf (ibid.
32:15-19), continues the description of their ascent. Perhaps it based on this
that these commentators conclude that the story of the revelation at Sinai
continues with the giving of the tablets, and that the command regarding the
building of the Mishkan is not part of this story. b)
The sin involving the golden calf should
have cancelled any command to build a Mishkan that was issued previously.
Rashi may think that had
Israel been commanded to build the Mishkan prior to the sin involving the
calf, that command should have been cancelled by the sin, and it would have had
to be reissued. Indeed, the Ibn Ezra, who accepts the opposing view, sees in the
words, "For I will not go up in the midst of you" (ibid. 33:3), an allusion to a
cancellation of the Mishkan in the wake of the sin. Thus, he writes in
his long commentary: "They shall not make a tabernacle, for I shall not dwell
among the children of Israel."[6] The Ramban answers this argument (in his
commentary to Shemot 35:1) by saying that with the pardon of the sin of
the golden calf, the decree canceling the command to build the Mishkan
was revoked, and the original command was fully restored:
When the Holy One,
blessed be He, was appeased, and He gave him the second tablets and made a new
covenant with him that God would go in their midst, they returned to their
former station and to their matrimonial love, and it was clear that His
Shekhina would be among them as He had commanded at first, "And let them
make Me a sanctuary, that I may dwell among them." And therefore Moshe commanded
then now all that he had been commanded at first. c)
The selection of the
tribe of Levi came in the wake of the sin involving the golden calf.
Another explanation of
Rashi's approach is based on his position that the tribe of Levi was chosen for
its priestly and Levitical functions in the aftermath of its conduct during the
incident involving the golden calf. Regarding Moshe's words to the Levites
during that incident, "Consecrate yourselves today to the Lord, even every man
against his son, and against his brother" (Shemot 32:29), Rashi comments:
"By this very act, install yourselves as priests of the Omnipresent." He makes a
similar comment on Moshe's words in Devarim 10:8 – "At that time, the
Lord separated the tribe of Levi, to bear the ark of the covenant of the Lord,
to stand before the Lord to minister to Him and to bless in His name, to this
day:" "At that time – In the first year of the exodus from Egypt, when you
sinned by worshipping the golden calf, but the sons of Levi did not thus sin, at
that time God separated them from you… To bear the ark – The Levites. To stand
before the Lord to minister to Him and to bless in His name – The priests, this
referring to the 'raising of the hands.'" According to this explanation, the
command regarding the selection of Aharon for the priesthood in the framework of
the command regarding the Mishkan (Shemot 28:1) is, according to
Rashi, a consequence of the selection of the entire tribe of Levi; he is
therefore forced to push off the command regarding the Mishkan until
after the sin involving the golden calf.[7]
Those who disagree with Rashi would argue that a distinction must be made
between the selection of Aharon for the priesthood, which was not connected to
the sin of the golden calf, and the selection of the tribe of Levi, which took
place later (Ramban, commentary to Devarim 10:8).[8] 4)
Parashat Mishpatim
was taught during the
first forty days. According to an
alternative understanding, Moshe could not have been commanded about the
Mishkan during the first forty days (between the 6th of Sivan
and the 17th of Tamuz), for it was during this period that God taught
Moshe the many laws found in Parashat Mishpatim. Those who disagree will
of course argue that it is entirely possible that Moshe was commanded about both
matters during the same forty days.
In my humble opinion, the simple understanding is that of the Ramban; the
events are recorded in the Torah in the chronological order of their occurrence,
and t the command regarding the Mishkan preceded the sin of the golden
calf. III. THE
THEOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE RAMBAN'S POSITION: THE MISHKAN IS
LE-KHATCHILA
Thus far I have discussed the two main approaches and the exegetical
proofs that can be adduced in support of each. Now I wish to discuss the
substantive-theological question: Is the Mishkan the way that God chose
le-khatchila to dwell among His nation, or was the command about the
Mishkan only issued bedi'eved, as a result of the sin?[9]
Put differently, is the Mishkan a continuation of God's revelation and
the resting of His Shekhina at the time of the giving of the Torah, or is
it a continuation of the sin of the golden calf and its
repair?
I will devote the next lecture to the view of the Tanchuma and
Rashi. I wish now to deal with the view of the Ramban, according to which the
building of the Mishkan was le-khatchila. 1)
The connection between the Mishkan and the Creation and the Garden of
Eden In lecture no. 10, I
dealt with the connection between the Mikdash and the creation of the
world. We saw that the midrashim present the Mikdash as the
ultimate objective and completion of creation; we discussed the view that the
entire world was created from the even ha-shetiya in the Holy of
Holies,[10]
and we examined the many parallels between the description of the creation and
the account of the building of the Mishkan and the service therein. In
lecture no. 12, I noted the parallels between the resting of the Shekhina
in the Mishkan and the Mikdash and the Garden of Eden, both with
respect to the external and material landscape (the river issuing forth from
Eden, the trees in the garden) and with respect to the spiritual landscape (the
walking of the Shekhina in the place, the speech and meeting with man,
the command to work and preserve, the keruvim, and the priestly
garments). We discussed the two complementary meanings of this parallelism: the
Mikdash as a continuation of the Garden of Eden in this world and its
perpetuation for future generations, and the Mikdash as repair of the sin
committed in the Garden of Eden. From all the proofs adduced in these lectures,
it clearly emerges that already from the time of creation (and at the latest,
from the time of Adam's sin), it was God's intention to rest His Shekhina
within the four walls of the Mishkan/Mikdash. In addition, note must
be taken in this context – the Mishkan as a mitzva that was issued
le-khatchila – of the connections between the Mishkan and Mount
Sinai and the exodus from Egypt. 2)
The Mishkan and Mount Sinai Many midrashim
portray the command regarding the Mishkan as a direct continuation of the
revelation at Mount Sinai and the receiving of the Torah. For
example: And when Israel accepted
the kingdom of heaven with joy, saying, "All that the Lord has said will we do,
and obey" (Shemot 24:7), the Holy One, blessed be He, immediately said to
Moshe, "Speak to the children of Israel that they bring Me an offering" (ibid.
25:5). (Tanna de-Bei Eliyahu, Eliyahu Rabba, Parasha
17) "That they bring [to] Me
an offering" – I gave you My Torah; take Me as well. And from where do we know
that 'to Me [li]' comes in place of 'Me' [oti]? As it is stated:
"But I [li] am your servant" (I Melakhim 1:26). (Torah
Sheleima, Shemot 25, 2, 12 in the name of Lekach
Tov)
And this is the way that M.D. Cassuto understood this continuity
(commentary to Shemot, p. 221): In order that we be able
to understand the significance and the objective of the Mishkan, we must
pay attention to the fact that the people of Israel, after having merited the
Divine revelation at Mount Sinai, were about to journey on from there and
distance themselves from the site of the revelation. As long as they were camped
at the site, they were able to feel God's closeness; once they set off on their
journey, it would have seemed to them as if the package was unraveling, were it
not for the fact that there was among them a tangible symbol of God's presence
in their midst. The Mishkan was meant to serve as such a symbol. It was
not for naught that this portion appears immediately following the portion that
tells of the making of the covenant at Mount Sinai. The connection between
Israel and the Mishkan is the ceaseless continuation of the connection
created at Mount Sinai between the people and their God. The people of Israel
who dwelt as tribes at each encampment could see the Mishkan standing in
the middle of the camp from every direction. The existence of the Mishkan
before their very eyes proved to them that just as the glory of the Lord
rested on Mount Sinai, so too does He rest among them in all the places of their
wanderings in the wilderness. It is to this idea that Scripture alludes when it
says: "And let them make Me a sanctuary, that I may dwell among them." And to
this also alludes the clear parallel between the concluding words of the
previous portion regarding the resting of the Shekhina on Mount Sinai and
the concluding words of the book [of Shemot], which describe in similar
language the resting of the Shekhina in the
Mishkan.
Indeed, the connection between Mount Sinai and the Mishkan is not
only in the substance of the revelation but also in its very nature: the
building of the Mishkan and its vessels in accordance with the form shown
by God to Moshe on the mountain; the revelation of the Shekhina through
fire, a cloud, and speech; the distinction between the various zones of
sanctity; the altar and the sacrifices – in all these things we find parallels
between the two revelations (as we saw at length in lecture
10). 3)
The Mishkan and the Exodus from Egypt God Himself asserts that
the goal of the exodus from Egypt, unconnected to the giving of the Torah, is
the resting of His Shekhina. This is evident from the clear parallel
between the words of God to Moshe at the beginning of Parashat Va-era and
the words of the Torah at the end of the command regarding the
Mishkan: And I will take you to
Me for a people, and I will be to you a God. And you shall know that I am the
Lord your God, who brings you out from under the burdens of Egypt. (Shemot
6:7) And I will dwell among
the children of Israel, and will be their God. And they shall know that I am the
Lord their God, Who brought them out of the land of Egypt, that I may dwell
among them. I am the Lord their God. (Shemot 29:45-46)[11]
The objective of the exodus from Egypt was the resting of the
Shekhina in the Mishkan. This is stated explicitly in the
Tanchuma: "And it came to pass on
the day that Moshe finished" (Bamidbar 7:1). Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi
said: The Holy One, blessed be He, stipulated with Israel while they were in
Egypt that He was taking them out only in order that they should make a
Mishkan and He would rest His Shekhina on them, as it is stated:
"And they shall know that I am the Lord their God, Who brought them out of the
land of Egypt, that I may dwell among them." When the Mishkan was set up,
the Shekhina came down and rested among them, at which time all those
conditions were fulfilled. Therefore it is written: "the Mishkan"
(Bamidbar, ibid.), to fulfill what the Holy One, blessed be He,
stipulated, so he did. (Tanchuma Nasa, 22)[12]
The Ramban in his introduction to the book of Shemot also writes
that the redemption from Egypt was completed with the building of the
Miskkan and the resting of the Shekhina
therein: The Torah finished the
book of Bereishit, which is the book of creation that deals with
the origin of the world and the fashioning of all created beings and the
happenings of the patriarchs… and after it finished the creation, it began
another book… And the book of Shemot is devoted to the first exile… and
the redemption from it… And the exile was not over until they returned to their
station and to the level of their ancestors. When they went out of Egypt, even
though they left the house of bondage, they were still regarded as being exiles,
because they were in a land that was not theirs, lost in the wilderness. And
when they came to Mount Sinai and built the Mishkan, and the Holy One,
blessed be He, returned and rested His Shekhina among them, they then
returned to the station of their ancestors… and they then were regarded as
redeemed. Therefore, this book concludes with the completion of the Mishkan
and with the glory of the Lord filling it at all
times.
To summarize, starting with the description of the creation itself,
continuing with the Garden of Eden, and concluding with the exodus from Egypt
and the revelation at Mount Sinai, the Torah clearly alludes to the
Mishkan, and this course is completed in a practical sense with the
building of the Mishkan and the resting of the Shekhina therein at
the end of the book of Shemot. In all these contexts, the Torah alludes
that the purpose of creation was the resting of the Shekhina in the
Mishkan – le-khatchila, in accordance with the Ramban and those who
follow in his path. Summary
We saw the two main approaches regarding the chronology of the command
regarding the building of the Mishkan. According to the simpler approach,
the Torah is arranged chronologically, so that the command regarding the
Mishkan is a direct continuation of the revelation at Mount Sinai;
according to the second, more novel approach, God commanded about the Mishkan
following the sin involving the golden calf.
After examining the exegetical issue and the proofs supporting each side,
we began to discuss the spiritual significance of the resting of the
Shekhina according to the approach that that the building of the
Mishkan was le-khatchila, in light of the fact that the central
events in the Torah until the building of the Mishkan – the creation of
the world and the Garden of Eden, the exodus from Egypt and the revelation at
Mount Sinai – all lead to the resting of the Shekhina in the
Mishkan.
In the next lecture, we will examine the spiritual significance of the
approach according to which the command regarding the Mishkan was issued
in the wake of the sin of the golden calf. (Translated by David
Strauss) [1] We have included this
table as a general framework, without getting into the thick of the sources and
the various views and calculations in Chazal and the commentators
regarding the events under discussion. [2] In both units, mention
is also made of the mitzva of Shabbat (31:12-17;
35:2-3). [3] There is special
significance to the fact that the command was issued on Yom Kippur, the day of
forgiveness, pardon, and atonement. With respect to its sacrifices, Yom Kippur
parallels the eighth day of milu'im, and in many senses is the day on
which the dedication of the Mishkan is renewed every year. It is not by
chance that in the days of Shlomo, the Mikdash was also dedicated on Yom
Kippur. [4] The Ramban is
consistent with his own position throughout his commentary to the Torah; he uses
the principle that "there is no chronological order in the events in the Torah"
as little as possible, as opposed to Rashi, who invokes this rule
frequently. [5] Those who disagree
would argue that even though the Mishkan was be-di'eved, in the
wake of the sin, it still had to be built in correspondence with the heavenly
sanctuary. [6] See, for example, the
Seforno's commentary on the verse, "And He said, My presence shall go with you,
and I will give you rest" (33:14). [7] This issue was
discussed by Rav Mordechai Sabbato in his "Ha-Kohanim Ha-Leviyim U-Ma'aseh
Ha-Egel," Megadim 2, pp. 23-32. [8] This is subject to a
broader disagreement, relating both to the order of the selection and the nature
of the selection: Were the priests selected first, and in their wake the entire
tribe of Levi, as argued by the Ramban, or was the tribe of Levi selected in the
aftermath of the sin, and in the wake of that selection, Aharon was appointed to
the priesthood, as argued by Rashi? I shall return to this issue in lecture no.
24. [9] It is important to
distinguish between the chronological question of what actually came first, and
the theological issue of what the best way for the Shekhina to rest in
this world is. It is possible to maintain that the sin involving the golden calf
came first, but it is not the reason for the command (although anyone who
invokes the rule that there is no chronological order to the events in the Torah
must, of course, explain why the Torah deviated from the chronological
order). [10] It can, of course, be
argued that the command regarding the Mishkan resulted from the sin of
the golden calf, but the building of the Mikdash on Mount Moriya is
le-khatchila. [11] The prophecy of
Yechezkel describes a similar situation in the future: "And My tabernacle shall
be with them: and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. Then the
nations shall know that I the Lord do sanctify Israel, when My sanctuary shall
be in the midst of them for evermore" (Yechezkel
37:27-28). [12] So, too, we find in
Tanchuma Bechukotai 3: "They left Egypt in order that they should build
the Mishkan and the Shekhina should rest among them, as it is
stated: "And they shall know that I am the Lord their God, Who brought them out
of the land of Egypt, that I may dwell among
them." | ||||||||||||||||||||||