Parshas Terumah
אמרו רבותינו ג' תרומות אמורות כאן א' תרומת בקע לגלגלת שנעשו מהם האדנים כמו שמפורש באלה פקודי ואחת תרומת המזבח בקע לגלגלת לקופות לקנות מהן קרבנות צבור ואחת תרומת המשכן נדבת כל אחד (רש"י)
In his Oznayim L’Torah, Rav Zalman Sorotzkin relates that there once reached a point when the yeshivos of
ועשו לי מקדש ושכנתי בתוכם (25:8)
In Shir HaShirim (3:11), Shlomo HaMelech uses the phrase ביום חתנתו וביום שמחת לבו – on the day of his wedding and on the day of his heart’s rejoicing. The Mishnah in Taanis (4:8) homiletically interprets the wedding day as referring to the giving of the Torah at
וצפית אתו זהב טהור מבית ומחוץ תצפנו (25:11)
Rav Chaim Volozhiner once came to ask his teacher, the Vilna Gaon, to help him understand a difficult passage in the Zohar HaKadosh, the explanation of which continued to elude him. The Gaon responded by noting that with regard to the Aron, which was made out of wood, the Torah writes that it should be covered with gold on the inside and on the outside. However, Rashi explains that first the wooden box was placed inside the larger golden box, and the smaller golden box was then placed inside of both of them. According to this, it comes out that the Aron was first covered on the outside (by the larger golden box) and only afterward on the inside (by the smaller golden box). If so, why did the Torah write it in reverse order, instructing that it should be covered first on the inside? Rather, we must re-interpret our verse as referring not to the wooden Aron but to the golden coverings. With respect to the golden boxes, we find that the covering occurred in the order prescribed by the Torah, as the wooden Aron first covered the inner walls of the larger outer box and subsequently covered the outer walls of smaller inner box. However, we now must understand why the Torah chose to write the instructions in such a convoluted manner. The wooden Aron, he continued, symbolizes man, who is compared to a tree (כי האדם עץ השדה) and the two golden boxes represent the Torah (הנחמדים מזהב), the outer one corresponding to the revealed Torah and the inner one to the mystical secrets of Kabbalah. The Torah wrote our verse in this confusing way to hint to us that just as the revealed Torah is covered by the Aron (representing man) on its inside, so too are we able and expected to penetrate to its deepest depths of understanding. However, when it comes to the hidden areas of the Torah, the Aron only covers the external side to teach us that it is impossible to completely plumb its innermost secrets and we sometimes must content ourselves with whatever superficial understanding we are able to attain. With that, he dismissed his surprised student to reflect upon this unexpected “answer” to his question regarding the esoteric passage!
ונתת אל הארן את העדת אשר אתן אליך (25:16)
התורה שהיא לעדות ביני וביניכם שצויתי אתכם מצות הכתובות בה (רש"י)
Rav Zalman Sorotzkin questions the value of having a Sefer Torah placed in the Aron in the Kodesh Kodashim, a place where it would never be used or even seen as nobody was allowed to go there. The Medrash (Devorim Rabba 9:9) suggests that even so, the fact that every single person was aware that hidden deep in the inner recesses of the Beis HaMikdash was a 100% authentic Sefer Torah written by Moshe Rabbeinu himself acted as a powerful deterrent to any would-be forger. Anybody who would entertain the possibility of denying some of the mitzvos and attempting to write a falsified Sefer Torah which leaves them out to support his claims would refrain due to the recognition that if he did so, it would be possible to bring out Moshe’s genuine Torah from the Aron to compare, thus proving him wrong and exposing his malicious intent. In a eulogy on the great Brisker Rav, Rav Yitzchok Zev Soloveitchik, Rav Sorotzkin suggested that the Brisker Rav had similarly isolated himself from most of the world, confining himself all day to the learning and teaching of Torah to a few select students in his house. Although he eschewed a public and social role, his value as the last remaining vestige of the Torah-true Judaism of Brisk was inestimable. As long as the Brisker Rav was alive, anybody who dared question the smallest custom and attempted to alter the mesorah (tradition) from
ועשית שנים כרבים זהב מקשה תעשה אתם משני קצות הכפרת (25:18)
Although the Torah specifies that the various utensils used in the Mishkan are to be made from gold, the Mechilta rules that this isn’t an absolute requirement but rather the preferable way for them to be made. If for any reason they have already been made from a different metal, they don’t become disqualified and it is permissible to use them, with one exception. With respect to the Keruvim which rest on top of the Aron, the obligation to make them from gold is absolute, and should they be formed from any other material for any reason, they are invalid for use in the Mishkan. Rav Meir Shapiro explains that the Keruvim symbolize Jewish children, as Rashi writes here that they had the faces of young children, and their placement on top of the Aron represents their Torah learning and upbringing. Should there be a time in the future when money is scarce and gold cannot be attained due to financial constraints, Hashem is willing to overlook His honor and glory with respect to the construction of the utensils used to serve Him even in His Holy dwelling place, but when it comes to educating our children, who represent the future of the Jewish people, second-best is completely unacceptable as there can be no possible excuse for sacrificing the quality of their education!
Parsha Points to Ponder (and sources which discuss them):
1) If the book of Shemos is known as the Book of the Exodus and revolves around the theme of the redemption of the Jewish people from Egypt, why does it discuss the building of the Mishkan and the garments of the Kohanim at such great length instead of ending after the splitting of the Red Sea or the giving of the Torah at Mount Sinai? (Ramban in his introduction to Sefer Shemos)
2) Hashem showed Moshe the form which the Mishkan was to have and commanded him that such should be its appearance in all generations, such that if one of the vessels was ever lost or damaged, it must be rebuilt precisely according to the specifications of the original one used in the Mishkan (Rashi 25:9). How can this be reconciled with the fact that each Beis HaMikdash was built with various changes in dimensions and appearance from what preceded it? (Shu”t Chasam Sofer Yoreh Deah 236, Radak Melachim 1 8:6, Mas’as HaMelech 25:9)
3) Rashi writes (25:40) that Moshe Rabbeinu had difficulty understanding the appearance of the menorah, so Hashem showed him a fiery illustration of how it was supposed to look. However, Rashi writes previously (25:31) that even so, Moshe had difficulty making it and ultimately Hashem told him to simply throw a block of gold into the fire and the menorah miraculously “made itself” and emerged complete. If Hashem knew that in the end Moshe would be unable to make it, why did He initially need to show him the fiery image and teach him all of the intricate laws regarding the appearance of the menorah? (S’fas Emes, Mishmeres Ariel, Nesivos Rabboseinu, Shemen HaTov)
4) Hashem tells Moshe that the Mishkan should have curtains of goat hair to be an “ohel” (tent) over the linen curtains that formed the roof of the Mishkan (26:7). There is a Talmudic maxim (see Shabbos 138b) that אין אוהל פחות מטפח – to be called a tent, there must be at least one tefach (3-4 inches) beneath it. If so, how could this second covering be referred to as an “ohel” when it was placed directly on top of the curtains underneath it? (Ha’emek Davar)
© 2006 Permission is granted to reproduce and distribute as long as credit is given. To receive weekly via email or to send comments or suggestions, write to parshapotpourri@optonline.net
1 Comments:
people are going to hear about this.
:)Git Shabbes
Post a Comment
<< Home