Complete Equality

These are Aaron and Moses to whom God said: Bring out the Children of Israel from the land of Egypt according to their hosts. These are they who spoke to Pharaoh, king of Egypt, to bring out the Children of Israel, these are Moses and Aaron.  

                                                      Exodus 6: 26-27

Rashi quotes Midrash Shemot Rabba which notes that some verses mention Aaron before Moses and others mention Moses before Aaron, to teach that they are equal.

       The order within the verses seems opposite to what it should be. Verse 26, where Aaron is given primacy, refers to God’s instructions to deliver the Children of Israel from Egypt. Yet, God’s words were spoken directly to Moses.  Verse 27, “these are they who spoke to Pharaoh” mentions Moses first. Yet, it was Aaron who actually spoke.

Moses and Aaron are each listed first specifically in the area in which they were, in fact, secondary.

The lesson is the complete equality of those who fulfill God’s command.

Dwelling/Walking Within the Land

And Jacob dwelt (vayeshev) in the Land of his father’s sojournings, in the land of  Canaan.        Genesis 37:1

Rabbi Yoḥanan says: wherever the verse uses the word “vayeshev” it is an indication of trouble.

                             Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 106a

            Anaf Yosef writes that we find numerous uses of the word “vayeshev” in a context which gives no indication of trouble, and at times, even in the context of joy, and therefore concludes that Rabbi Yoḥanan’s comment must be understood to mean that in the majority of verses, “vayeshev” indicates trouble.

            Maharal of Prague explains that Rabbi Yoḥanan teaches that if one is content to “dwell” and stay in place, as if he has achieved his personal perfection, and has no desire to advance himself, he indeed has trouble.

            Our Sages [Babylonian Talmud, Ketubot 111a] taught: “one who walks four cubits within the Holy Land is assured a place in the world to come.” Maharal explains that “four cubits” represents one’s personal space, and therefore, walking four cubits represents advancing oneself. Thus, the Sages’ teaching is to be understood to mean that one who takes advantage of the Holy Land to advance himself spiritually is truly guaranteed his place in the world to come.

            Among the 613 mitzvot (at least in Naḥmanides’ reckoning) is dwelling within the Land of Israel (yeshivat Eretz Yisrael). Based upon the insights and elucidations of Maharal, we can understand that merely dwelling in the Land, with no aspiration to improve oneself spiritually does not constitute true fulfillment of the mitzva. While acknowledging the tremendous importance of the Land of Israel, the Land is not an end, but a means, perhaps the means, for approaching the Holy One blessed be He and His will.

            It seems significant that both Talmudic statements we quoted are said in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan.

Sanctifying God's Name: Maintaining Humanity

            The classic definition of Kiddush haShem, sanctifying God’s name, is sacrificing one’s life at a time of decrees suppressing fulfillment of mitzvot, as Maimonides writes:

When anyone about whom it is said: “Sacrifice your life and do not transgress” sacrifices his life without transgressing, he has sanctified (God’s) name. And if this was in the presence of ten Israelites, he has sanctified (God’s) name in public, as did Daniel, Ḥananya, Mishael and Azarya, and Rabbi Akiva and his colleagues.  These are those slain by the (evil) kingdom, above whom there is no higher level, and of whom it is said: “For Your sake we are put to death all day long, we are considered as sheep to the slaughter.” [Psalms 44:23] And of them it is said: “Gather to Me My faithful, those who have made a covenant with Me by sacrifice.” [Psalms 50:5]

                            Laws of the Essentials of Torah 5:4

            During the Holocaust years, there were Jews who asked the practical halachic question of whether to recite a blessing on sanctifying God’s name before being killed by the Nazis, and if so, what is the proper wording of the blessing. [See Rabbi Ephraim Oshry, Responsa Mimamakim, 2:4]

            However, we can ask if the six million Jews killed by the Nazis simply because they were Jews indeed are to be considered as having sanctified God’s name. The Nazis decreed death for all Jews, and were not interested in forcing the Jews to abandon their religion.

            Rabbi Yehoshua Moshe Aharonson, who survived the forced labor camps and the concentration camps, wrote: “this question racked my brain without relief, while I was still in the Valley of Death of the death camps of Auschwitz and Buchenwald.” Rabbi Aharonson concluded that the Jews indeed were killed in sanctification of God’s name, since “all the nations of the world clearly know that the Jews are God’s nation, and their oppression and hatred of the Jews stems only from this.”

            The Holocaust was a horrific desecration of God’s name, with God’s nation being trampled, by those who (as it were) said “where is your God?” (Based upon Psalms 42:4. Alshikh comments on the verse: “The name of Heaven is desecrated when it is said to Israel ‘Where is your God?’ that is, why does He not rescue you.”) The very fact that the Jews survived the Holocaust constitutes sanctification of God’s name.

            I heard an interview with a survivor of the death camps, who said that he has overcome all the physical tortures he endured, but what remains with him still, more than seventy years after his liberation, is the emotional – spiritual torture, in particular, the Nazis’ attempt to dehumanize the Jews. The survivor related that on the death march, a woman from a village on the route approached to offer a drink of water, and the S.S. guard told her: “This is not a human, it is a Jew.”

            In my opinion, the greatest sanctification of God’s name during the Holocaust is in the fact that Jews managed to maintain their humanity and the Divine image which is part of them.

Double the Number of Those Who Left Egypt

The Sages taught: Once, King Agripas wished to know the multitudes of Israel (i.e. to know the population) He said to the High Priest: “Set your eyes on the Paschal lambs (count the number brought in order to approximate the population). (The High Priest) took a kidney from each, and six hundred thousand pairs of kidneys were found there, double (the number) of those who left Egypt. (This did not reflect the sum total of the Jewish population, since it) excluded those who were ritually impure or at a great distance (from the Temple, and hence did not offer the paschal sacrifice). (Furthermore) there was not a single lamb that did not have more than ten people registered for it.                           Babylonian Talmud, Pesaḥim 64b

            Based on the Talmud’s story, during the time of King Agripas (who reigned between 41 – 44 ce) 1,200,000 paschal lambs were slaughtered and offered on the altar, and since each lamb was brought by a group of no fewer than ten, more than 12,000,000 Jews ascended to the Temple.

            Anaf Yosef (commentary on the Talmudic agadot) suggests that the Talmudic story is an exaggeration, a suggestion which seems necessary, based on at least two considerations:

             It is physically impossible to deal with such a huge number of sacrifices within the limited time available for offering the Paschal lamb (approximately four and a half hours, see Maimonides’ Laws of the Paschal Sacrifice 1:4];

            Historians estimate that at the time of Agripas, the Jewish population of the world numbered approximately 7,000,000

            Immediately before quoting  the episode of counting the kidneys of the Paschal lambs, the Talmud presents a difference of opinion between Abayye and Rava concerning the correct reading of the Mishna’s description of offering the Paschal sacrifice. Abayye posits that the proper reading is “the doors (of the Temple courtyard) were closed (implying automatically, and miraculously),” while Rava maintains that the reading is “they (humans) closed the doors.”

The Talmud explains that the source of the disagreement is the question of whether or not we are to rely on miracles.

            While the debate between the two Talmudic giants apparently is not on a halachic issue, nonetheless, it would seem that Rava’s position is to be preferred, since in all halachic debates between the two the halacha is decided in accordance with Rava’s approach (save six times).

            Indeed, Maimonides, in describing the service of the Paschal lamb, quotes Rava’s position:

The first group (to offer the Paschal lamb) entered (the Temple courtyard) until it was filled, and then they closed the doors of the courtyard and began to sacrifice the Paschal lambs.

                              Laws of the Paschal Offering 1:11

            This preamble to the episode of Agripas’ “census,” accepting that we do not rely on miracles, is perhaps intended to inform us that the following story is not to be believed literally.

            Moreover, the source of the Agripas episode is the Tosefta, however, the Talmud deletes a phrase from the original source “and the (courtyard) could not contain them all.” [Tosefta, Pesaḥim 4:15] According to the Tosefta, there was not enough room in the Temple courtyard for all of the pilgrims who ascended to Jerusalem. The missing phrase too indicates our Sages exaggerated and the story is not to be believed literally. If the story reflects a miracle that the natural limitation of space was overcome, it matters not to God, who performs the miracle whether there were 12,000,000 or 12,000,000,000 in the courtyard.

            The number which our Sages use “six hundred thousand” (in a more exact translation: “sixty myriads”) is what scholars refer to as a “typological number,” that is, a number which conveys a symbolic, rather than exact meaning.

            We may suggest that in stating that the number of Paschal lambs brought to the altar was “double (the number) of those who left Egypt,” our Sages express the thought that the experience of offering the Paschal sacrifice is greater than the experience of leaving Egypt. The reason for this is that the exodus was not a goal, but a means. The goal of the exodus was to bring the nation of Israel into its Land, and to fulfill God’s mitzvot within her. When Jews offered the Paschal sacrifice during the Second Temple period (and, equally, during the First Temple period) they realized the purpose of the exodus, and thus their experience was greater than leaving Egypt.

Five-fold Repetition

      Perhaps the primary difficulty with Parashot Vayakhel – Pekudei is the apparent redundancy of the description of making the Tabernacle. Indeed, the Torah provides a fivefold description of the Tabernacle and its appliances [Parashot Teruma, T’tzaveh, Ki Tissa, twice in vaYakhel (35:4-19; 36:8 – 38:20) and Pekudei].

       Rabbeinu Beḥayye writes that the repetitions reflect the lofty level of the Tabernacle and the fact that it is so dear to God. Rabbeinu Beḥayye notes that, in a similar manner, there is a single verse which mentions the Children of Israel five times, as an expression of how dearly God loves His nation:

I have given the Levites from the Children of Israel for Aaron and his sons to perform the service for the Children of Israel in the meeting tent and to atone for the Children of Israel, so that there will not be a plague on the Children of Israel when the Children of Israel approach the sanctuary.              Numbers 8:19

      Tzror haMor  writes that each of the five mentions of the construction of the Tabernacle and preparing its vessels has a particular purpose: the first, of course, conveys God’s command; the second describes Moses’ relating the Divine command to the nation; the third is Moses’ explanation to the artists and artisans who are responsible in practice for creating the Tabernacle; the fourth describes the diligence and precision of the artisans’ work, corresponding exactly to God’s instructions; the final repetition conveys Moses’ confirmation that all the work was done in accordance with the Divine plan. Thus, the final repetition concludes with the summary:

Moses saw all the work, and behold, they had done it as God commanded, and Moses blessed them.                                                                      Exodus 39:43

      Perhaps Tzror haMor ‘s words can be seen as an expansion and specification of Rabbeinu Beḥayye’s comment that the repetitions convey God’s affection for the Tabernacle and for those engaged in its construction.

    Rabbi Shimshon Raphael Hirsch explains the need for the repetitions in Parashot vaYakhel – Pekudei and the practical lesson to be learned from these repetitions in light of the sin of the golden calf. As grave as the sin of the golden calf was, “the highest grace of God was regained” when God said to Moses “I forgive them, as you have requested,” [Numbers 14:20] and this was accomplished “without Temple and without offering.” This taught the truth “that Temple and offering do not themselves bring about the grace of God, but are only means of showing the way to gain the grace of God.” Thus, each repetition of the matter of the Tabernacle serves as a reminder that the Shechina resting with Israel is independent of the Temple/Tabernacle and of the service therein and Israel’s ability to achieve atonement is a function of the Israelites’ behavior and repentance of their sins.

           Rabbi Hirsch’s comment hints at Jeremiah’s words:

Do not trust deceitful words, chanting: This is the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord.                                  7:4

The classical commentaries explain that the Israelites relied on the assumption that God would not destroy His Temple in response to the nation’s sins, and the people felt that the very existence of the Temple insulated them from retribution for their sins. Jeremiah’s message to the people was that the true “temple of God” is not the Temple in Jerusalem, but the Israelites themselves, “for when they are righteous, they themselves are the temple.” [Alshikh, Jeremiah 7:4]

          Indeed, the verse states explicitly: “They are to make a sanctuary for Me so that I may dwell among them.”

         Though our souls yearn for the construction of the Third Temple, we must realize that the true Temple resides within the hearts of the Children of Israel.

The Yearly/Daily Blessing

          There is a special blessing, said only once per year, which is to be recited specifically in the month of Nissan.

          We read in Shulḥan Aruch, Oraḥ Ḥayyim ]226[:

One  who  goes  out  during  the days of Nissan  and  sees  (fruit) tees in blossom, says: “Blessed are you, Lord  our  God, Ruler of  the universe, Who has  left nothing out of His world  and  made good  creatures and good trees to benefit Man.”

          The wording chosen by our Sages clearly indicates the perspective that God’s creation is for the benefit of Man, the epitome of His creation.

          Meshech Ḥochmah comments that when God said to Adam “Of every tree of the garden you may eat freely,” [Genesis 2:16] it was not only giving him permission, but presenting an imperative. (In accordance with this comment, the more exact translation of the verse would be: “Of every tree of the garden you shall eat.”) In essence, God’s first command to Man was to benefit from His creation. Indeed, the Sages comment that man is destined to give an accounting for having refrained from benefiting from the good things in God’s creation. [Jerusalem Talmud, end of Tractate Kiddushin]

          Rabbi Kook presented the deeper aspect: through reciting a blessing before benefiting from the good things in God’s creation, man in some sense, completes the creation.

          Thus, there is a reciprocal relationship between man and God’s creation. On the one hand, God created things for man’s benefit, while on the other, it is up to man to use things properly. In so doing, Man has the power to sanctify God’s work and to complete it.        

          Though recited only once per year, the Blessing of the Trees applies to every day of the year, “from the beginning of the year until the end of the year.” [Deuteronomy 11:12]

Flour and Torah, Golden Table and Menorah

He placed the table in the Tent of Meeting on the north side of the Tabernacle, outside the curtain.

He put the menorah in the Tent of Meeting across from the table, on the south side of the Tabernacle.                                                          Exodus 40:22,24

            In placing the vessels in the Tabernacle, Moses preceded the golden table to the menorah.

            My father explained that the golden table, the table of the showbread, represents Israel’s material life, while the menorah symbolizes the nation’s spiritual life.

            Based upon this approach, we may note that the order of placing the vessels within the Tabernacle is paralleled by our Sage’s teaching:

Rebbi Elazar ben Azarya says: if there is no flour, there is no Torah; if there is no Torah there is no flour. Pirkei Avot 3:17

            Maharal of Prague expounds Rebbi Elazar ben Azarya’s thus:

For Torah as well provides sustenance for man, since Torah provides spiritual sustenance, as bread provides physical sustenance. Torah completes the soul.                                                                  Derech Ḥayyim

            Indeed, the symbols of the physical and spiritual lives of the Nation of Israel stood opposite each other within the Holy of the Tabernacle/Temple, serving, as it were as the approach to the Holy of Holies, which contained the Ark of Covenant with the Tablets, that is, Torah which completes the Jewish soul.