Tabernacle, National and Individual Lives

And it came to pass in the first month in the second year, on the first day of the month, that the tabernacle was set up (hukam).                                Exodus 40:17

Ba’al haTurim connects our verse’s use of the word “hukam” with that in connection with King David [II Samuel 23:1] and in connection with Jonadab ben Rechav [Jeremiah 35:14].

My father explained that the common use of the word “hukam” teaches that it is through the establishment of the tabernacle, bringing the Shechina into the midst of Israel, that the kingdom of David, the national life of Israel, was established. As well, the lives of individuals, such as Jonadab, were established through their relationship with the Shechina. Therefore, the tabernacle influences both the national and individual lives.

Waving Brass and Gold

And the brass of the offering (hatenufa, literally “the waving”) was seventy talents and two thousand and four hundred shekels.                                     Exodus 38:29

Naḥmanides notes that in Parashat vaYakhel, the word “hatenufa” is used only in connection with gold, because those who brought gold, as it were, waved their hands to bring attention to their contribution.

My father explained that in our parasha, which conveys the account of the contributions to the Tabernacle, even the contribution of brass merits the addition of the word “hatenufa,” to praise everyone who contributed wholeheartedly, even if he was unable to contribute the most valuable items.

The Tabernacle as Man

These (eileh) are the accounts of the tabernacle, the tabernacle of the testimony …                                                            Exodus 38:21

My father noted that the main purpose of the Tabernacle was to hold the tablets of testimony, that is, for Israel to appreciate the need to fulfill the mitzvot. The true testimony for Israel is its fulfillment of God’s will, which sanctifies the nation.

In a sense, the Tabernacle symbolizes man. Just as the Ark of Testimony is the essence of the Tabernacle, and not something external, so too, Torah must be an integral part of the Jew and dwell within him, becoming part of his essence. Thus, our Sages teach that the 248 positive mitzvot correspond to the 248 limbs of the human being, and the 365 negative mitzvot to the body’s 365 sinews. 

True Accounting

These (eileh) are the accounts of the tabernacle, the tabernacle of the testimony, as they were rendered according to the commandment of Moses, through the service of the Levites, by the hand of Itamar, the son of Aaron the priest.                                   Exodus 38:21

My father commented that the true accounting of one’s life is in what he has contributed to others, for only this, and not what he amassed for himself, accompanies him eternally.

          Our Sages taught that the word “eileh” (opposed to the word “v’eileh,” with the conjunctive letter vav) delineates what is written from what preceded it. Perhaps in our Parasha the Torah wishes to distinguish between the contributions the Children of Israel made to the construction of the Tabernacle and their contributions toward the golden calf. Beyond the simple message of disqualifying the people’s contributions to the golden calf, there is an additional significant point. The people did not ask for an accounting of the use of their contributions to the golden calf, while here Moses offered an accounting of the use of the contributions to the erection of the Tabernacle. While, clearly, Moses was above suspicion of malfeasance in supervising the use of communal funds, the Torah teaches the moral lesson that even the greatest leader must be accountable for all of his public actions.

Only Moses was Able to Assemble the Tabernacle

And they brought the Tabernacle to Moses, the tent, and all its furnishings, its clasps, its boards, its bars, and its pillars and its sockets. Exodus 39:33

No one but Moses was able to assemble the Tabernacle. Rashi

My father suggested that Rashi’s intention is that it was only Moses, the man of spirit, who was able to actually assemble the Tabernacle, for without the spiritual dimension the Tabernacle would remain merely a material structure. Thus, Moses’ contribution was endowing the Tabernacle with its spiritual aspect.

However, Rashi, based upon a Midrash Tanhuma, continues and tells us that Moses asked God: “How is it possible to establish the Tabernacle through man?”, and presents God’s response: “You deal with it with your hands.” Moses appeared to assemble the Tabernacle, but it actually assembled itself. This is the meaning of the verse [40:17]: “The Tabernacle was erected.”

The complementary point of the Midrash is that even Moses was unable to assemble the Tabernacle without divine assistance. The Midrash teaches us that we must do what is incumbent upon us and then we will benefit from divine help.

Ba’al haTurim notes that the verse [40:18] stresses: “Moses established the Tabernacle,” and comments that this includes the Heavenly Tabernacle. My father pointed out the lesson is the importance of man acting first. When we fulfill our commitments on earth, it can have a great impact in heaven as well. 

The Broad Strokes of Exodus

With The reading of Parashat Pekudei, we complete the Book of Shemot (Exodus). An analysis of the themes of Shemot leads us to discern several levels, which are complementary, rather than mutually exclusive.

In broad strokes, we can say that Shemot presents three major topics: redemption, revelation and sanctuary. The early parashot deal with the enslavement in Egypt and the exodus (hence the English name of the Book of Shemot). Shemot then describes God’s revelation at Mount Sinai, when He gave the Torah to the People of Israel, who accepted, saying in unison “na’aseh v’nishma” (we will do and listen). Shemot concludes with the donations to and erection of the Tabernacle.

My father pointed out that these topics are directly related to, and dependent upon, each other. Freedom was the necessary prerequisite to be able to accept the Torah and live by God’s laws, because one who is not free can neither assume nor discharge responsibilities.

On the other hand, freedom has little, if any, value unless one assumes responsibility. As our Sages taught “none is free, save he who deals with Torah;” thus, redemption was not an end in itself, but rather the means for bringing the Children of Israel to Mount Sinai to receive the Torah.

Although the revelation at Mount Sinai gave meaning to the redemption, it also was not an end in itself. The ideal of Torah is building a better society and bringing salvation to mankind as a whole, through sanctifying our daily lives and all our actions. Building the Tabernacle represented the place from which Godliness would radiate to inspire, sanctify and spiritually elevate the people towards completion of the goal of the revelation.

On another plane, Shemot deals with each of the three spheres of sanctity Judaism recognizes: of time, of place and of man.

God specifically gave the first mitzva Israel received as a people, sanctifying the month [Exodus 12:1ff], in anticipation of, and preparation for, the exodus from Egypt, since time has meaning only to free people. A slave’s time is not his, but his master’s. Only a free person can use time, for good or for bad.

A large portion of Shemot, the parashot which deal with the Tabernacle, is devoted to the sanctity of place. Rashi, on the second verse of  Parashat vaYakhel [35:2], comments that Moses  mentioned the law of Shabbat prior to his appeal for the building of the tabernacle to stress that building the tabernacle does not override Shabbat, essentially teaching that the sanctity of time takes precedence over the sanctity of place. Yet, the sanctity of man overrides Shabbat, for even if there is only a possibility of saving a life, the prohibitions of Shabbat are waived. Thus, we conclude that the sanctity of man is the highest level of holiness.

The Holy One, blessed be He, who is the source of all sanctity, endowed every human with a special sanctity by creating them in His image. Nonetheless, Israel’s unique sanctity, which we received when we accepted Torah at the foot of Mount Sinai, exceeds that of the other nations of the world, and therefore is the highest level of sanctity.

Because God endowed Israel with power over the sanctity of time, when the Sanhedrin (the supreme religious court) existed, the new month was sanctified not by the appearance of the new moon, but only as a result of the judges’ proclamation that the month had begun. Thus, Israel’s sanctity which allows the sanctification of time is recognized in the blessing on the holidays, “Blessed are You God, Who has sanctified Israel and time.”

On an additional level, the themes of Shemot correspond to our Sages’ statement [Ethics of the Fathers 1:2]: “Upon three things does the world stand: upon Torah, upon avoda (service) and upon g’milut hassadim (acts of kindness):” Torah which Israel accepted at Sinai, avoda, dealt with in the parashot of the Tabernacle, and g’milut hassadim contained both in the laws governing relations between fellow-men [Parashat Mishpatim] and in the mitzva of contributing to the Tabernacle, the paradigm for giving charity.

May we be privileged to see the full realization of each of the themes of Shemot.

Moses and Elijah

In Parashat Ki Tissa Moses completes his first stay of forty days on the heights of Mount Sinai, “the Mountain of the Lord.”

            Yet, the Master of all Prophets is not the only prophet to spend time on Horeb, as we read in I Kings 19:8:

And he (Elijah) got up, ate and drank, and, on the strength of that meal, traveled forty days and nights until he reached Horeb, the mountain of God.

This verse highlights the comparison between Moses at Horeb and Elijah at Horeb. As Moses spent forty days and forty nights [Exodus 24:28] on Mount Horeb, so Elijah “traveled forty days and nights” to reach the mountain of God. And as Moses did not eat or drink during his forty days on Horeb [ibid. 34:28], so Elijah traveled to Horeb forty days and forty nights without eating.

The parallels between Moses and Elijah are so blatant that the Midrash [Tanḥuma, I Kings 209] states: “We find that Moses and Elijah are equal in all things.”

P’sikta Rabbati [Piska 4] presents a list of twenty-six parallels between the two prophets who reached Horeb. Among the parallels is “Moses was a prophet and Elijah was a prophet,” a comment which, of course, can be made concerning any of the forty-eight prophets, and is certainly not a parallel unique to Moses and Elijah. It is clear that the author of the P’skita included this parallel in order to reach the “magic” number of twenty-six, the gematriya of the holy name of God.

A number of the parallels cited by P’sikta Rabbati are directly related to Horeb, among them:

Concerning Moses, the verse [Exodus 34:6] states: “God passed by before him;” and of Elijah, the verse [I Kings 19:11] states: “And behold, God passed by.”

Moses was placed by God “in a crevice in the mountain” [Exodus 33:22], while Elijah “entered a cave there (Horeb) and spent the night.” [I Kings 19:9] And, indeed, our Sages [Babylonian Talmud, Pesaḥim 54a] taught that Moses and Elijah stood in the same cave on Horeb.

Not only are the lives of the two prophets similar, but their deaths are as well, as Don Yitzḥak Abravanel notes: “Moses and Elijah are distinguished from all other prophets in the fact that their deaths involved a miraculous element, while all other prophets died in the same way as all humans.” The Master of all Prophets ascended to Mount Nebo, to be buried by God Himself [Deuteronomy 34:6], and the Elijah went up to heaven in a whirlwind with a chariot of fire, and horses of fire. [II Kings 2:11]

P’sikta Rabbati also notes a character trait shared by the two prophets: both were zealous. Moses was zealous for God, when he commanded the Levites “Let each one kill (all those involved in the idolatry of the golden calf), even his own brother, close friend, or relative’” [Exodus 32:27] while Elijah twice described himself as being “zealous for the Lord God of hosts.” [I Kings 19:10, 14]       

Yet, this brings us to the major difference between Moses and Elijah. Though in his zeal for God, Moses ordered the execution of those Israelites who had worshipped the golden calf, the very next morning he pleaded with God to forgive the nation’s sin, even presenting an ultimatum to Him: “Now, if You would, please forgive their sin. If not, You can blot me out from the book that You have written.” [Exodus 32:32] (It is significant that Moses’ ultimatum appears in 32:32 [32 is the gematriya of “lev” = heart], indicating that Moses’ heart was with the People of Israel.) Moses was able to combine zeal with true concern for his flock.

On the other hand, when God asked “Why are you here, Elijah?,” the prophet answered “I have been zealous for the Lord God of hosts.” [I Kings 19:9,10] In response to Elijah’s answer, God instructed him to leave the cave and stand on Mount Horeb, and then:

the Lord passed by and sent a furious wind that split the hills and shattered the rocks - but the Lord was not in the wind. The wind stopped blowing, and then there was an earthquake - but the Lord was not in the earthquake; and after the earthquake a fire; but the Lord was not in the fire: and after the fire a still small voice. [ibid. 11-12]

Following these spectacles, God again asked “Why are you here, Elijah?,” and the prophet responded word for word as he had the first time God asked: “I have been zealous for the Lord God of hosts.” [ibid. 13-14]

            Malbim comments that the intent of God’s question “Why are you here, Elijah” was not “Why have you come to Horeb?” rather it was a statement: “A prophet must be among the people in order to rebuke them, and not isolated in the desert.” The second time God asked the question of Elijah, the Divine intent was: “Why have you not returned to your prophetic mission to rebuke the people without zealotry.” When Elijah failed to understand God’s message, the Lord instructed him to anoint Elisha ben Shafat as his successor, informed Elijah that he was no longer suited to be a prophet and his prophetic mission had reached its end.

            Unlike Moses, Elijah remained a zealot and was unable to temper his zeal to work from within to bring the nation to repent.

            In explaining Jethro’s advice to his son-in-law Moses: “you are to be the people’s representative before God,” [Exodus 18:19] Netziv presents a parable: there are two ways to mediate between commoners and their monarch; either through a minister appointed by the king to hear the people, or through a wise person who is respected by the king and empowered to appear before the monarch. There is a significant difference between the two mediators. The royal minister has no bond with the commoners and his loyalty is solely to the king; while the latter is the commoners’ advocate, who seeks their best interest. Thus, Jethro’s advice to Moses was to represent the people’s needs before God.

            It is very significant that Netziv uses Elijah as an example of the first approach and Moses as the example of the latter, encapsulating the great difference between the two prophets who stayed on Horeb.

            Yet, despite the difference between Moses and Elijah, perhaps the most important parallel between them lies in the future. Returning to P’sikta Rabbati:

Both redeem Israel as Divine messengers. Moses redeemed Israel from Egypt, as we read God’s command: “Now go. I am sending you to Pharaoh. Bring My people, the Israelites, out of Egypt.” Elijah is destined to redeem Israel, as we read: “Behold, I send unto you Elijah the prophet, before the coming of the great and terrible day of God.”

 P’sikta adds that just as Moses redeemed Israel from Egypt and they never returned to Egyptian subjugation, so too Elijah will herald Israel’s final redemption, which will be eternal.

            May we be privileged to see Elijah fulfill his mission speedily in our days.

The Wise Heart

And you (singular) shall make holy garments for Aaron your brother, for splendor and for beauty. And you shall speak to all that are wise-hearted, whom I filled with the spirit of wisdom that they make Aaron’s garments to sanctify him ...                                                                 Exodus 28:3

My father noted that wisdom resides in the head, not in the heart. In using the phrase “wise-hearted,” Torah teaches a valuable lesson in the application of wisdom. Wisdom which is not filtered through the heart can bring destruction. In order to create sanctity, a wise person must think not only with his brain but with his heart as well.

Ba’al haTurim notes that the gematriya of the phrase ḥachmei lev asher (that are wise-hearted), from our verse, equals that of yir’at (awe of) and refers to one in awe of heaven, as the verse states: “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.” [Psalms 110:11]

Netziv, without quoting Ba’al haTurim also comments that ḥachmei lev refers to awe of heaven.

According to these commentaries, Torah teaches as well that it is wisdom which is tempered by awe of heaven which brings true blessing to the world.

Actively Refraining

… these are the things which the Lord has commanded that you shall do them. Exodus 35:1

Malbim notes that while the verse speaks of things which God commanded to do (i.e., actively), the context is Shabbat, which essentially involves refraining from creative activity (m’lacha). Malbim then explains the p’shat (simple meaning) of the verse: it actually refers to the work necessary to build the Tabernacle, thus Shabbat is mentioned to teach that one may not desecrate Shabbat to build the Tabernacle, as our Sages noted.

My father offered an explanation on the drash (homiletic) level. Refraining from m’lacha on Shabbat is only the basis for Shabbat observance, not its full realization. Ideally, a Jew should use the resting of Shabbat to recharge his/her spiritual batteries through Torah study and appreciation of the sanctity of Shabbat. Refraining from m’lacha is a means for linking with one’s neshama yeteira (additional soul) and making spiritual progress. By experiencing the sanctity of Shabbat and bringing that sanctity into our lives, Shabbat observance goes well beyond refraining from m’lacha and indeed becomes an active observance.

My father pointed out that this approach is implied in the verse in last week’s Parasha:

Wherefore the Children of Israel shall keep the Shabbat, to observe the Shabbat … Exodus 31:16

Our Sages teach us that the word v’shameru (shall keep) implies a negative command. Thus, the verse instructs that one who refrains from m’lacha on Shabbat should reach the level of observing, that is, the active stage. Indeed, it is experiencing the sanctity of Shabbat, not refraining from desecrating Shabbat which is the goal of the mitzva.

Three Degrees of Sanctity

Moses assembled the entire Israelite community and said to them, “These are the words that God has commanded for (you) to do: You may do work during the six weekdays, but Saturday must be kept holy as a Sabbath of Sabbaths to God. Whoever does any work on (that day) shall be put to death.”             Exodus 35:1-2

Moses prefaced his appeal for building the Tabernacle by introducing the law of Shabbat. Rashi, quoting our Sages, comments that the intention is to teach that Shabbat takes precedence over the construction of the Tabernacle.

My father noted that the first of two great lessons Moses presented here is that no matter how important the goal may be, the means to achieve that goal must be just and right. One cannot build a sanctuary though desecration.

The second lesson, which pertains to sanctity, may be even more important. There are three realms of sanctity: that of place which the building the Tabernacle established; that of time which Shabbat represents; and that of man. The Torah teaches that there are degrees of sanctity, and Moses taught us that in their hierarchy, sanctity of time is greater than the sanctity of place, but the greatest sanctity is that of man. Since time has a higher level of sanctity than place, the Tabernacle may not be built on Shabbat; but if a person’s life is in danger, then Shabbat is disregarded because life supersedes even the sanctity of time. 

An Ark for the Wilderness of Mankind

And Betzalel made the ark of acacia wood: two cubits and a half was the length of it, and a cubit and a half the width of it, and a cubit and a half the height of it.                                 Exodus 37:1

Betzalel asked Moses: “Where will the Torah be kept?” Moses answered: “We shall make the Tabernacle [mishkan] and then make the ark for the Torah.” Betzalel responded: “Our Master Moses, this is not proper respect for the Torah, rather we should make the ark first and then the Tabernacle.” Therefore Betzalel merited having the ark called by his name, as the verse says “And Betzalel made the ark.”                Shemot Rabba

My saintly teacher, Rabbi Mordechai Rogov, commented that the Nation of Israel began its spiritual life at a time in which it had neither basis nor foundation for its physical life. We accepted Torah in the desert, a place of desolation, with no natural protection from the elements or wild animals. The lesson is that throughout the generations, the Children of Israel must maintain their commitment to Torah, even when they are exiled in the wilderness of mankind. Indeed, Israel has followed the Torah throughout its exile, and in times of great distress, when the nation’s existence seemingly hung by a thread.

Thus, Betzalel said: the proper “respect” of Torah is to first make the ark, that is: before Israel has its own mishkan, even without its own place, even without a permanent place, we begin by making an ark for the Torah. Ultimately, it is having the ark and its Torah which has allowed our people to have survived for two thousand years in the wilderness of mankind.

The Whole is Greater

Meshech Ḥochma notes that Parashat vaYakhel presents the building of the Tabernacle before the ark, while three Parashot previously, in Terumah, the order is the opposite.

Meshech Ḥochma explains that there are levels of sanctity higher than the sanctity of an individual Israelite. However, the sanctity of klal Yisrael (the totality of Israel) is unmatched. Thus, the Midrash [vaYikra Rabba 36:4, quoted by Rashi on Genesis 1:1] states that the entire world was created for Israel.

The Tabernacle represents klal Yisrael. Assembling the boards and covering them with the curtains to create a single tent represents the unity of Israel, the power of the klal. In Parashat Terumah the Torah presents the instruction to build the Tabernacle, it is not yet a reality. Therefore the Torah presents the vessels before the Tabernacle itself, corresponding to the higher sanctity of the ark than of individuals Israelites. However, in our Parasha, after the Tabernacle has actually been assembled, representing klal Yisrael, the ark has a lesser status and is presented after the Tabernacle.

Essentially, the Torah teaches us that in the case of the Tabernacle, as well as in the case of the People of Israel, the whole, as a collective entity is greater than the sum of the individual parts. 

The Microcosm is the Macrocosm

And Moses assembled all he congregation of the Children of Israel and said to them: “these are the things which God has commanded to do them.”                                            Exodus 35:1

Three verses after this opening to the parasha, we read: “And Moses said to all the congregation of the Children of Israel, saying: this is the thing which God has commanded, saying” (verse 4)

Interestingly, the first verse, which uses the plural (these ... things), presents only a single law, the prohibition of kindling fire on Shabbat. On the other hand, the fourth verse, which uses the singular, presents a rather lengthy list of matters related to the construction of the Tabernacle its vessels and the priestly garments.

The lesson is this: in Torah, a divinely given system, the microcosm is the macrocosm. Any given mitzva reflects God’s overall program and can thus be seen as “these things”. Conversely, any group of mitzvot is “this thing” in conveying God’s plan.

Personally Making the Ark

And Betzalel made the ark … Exodus 37:1

Ba’al haTurim comments that Betzalel is specifically mentioned only in connection with the ark but not with the other vessels of the Tabernacle because Betzalel understood the (mystical) secrets of the ark, which correspond to the Divine Throne.

Siftei Ḥachamim (Rabbi Shabbetai Bass, 1641-1718) suggests that for all the work of the Tabernacle, other than the ark, Betzalel delegated the actual work to Ohaliav and his other assistants, and was satisfied to supervise. However, because of the greater level of sanctity of the ark over the other vessels, Betzalel insisted on building the ark himself.

Meshech Ḥochma presents a simple, practical explanation: the ark was the only permanent vessel. In anticipation of the destruction of the First Temple, the original ark, made by Betzalel, was hidden away. The Second Temple held no ark, while copies of other vessels were prepared for the Second Temple. Thus, only the ark is specifically related to Betzalel.

My father suggested that the Torah implies a valuable lesson: although Betzalel could delegate his responsibility for creating the other vessels of the Tabernacle, the ark, which held the Torah, the essential life force of the People of Israel, must be made, as it were, by each individual. No member of klal Yisrael has the right to delegate his/her responsibility for maintaining the Torah.

Spreading Sanctity

And Moses assembled all the congregation of the Children of Israel, and said to them, 'These are the words that God has commanded (you) to do.                                                                                Exodus 35:1

"And Moses assembled”: On the day after Yom Kippur                                                                        Rashi             

My father commented that assembling the congregation to deal with the construction of the Tabernacle was essentially a continuation of the lesson of Yom Kippur: just as the purpose of Yom Kippur is to elevate the individual (and the nation) to a higher spiritual level, which will have an impact on the remaining days of the year, so too the Tabernacle (and later the Temple) is not intended to limit sanctity, not to confine God within its four walls, but rather to be the place from which sanctity spreads and radiates throughout the world. Thus, the Torah says “They shall make a sanctuary for Me, then I will dwell in their midst.” (Exodus 25:8) God will not dwell within the sanctuary but within the people.

Before presenting the construction of the Tabernacle, Moses instructed the congregation in Shabbat observance. The lesson of Yom Kippur applies equally well to Shabbat: the ideal of Shabbat is for the sanctity of the seventh day to invest the remaining six days of week with a spiritual dimension as well. Shabbat influences and conveys sanctity to the days of the week.

There are three realms of sanctity: that of place (which building the Tabernacle established); that of time (which Shabbat and Yom Kippur represent); and that of man. Each of these sanctities shares the concept that they are not to be confined, but on the contrary, the goal is to spread their holiness. Similarly, man is not to confine holiness to himself, rather his duty is to spread holiness throughout society. Judaism does not attribute sanctity to one who withdraws from society, to one who cares only for his own spiritual needs, but rather to one who helps, inspires and elevates his entire society. This is the true meaning of sanctity.

The Light of Jewish Women

And you shall command (t’tzaveh) the Children of Israel that they take for you pure olive oil, pressed, for lighting, to make a light shine out continuously.
                                                              Exodus 27:20

Ba’al haTurim (13^th century) comments that the gematriya (numeric equivalent of the letters) of “t’tzaveh” (you shall command) equals “nashim tzivah” (He commanded women), and that this hints at the Shabbat candles which are lit by Jewish women.

My father added that we can see this as a hint of the fact that it is women who light the fire of Torah through educating their children, as indeed the early education of a Jewish child and his/her introduction to our heritage are dependent upon the mother.

This Dvar Torah is dedicated to the memory of two remarkable women: Ruby Jorban Rashbaum and Barbara Rashbaum Pomerantz, whose yahrtzeits fall this year on Shabbat Parashat Tetzaveh. May their souls be bound in the bonds of life. 

Counting to 613

When you take the sum [ki tissa] of the Children of Israel, according to their number …           Exodus 30:12

            The initial letters of the second through sixth words of the verse (tissa et rosh Bnei Yisrael) equal 613, the number of mitzvot commanded by the Torah.

My father noted that the census through the half sheqel unites all Jews, since each gives equally. Thus, the lesson of the wording can be that when Israel is united and fulfils all the mitzvot (it is to be noted that only the entire community of Israel can fulfill all miztvot, since some mitzvot apply only to men, other exclusively to women, some only to kohanim, etc.) its head will be raised (the literal meaning of “tissa et rosh”). It is through the 613 mitzvot that Israel draws its sanctity.

It is interesting that Ba’al haTurim notes that the initial letters of the words “tissa et rosh Bnei” equal 603, as does the gematriya of “Bnei Yisrael,” yet he fails to mention that including the first letter of the word “Yisrael” brings the total to 613. My father suggested that Ba’al haTurim did so to teach that Israel does not distinguish between the Ten Commandments and the remaining 603 mitzvot, because The People of Israel appreciates that all of God’s commandments enrich, sanctify and purify the nation.

A Constant Reminder

And you shall take the atonement money from the Children of Israel and shall give it for the service of the Tent of Meeting, that it may be a memorial (zikaron) for the Children of Israel before the Lord, to make atonement for their souls.                                                                 Exodus 30:16

After he notes that the word zikaron in our verse is spelled fully (with the letter “vav”), while the previous parasha [28:12], in describing the shoulder pieces of the ephod worn by the High Priest, omits the letter “vav” from the word zikaron, Ba’al haTurim comments that the missing “vav” teaches that the ephod serves as a reminder of the Children of Israel only when it actually worn by the High Priest.

My father noted the implication of Ba’al haTurim’s comment: contributing to charity, as in our parasha, serves as a constant reminder of the Children of Israel to their Father in Heaven, even when the Temple is in a state of destruction, and even when Israel is in exile, their practice of giving charity will serve as a reminder before God.

My father suggested an additional lesson of the appearance of the “vav” in our verse: because the letter “vav” is the conjunctive, it teaches that the giving of charity serves to connect Jews to each other.

Counted by Giving

The census was taken through donation of half a sheqel to the Temple. We Jews are counted through giving.  There cannot be a Jew up to his pocket, a Jew who does not give charity, therefore, to be counted as a Jew, one had to give half a sheqel.

However, half a sheqel was to be given, teaching that as important and as basic as giving charity is to Judaism, there is much more to being a good Jew, and we have many additional obligations, as our Sages taught: the world exists through three things: Torah, service and g’milut ḥassadim (acts of kindness, including giving charity).

The root word of tzedaka, charity is tzedek, which means justice. Giving charity is not an act beyond the call of duty, but merely fulfillment of our obligation.

The Torah teaches us that to give is a privilege. A Jew feels that when he gives charity, he receives more than he has given. Moreover, we do not even give what is ours, but what is the Almighty’s.

Taking Heads

When you take the sum (Ki Tissa et rosh, literally: “take up the head”) of the Children of Israel according to their numbered ones …                                         Exodus 30:12

Kli Yakar questions why the singular (rosh, “head”) is used rather than the plural, especially as the verse continues in the plural, “according to their numbers.”

My father suggested that the Torah teaches a valuable lesson through its choice of words. Though the Torah commands that the People of Israel be counted, it is not the total number which is vital, but the individual, since each person is an entire world, and of ultimate worth, as our Sages have taught. Further, it is the realization of the importance and value of the individual which will lift up the heads of the Children of Israel.

It is the quality of the Children of Israel which has value, not the quantity. More exactly, the quantity has value only when it is realized that the quality has primacy.

The Fiery Coin

Everyone included in the census must give a half shekel. This shall be by the sanctuary standard, where a sheqel is twenty gerahs.  It is half of such a shekel that must be given as an offering to God.                                        Exodus 30:13 (The word “this” is emphatic, teaching that) God took a kind of fiery coin from His throne of glory, showed it to Moses and said “Like this shall you give.”                                   Midrash Tanḥuma

My father suggested that the following is the intention of the Midrash: Perhaps Moses had difficulty with the concept of money being connected to sanctity, in light of its corrupting effects, and he therefore wondered how money can purify and cleanse a person. In answer to Moses’ dilemma, God showed him a coin of fire. Fire can be a most destructive force, but it can also be most constructive, providing light and heat, melting and shaping things for man’s benefit. What determines whether fire will be constructive or destructive is how it is used. So too is money. When used to help others, indeed money can bring sanctity to our lives.

Indeed, many times the Torah teaches the lesson that things, in and of themselves, are neither good nor bad, rather it is the use to which we put them that determines their value.

Census and Plague

When you take the sum of the Children of Israel ... then shall they give a ransom each one for his soul to God ...  that there be no plague among them when you number them.        Exodus 30:12

Thus the Torah introduces the mitzva of the half-sheqel. The Israelites were to be counted by each giving half a sheqel, rather than being counted directly, to avoid bringing a plague upon them.

As Rashi notes, when King David took a direct census (II Samuel 24), the People indeed suffered a plague.

Various explanations have been offered for the connection between census and plague.

Some suggest that taking a census in effect reduces everyone to a number and robs the individual of his uniqueness and hence of his or her personal value.

Malbim suggests the opposite. Taking a census makes each person an individual and destroys the group’s unity. Says Malbim, as long as the nation is united as a single person, the merit of the group is indeed very great. When people are counted, they become individuals, separated from the whole, and the merit of the group cannot protect them. Malbim adds that this is the reason the Torah requires giving half a sheqel, to demonstrate that each person is incomplete. Only in joining with others does the individual achieve completion.

On the face of it, the two explanations are contradictory. The first explanation suggests the problem in a census is its effect on the individual, while Malbim suggests that the problem is the effect on the group.

But we can see the explanations as complementary rather than contradictory.

The individual is of infinite value. This is evidenced by the halacha that prohibits handing anyone over when a Jewish town is surrounded by gentiles, who demand a single Jew be handed over to them for execution, or they will kill the entire community. That neither the greatest leader of the generation nor a common criminal may be handed over is understandable only in light of the value of each person as a person.

On the other hand, what Malbim stresses is that in the case of the Children of Israel, the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. As great as the value of the individual is, that value is further enhanced by being part of Klal Yisrael.

The concept of Klal Yisrael being greater than the sum of its parts explains the connection between disunity and the destruction of the Temple (as our Sages taught: the Second Temple was destroyed because of needless hatred among the Jews). When there is disunity, through our own deeds we destroy the added merit of Klal Yisrael and in essence bring destruction upon ourselves.

T'tzaveh versus Terumah

And you shall command the Children of Israel that they take for you pure olive oil, pressed, for lighting, to make a light shine out continuously.                                                       Exodus 27: 20

There is an interesting contrast between the opening of the Parasha and that of last week’s Parasha.  In Terumah we read : “Speak to the Children of Israel that they take for Me an offering ...” (Exodus 25: 2).  As Malbim notes, the verse refers to taking an offering to avoid making it mandatory. Yet in our verse, Moses is told to command the Israelites to provide oil for lighting the menorah.  

Additionally, Moses is not mentioned by name in our verse.

My father explained that lighting the menorah symbolizes the light of Torah and Jewish education. This is incumbent upon each individual, not only upon the leaders.

For this reason, taking the oil is commanded and Moses’ name is not mentioned in this connection.

The common point between the two verses is significant also.  As the verse in Parashat Terumah refers to “taking”, so does the verse in our Parasha. It has been explained that Terumah uses the phrase “they shall take...” to teach the lesson that in giving to the building of the Tabernacle, the Israelites were also receiving. Similarly, by giving the oil to light the menorah, the Israelites will also be receiving .

Connecting the Ends

It shall have two shoulder pieces joined to the two (el shnei) ends thereof, that it may be joined together.                           Exodus 28:7

Thus the Torah describes the ephod, the apron-like garment worn by the High Priest, to which the breastplate was attached.

My father suggested that the wording of the verse symbolically teaches a lesson as far as the function of the High Priest: he must connect the “ends” of the Nation of Israel, even those who have strayed from the traditions of Israel.

Indeed, our Sages have taught us that the outstanding characteristic of Aaron, the first High Priest was his pursuit of peace with all Israelites.

Without explaining the connection between the verses, Ba’al haTurim quotes two other verses in which the phrase “el shnei,” as in our verse, appears. The first concerns the sons of Eli the High Priest, and the second pertains to Na’aman, the commander of the army of Aram:

And this shall be the sign unto thee, that which shall come upon (el shnei) your two sons, on Ḥophni and Phineḥas: in one day they shall die both of them.                                                                   I Samuel 2:34

And Naaman said: ‘Be content, take two talents.’ And he urged him, and bound two talents of silver in two bags, with two changes of raiment, and laid them upon two (el shnei)of his servants; and they bore them before him.                                           II Kings 5:23

Ba’al haTurim notes the contrast between the sons of Eli and Na’aman: Eli’s sons abused the priesthood, for which they incurred the death penalty, while Na’aman respected Divine service, as evidenced by his commitment to offer his sacrifices only to God. [ibid. v.17]

My father’s explanation conveys the connection: the sons of Eli failed in the job of the priesthood, by distancing the people rather than drawing them together, while Na’aman was indeed brought close to God.

Light and Fragrance

And Aaron shall burn thereon incense of sweet spices, every morning when he dresses the lamps, he shall burn it.                  Exodus 30:7

My father commented that lighting the menorah symbolizes the light of Torah. Therefore, the fact that the incense, with its beautiful aroma, is to be offered in conjunction with lighting the menorah symbolizes the idea that Torah is to be presented in a pleasant way, one which will draw the people’s hearts to it.

Cohain God and Nation

And you bring near to you Aaron your brother, and his sons with him, from among the Children of Israel...  And you (singular) shall make holy garments for Aaron your brother, for splendor and for beauty. And you  shall speak to all that are wise-hearted, whom  I filled with the  spirit of  wisdom that they make Aaron’s garments to sanctify him ...                           Exodus 28:1-3

My father commented that the phrase “from among the Children of Israel” teaches that the sanctity of the priesthood derives from the sanctity of Israel. The Cohanim must appreciate that they serve God and His people, and that their sanctity is not personal, but endowed through the nation.

The switch from singular in verse two to plural in verse three continues the lesson of verse one. For Aaron’s garments to be “for splendor and beauty” it is sufficient that they be individual, but for them to sanctify him, it is necessary that “they make” the garments. The Cohain cannot fully achieve sanctity without the nation’s assistance.