Surf A Little Torah
Yeshivat Har Etzion

At several points throughout Parshiyot Vayakhel-Pekudei, the Torah lists all the items associated with the Mishkan. In 35:4-19, Moshe briefly reviews all the items Benei Yisrael were to construct or produce. In 39:33-41, the Torah records that Benei Yisrael brought all the items to Moshe and enumerates them one by one. In both these listings, we find something peculiar regarding the sequence of presentation. Immediately after mentioning the mizbach ha-ketoret (incense altar), the Torah lists the shemen ha-mishcha (anointing oil), followed by the ketoret (incense). This sequence appears in 35:15 and 39:38. Instinctively, of course, we would expect the Torah to place the incense immediately following the incense altar. Why would the Torah list the anointing oil in between the mizbach ha-zahav and the ketoret? This counterintuitive sequence is employed as well in the Torah's recounting of the construction of the various vessels of the Mishkan (see 37:25-29). How does the anointing oil relate to the incense that it should be listed in between the incense and incense altar?

Rav Menachem Kasher ("miluim" to Torah Sheleima, vol. 23 - Vayakhel-Pekudei) suggests three explanations. First, according to the interpretation of several commentators to 25:6, the anointing oil and incense shared several common ingredients (referred to by the Torah as "besamim"). This perhaps warranted this association by juxtaposition between these two substances. Secondly, Rabbenu Yosef Bekhor Shor, in his commentary to 35:28, surprisingly indicates that the incense itself was among the items anointed with the shemen ha-mishcha. If so, then the Torah perhaps sought to allude to this requirement by interjecting the shemen ha-mishcha in between the incense and incense altar. However, such a theory does not appear in other works; it is generally assumed that the anointing oil was used only for the kohanim and the vessels of the Mishkan.

Rav Kasher prefers a third possible answer, one which may resolve another difficulty, noted by Rashi in his commentary to Parashat Tzav (Vayikra 8:11). There, in the Torah's account of the consecration of the kohanim and the Mishkan, we read that Moshe sprinkled some anointing oil on the incense altar seven times. Apparently, beyond the standard obligation to anoint all the vessels of the Mishkan (as described in Parashat Ki-Tisa, when the Torah first introduces the anointing oil - Shemot 30:26-28), there was a requirement to sprinkle the oil on the altar seven times. Rashi writes that he does know where in the previous parshiyot Moshe is commanded to conduct this additional sprinkling. Rav Kasher suggests that the Torah may have indicated this obligation by its sequence in the three locations, as discussed, whereby the anointing oil appears in between the incense and incense altar. This may allude to the fact that with regard to the incense altar, the shemen ha-mishcha serves a dual function: it is placed on the altar as a means of consecration just as it was placed on all the other vessels of the Mishkan, and, in addition, Moshe was to sprinkle some of this oil upon the altar, beyond the formal consecration. (Rav Kasher does not, however, explain why an extra sprinkling was necessary on the mizbach ha-zahav.)

*****

The opening verse of Parashat Pekudei refers to "ha-mishkan, mishkan ha-edut" - "the Tabernacle, the Tabernacle of Testimony." Rashi comments that this otherwise verbose expression alludes to the two Temples, rather than the Mishkan. The Temples here are referred to with the term, "mishkan" because "nitmashken" - they were taken collateral, as it were, as a result of Benei Yisrael's misdeeds. The literary association between the words "Mishkan" and "mashkon" (collateral) serves as the basis for this allusion.

The concept of the Batei Mikdash having been taken from us as "collateral" is a very meaningful one. A borrower who gives a valuable item as collateral to his creditor does not intend to forever part with his possession; neither does the lender plan on keeping the collateral as his own. The item is transferred only temporarily, until the borrower can fully repay his debts. Similarly, God never intended to take our (and His) Mikdash from us permanently; its destruction is meant as but a temporary measure until such time as we "repay our debts" through the suffering of exile and proper repentance. Only this can explain why almost two thousand years later Jews still affirm and reaffirm their belief in the ultimate rebuilding of the Temple; understanding that it was initially taken as just a "collateral" naturally results in such a firm belief.

Rav Yaakov Kaminetzky zt"l, in his "Emet L'Yaakov," develops the image of "mashkon" further. When someone comes upon hard financial times, he might sell possessions he deems less important than others in order to pay his expenses. If he is still short on funds, he might be compelled to pawn his valuables and cherished possessions - jewelry, expensive artwork, furniture, etc. But under no circumstances will he sell these valued items. He will pawn them temporarily until he can afford to redeem them.

That the Mikdash was taken as "collateral" testifies to Benei Yisrael's attitude towards it. Benei Yisrael have always looked upon it as a treasured gift; it has always ranked among our most cherished valuables. The subtle allusion in Parashat Pekudei tells us that God destroyed the Temple with this attitude of Benei Yisrael in mind: since we had always cherished it, He did not take it from us permanently; instead, He took it as "collateral."

Rav Yaakov adds that this attitude towards the Mishkan/Mikdash is reflected already in Parashat Vayakhel. While Benei Yisrael's enthusiastic response to the appeal for materials and labor in itself deserves praise and admiration, it is particularly noteworthy in light of the temporary nature of the Mishkan. Ideally, Benei Yisrael were to march from Sinai directly to Eretz Canaan and quickly complete the conquest. As a result of the sin of the spies, however, the entry into the land was delayed forty years; the conquest also took longer than planned. Now the permanent Temple was to be built once Benei Yisrael got settled in the land; thus, the Mishkan was originally intended to function for only a few months, or perhaps a year or two, no more. Yet, Benei Yisrael unhesitatingly gave of their wealth and time towards the construction of the Mishkan. It did not matter that it would serve them for such a short period of time.

Torah and mitzvot are our most treasured and meaningful possession; we therefore mustn't hesitate to give of ourselves towards them.

*****

The most glaring and obvious difficulty when studying Parshiyot Vayakhel-Pekudei is its almost tedious verbosity. By and large, these parshiyot simply report the meticulous execution of the orders concerning the Mishkan issued in Parshiyot Teruma and Tetzaveh. Why did the Torah not simply state, "Betzalel constructed the Mishkan and all its accessories precisely as God had commanded Moshe," or something to that effect, and thus spare the ba'al koreh the trouble of this grueling 214-verse reading? What message does the Torah seek to impress upon us through this repetition?

Among the many answers to this question is one particularly meaningful idea suggested by Rav Avraham Pam zt"l. As the Mishkan symbolizes the "construction" of "God's residence" within the heart of each individual, we may understand Parshiyot Vayakhel-Pekudei as teaching an important lesson relevant to this concept. Quite simply, the Torah wished to emphasize that the planning of Parshiyot Teruma-Tetzaveh was actualized in our parshiyot. The grand notion of a Mishkan did not remain an abstract idea or a plan somewhere in the back of the nation's mind that they would get around to when the time arrives. Rather, upon heathe command they immediately applied themselvediligently and saw the project through to completion. We all have moments - be it on Rosh Hashanah orYom Kippur, or Tu B'Shvat or any other time - when we acknowledge the need for a certain change in our lifestyle and conduct. At times this realization develops into a sincere resolve to improve. More often than not, however, these plans remain unfulfilled and we fail to see them through to completion. The message of Vayakhel-Pekudei is that of "zerizut" - a charged, energetic and vibrant response to the realization of what needs to be done.

Among the more famous symbolic associations of the prohibition against chametz on Pesach is the rabbinic adage, "Mitzva ha-ba le-yadekha al tachmitzena" - do not let a mitzva opportunity "ferment" or turn sour. Just as dough turns to chametz when left sitting without active handling, so can mitzvot spoil when met with passivity. When we confront a mitzva opportunity, when discovering ways to construct our own "Mishkan," we mustn't hesitate, but rather diligently apply ourselves to putting our theoretical plans into action.

*****

Parashat Pekudei begins with a record of the quantities of the various materials used in the construction of the Mishkan. The Seforno, commenting on 38:24, observes that a relatively small amount of gold was necessary for the Mishkan. As outlined in Sefer Melakhim II, King Solomon used much higher quantities of gold when he built the First Temple. Even he was outdone by Herod, who used huge amounts gold in turning the Second Temple into a spectacular edifice. The Seforno adds that the level of "hashra'at Shekhina," God's "residence," in the Mishkan and two Temples is inversely proportional to the amount of gold used. God revealed Himself in the Mishkan - to speak with Moshe - far more frequently than He appeared in the Temple. And in the Second Temple, Chazal say the Shekhina did not reside at all. (The Sefat Emet, however, writes that the Shekhina in fact descended upon the Second Temple with the Hasmoneans' victory and rededication of the Temple.) The Seforno writes that this shows that wealth and luxury do not bring God's Presence among Benei Yisrael; only their actions and deeds.

But if so, then why did God require any gold at all in either of these three Sanctuaries?

Rav Moshe Sternbuch explains that the external appearance, particularly the precious metals, served as a means to enhance the honor and glory of the Mishkan/Mikdash in people's eyes. Clearly, as the Seforno emphasizes, it was not intrinsically necessary as a prerequisite for the Shekhina's arrival. Rather, God wished to impress upon Benei Yisrael the majesty and grandeur of His Sanctuary. He therefore used man's own frame of reference - wealth - to engender within them this perspective on the Mishkan and Temple. The extent to which this was necessary depended on the spiritual level of the people. The generation of the wilderness did not need an overabundance of gold to properly appreciate the meaning of the Mishkan. They were therefore called upon to donate just enough gold to adequately honor God in the Tabernacle. In the First and then Second Temples, however, higher quantities of gold were necessary.

We may add that the Seforno himself, in his commentary to the end of Parashat Yitro, writes that ideally, no gold whatsoever is needed in God's home. Before the golden calf, any structure God chose, no matter how aesthetically crude and austere, could have served as the place of communion between man and God. It was only in the aftermath of that unfortunate incident that Benei Yisrael required a glorious structure to house the Shekhina. It stands to reason, then, that as Benei Yisrael sunk to lower levels more elaborate and expensive structures were needed to serve as God's Temple.

*****

As we mentioned yesterday, Parashat Pekudei begins with an account of the materials used for the construction of the Mishkan and the quantities of each material. In these verses we learn that the half-shekel tax levied upon Benei Yisrael went towards the silver "adanim," or sockets, that were embedded in the ground and formed the foundation of the Mishkan. One hundred of these sockets in total were made from the silver coins donated by Benei Yisrael.

The Ba'al ha-Turim draws an interesting association between these one hundred sockets and a halakha also involving the number one hundred. Namely, the obligation instituted by Chazal to recite one hundred berakhot every day is meant to correspond to these one hundred sockets. (On weekdays, reciting one hundred berakhot generally happens naturally over the course of all three prayers; on Shabbat and Yom Tov, one should try to eat snacks before and after meals to reach this total.)

What are we to make of this association?

Apparently, the Ba'al ha-Turim felt that berakhot, in one sense or another, constitute - or at least represent or signify - the foundation of a Torah lifestyle, of the spiritual ideal embodied by the Mishkan. The very first step towards "hashra'at ha-Shekhina," bringing God's Presence into our lives, is acknowledging that everything in the world occurs only in accordance with His will. When we recite a berakha, we declare that we do not take anything for granted, be it a given morsel of food, water, thunder and lightening, a new garment, or even a mitzva. This awareness, that we are indebted to the Almighty for everything, perhaps forms the basis and foundation of the Mishkan that we must build over the course of our lives. (See Rav Moshe Sternbuch, Ta'am ve-Da'at)

The Rosh Yeshiva, HaRav Yehuda Amital shlit"a, often points to a different symbolic message of these sockets. Whereas all materials used for the Mishkan came as voluntary donations, the sockets were made from the mandatory half-shekel tax. The Rosh Yeshiva suggested that although the Torah allows for and encourages volunteerism, creativity and individual initiative in religious life, the basis and foundation of Judaism is our obligations and responsibilities. One cannot offer voluntary donations before satisfying his basic obligations. For example, one must recite the required prayers before composing and offering his own individual supplications. First we must fulfill that which the Torah specifically requires and demands, and only then, after the foundation is laid, may we add our own, personal, voluntary measures.

*****

Over the last two days we discussed the beginning of Parashat Pekudei, which presents an account of the metals used in the construction of the Mishkan and its accessories. One basic question we have not asked is, why is this necessary? We were already told in Parashat Vayakhel that the people donated more than enough materials for the Mishkan, and the rest of that parasha reported the completion of the Mishkan and most of its vessels. Why must we read the accounting records of how much gold, silver and copper were donated and for what they were used? What do these verses add to our understanding or appreciation of the Mishkan?

Rav Yosef Shaul Nathanson (Divrei Shaul) explains that the Torah here alludes to the basic distinction between the construction of the Mishkan and that of an ordinary building. When one hires a contractor to build a home or office building, what interests him is the final product. The quantity or type of materials used is important only insofar as it affects the outcome, the quality and appearance of the building. If he asks the contractor for a list of materials purchased over the course of the project, he does so only because he wants to hold the contractor accountable for all the expenses for which he charges the client. Accounting for this purpose is certainly unnecessary when the "contractor" is Moshe Rabbenu, the Almighty's loyal servant. However, the listing in Parashat Pekudei indicates that from God's perspective, the final product - the Mishkan - is of less importance than the process involved, specifically Benei Yisrael's generous donation of materials for the Mishkan. He obviously does not require a physical structure for His own good; Hedoes, however, want Benei Yisrael to express their devotion to Him through selfless sacrifice and dto give. The Torah therefore gives an accounting of all the metals donated by Benei Yisrael - as this constituted the primary element of the Mishkan's construction as far as the Almighty was concerned.

This may also explain why this listing enumerates only the metals used in the Mishkan, not any of the other materials (wood, linen, goat skins, etc.), an issue raised by the Netziv in his commentary to these verses. As the Torah wishes to emphasize Benei Yisrael's fervent response to the campaign and willingness to give of their wealth for the building of the Mishkan, it mentions only the most expensive gifts, those that best reflect the nation's generosity and enthusiasm.

*****

Parashat Vayakhel begins, "Moshe assembled the entire community of Benei Yisrael and said to them, 'These are the things that God has commanded you to do them " (35:1). The verse seems to emphasize two points. First, there is an emphasis on the presence of all of Benei Yisrael at this gathering: "kol adat Benei Yisrael" ("the entire community of Benei Yisrael"). Secondly, Moshe himself seems to add two superfluous words: "la-asot otam" - "to do them." Rather than simply saying, "These are the things that God commanded," which clearly would have indicated that the people must "do" that which God commanded, Moshe emphasizes "to do them."

Rav Aharon Lewin, in his ha'Derash ve-he-Iyun, suggests that Moshe here makes reference to a fundamental tenet of the Torah. We believe that God demands concrete actions; good will, broad knowledge, purity of thought and genuine emotion are meaningless when they are not translated into concrete observance of the dictates of the Torah. And for good reason: were the Torah to be interested only in the mind and heart, it would limit itself to the giants of the intellect and spirit. Only those who could truly understand and analyze, or those who can genuinely feel and experience, spirituality could take part in the Torah. But once the Torah demands, first and foremost, actions and deeds, before - though certainly not to the exclusion of - intellectual achievement and spiritual experience, it applies itself to every individual, regardless of intellectual or emotional capabilities.

Moshe therefore assembles all of Benei Yisrael, without exception, to deliver the instructions he received from God - laws that they are "to do." He emphasizes that these laws apply to every individual, because every individual is capable of performing actions, even if they cannot all relate on the same level intellectually or emotionally to the concepts behind these mitzvot.

In this monologue, Moshe introduces the guidelines concerning the construction of the Mishkan. The concept of "They shall make for Me a sanctuary, and I will dwell in their midst" could potentially be seen as one reserved for the elite, for those capable of understanding or experiencing God's "Presence" in the Israelite camp. Moshe, however, impresses upon the nation that through concrete action, everyone can play an important role in this endeavor, of bringing the Almighty's Presence into the Mishkan.

Make Jewish learning part of your week on a regular basis - enroll in the
Virtual Beit Midrash

Yeshivat Har Etzion
Alon Shvut, Israel, 90433
office@etzion.org.il