|
   |
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
           |
|
|
|
2. SHIUR ON PARASHAT TERUMAH 3. QUESTIONS FOR FURTHER IYUN PARSHAT TERUMAH PART I - QUESTIONS FOR THE 'SHABBOS TABLE'
1. In Parshat Terumah, how does the wording of the opening commandment to build the "ARON" differ from the opening commandment to build all of the other vessels? [See 25:10,17,23,31 etc., (noting if the command is in singular or plural).]
2. Relate the purpose of the ARON (see 25:21-22) to the REASON why Moshe ascends Har Sinai for forty days, as explained in 24:12.
3. In relation once again to 25:21-22, how does the function of the ARON relate to the function of the KERUVIM? How does this function relate to Bnei Yisrael's request (at Ma'amad Har Sinai) that Moshe speak to them instead of God (see Shmot 20:15-16 & Devarim 5:20-28).
4. In what context is the word "keruvim" used in Sefer Breishit? 5. What is the precise meaning of the word "MISHKAN" in 26:1 and in the remainder of chapters 26 & 27? Relate also to 25:9. Does the word MISHKAN also have a more general meaning? If so, explain what it is and why it has a 'double' meaning. Relate to the structural difference between the Mishkan and the Bet ha'Mikdash. PART II - QUESTIONS FOR PREPARATION (for weekly shiur)
1. Review Shmot 24:12-18. Based on these psukim, for what purpose does Moshe ascend Har Sinai in 24:12? Up until this point, have Moshe and/or Bnei Yisrael received any other mitzvot from God? If so, which mitzvot, and when (and where) were they given? How do (or should) those mitzvot differ from the mitzvot that Moshe is now about to receive on Har Sinai?
2. Even though 24:12-18 is a narrative, the Torah does not continue this narrative until Moshe descends from Har Sinai in chapter 32. In the interim, i.e. chapters 25-31, the Torah records many parshiot of mitzvot. Scan this unit, noting what general categories of the mitzvot that are discussed. Can you identify one general category, or is this simply an assortment of various mitzvot?
3. As you probably realized, chapters 25 thru 31 discuss the various laws concerning the Mishkan. As you study these laws, and the various vessels of the Mishkan and its structure, can you identify any thematic parallels between these laws and the events that took place at Ma'amad Har Sinai (as described in Shmot chapters 19,20 & 24? Relate especially to 19:9-15,20-24 and 24:1-12.
Can you suggest a reason for any of the parallels that you find?
4. In a similar manner, attempt to identify any thematic parallels that may exist between this section about the Mishkan and the events that take place during the events of "chet ha'egel".
5. Based on your answers to the above two questions, attempt to explain the reason for the controversy between Rashi and Ramban concerning WHEN the parshiot of the Mishkan were first given to Moshe Rabeinu.
6. When Rashi (on 31:18) says: "ein mukdam u'muchar" [the parshiot in Chumash are not necessarily written in chronological order], does it mean that the Torah is written in RANDOM order?
7. Review 33:7, noting its context within 33:1-11. Note the word "ohel moed", and be sure that you understand its meaning within that context.
7. According to Rashi, who claims that the commandment to build the Mishkan was first given only AFTER the events of Chet ha'egel, does this imply that had it not been for chet ha'egel that there would never have been a need for a Mikdash? PART III - PARSHANUT
1. In addition to the first Ramban on Parshat Trumah, see also first Ramban on Sefer Vayikra, and first Ramban on Sefer Bamidbar.
Review as well, first Ramban on Sefer Shmot?
2. Re: the Menorah, read 25:37 - and translate the pasuk into English, based on what you always thought this pasuk meant.
Now, read the entire parshia from 25:31-40, and pay careful attention to how you translate 25:37 in the context of the entire 'parshia'. What are the "neirot" of the Menorah? Are they an integral part of the rest of the Menorah as described in 25:31-36?
[If not, why not?]
Next, see Rashi on 25:37.
3. How do we know that the mitzvah to build the Mishkan for all generations, and not just something special for the generation in the desert (or is it). Is there any pasuk that indicates that the Mishkan should also be set up once Bnei Yisrael enter Eretz Canaan?
See Rashi on 25:9. See also Chizkuni & Ibn Ezra on that pasuk.
4. What does the word Mikdash imply? For example, does Shlomo ha'melech build a Mikdash or a Mishkan? Can you explain why?
2. SHIUR ON PARSHAT TERUMAH
PARSHAT TERUMAHHad it not been for CHET HA'EGEL [the sin of the Golden Calf], would Bnei Yisrael have needed a MISHKAN?Many claim that the answer to this 'philosophical' question lies in the famous 'exegetical' controversy between RASHI and RAMBAN concerning WHEN God commanded Bnei Yisrael to build the Mishkan, BEFORE or AFTER the sin of the golden calf. In this week's shiur, as we study this controversy and its ramifications, we will show how the answer to this question is not so simple. While doing so, we will also try to make some sense out of the thorny issue of "ein mukdam u'meuchar ba'Torah" (chronological order in Chumash). INTRODUCTION - FOUR UNITS
To understand the source of this controversy between Rashi and Ramban, we must first delineate the FOUR distinct units of the last half of Sefer Shmot. In last week's shiur, we defined and discussed the first of these four units - chapters 19->24, better known as MA'AMAD HAR SINAI.
THE FIRST FORTY DAYS - FOR WHAT? Therefore, if we follow the strict chronological order of Chumash, Moshe ascends Har Sinai for the first forty days for ONE primary purpose: to receive the LUCHOT and the MITZVOT that describe the building of the Mishkan, for that structure will house the LUCHOT.
Despite the simplicity of this approach, not a single commentator advances it, for two very good reasons: * First of all, it would not require FORTY DAYS for God to teach Moshe just the laws of the MISHKAN. There must have been something else as well.For these reasons, the commentators must explain why specifically the laws of the Mishkan are recorded at this point in Sefer Shmot, even though many other mitzvot were also given to Moshe during those forty days. Ramban (see 25:1) offers a very comprehensive and emphatic 'pro-Mishkan' approach. Drafting both textual and conceptual arguments, Ramban claims that the Mishkan serves as a vehicle to perpetuate the experience of MA'AMAD HAR SINAI; it is therefore the FIRST mitzvah that Moshe receives when he ascends Har Sinai. Even though Moshe received other mitzvot at that time, as well (see Ramban on 24:12), Sefer Shmot focuses specifically on the Mishkan because it reflects the unique level that Bnei Yisrael attained when they accepted God's covenant at Har Sinai. Furthermore, at the focal point of the Mishkan lies the ARON, which contains the LUCHOT - the symbol of that covenant at HAR SINAI. On top of the ARON are the KERUVIM, from where God will now convey to Moshe the remaining mitzvot. This explains not only why the MISHKAN follows Har Sinai, but also why this unit opens specifically with the laws regarding the ARON and KERUVIM. To summarize Ramban's approach, we will quote a few lines from his commentary [though it is highly recommended that you read the entire Ramban inside]: "After God had given the Ten Commandments DIRECTLY to Yisrael and instructed them with a sampling of the mitzvot (i.e. Parshat Mishpatim)... and Bnei Yisrael accepted these laws and entered a covenant (24:1-11)... behold they became His nation and He became their God, as was originally stipulated [at Brit Milah and Har Sinai]... Now they are worthy to have a house - His dwelling - in their midst dedicated to His Name, and there HE WILL SPEAK WITH MOSHE and COMMAND BNEI YISRAEL... Now the 'secret' ('sod') of the Mishkan is that God's GLORY ('kavod') which dwelled on HAR SINAI will now dwell [instead] on the MISHKAN 'b'nistar' [in a more hidden manner, in contrast to Har Sinai]..." (see Ramban 25:1)RASHI'S APPROACH Despite the beauty and attraction of Ramban's approach, Rashi claims exactly the opposite (see 31:18): that the commandment to build the Mishkan came AFTER, and BECAUSE of, Chet Ha'egel. In other words, Rashi posits that the parshiot are not presented according to their chronological order. Rashi goes even further, claiming that during the first forty days Moshe received ALL the mitzvot of the Torah EXCEPT the laws of the MISHKAN! [In other words, using our original chart, the chronological order would be A>C>B>D; or, using our computer mashal - WYSIWYDG - What You See Is What You DIDN'T Get!] At first glance, such an interpretation seems untenable. Why should the Torah record at this point specifically the mitzvot that Moshe DID NOT receive at this time, while omitting all the mitzvot which He DID receive at this time?! What leads Rashi to this conclusion? To answer this question, we must first explain the exegetical principle of "ein mukdam u'meuchar ba'Torah" [literally: there is NO ORDER in the sequence of parshiot in the Torah]. Despite the common misunderstanding to the contrary, this principle does not imply that Chumash progresses in random sequence. Rather, it simply means that the arrangement in which Chumash records its parshiot does not necessarily reflect their chronological order. [Most commentators, and especially many of the Midrashim quoted by Rashi, employ this approach. RAMBAN, however, consistently disagrees with this assumption, arguing that Chumash DOES follow in CHRONOLOGICAL order. Unless a certain technical detail 'forces' him to say otherwise, he always assumes that the order in which Chumash is written corresponds with the precise chronological order of the events as they took place.]
The principle of "ein mukdam u'meuchar" implies that when Moshe received the Torah in its final form in the fortieth year (see Devarim 31:25-26), its "parshiot" were organized based on thematic considerations, and hence not necessarily according to the chronological order of when they were first given. By doing so, the Torah conveys its message not only by the content of each "parshia," but also by intentionally juxtaposing certain parshiot next to one another. Rashi, following this approach, assumes that Chumash (at times) may prefer a CONCEPTUAL sequence over a chronological one. Therefore, Rashi will often explain that a certain "parshia" actually took place earlier or later when the progression of theme implies as such.
With this background we can better understand Rashi's approach in our context. Employing the principle of "ein mukdam u'muchar," Rashi always begins with considerations of theme and content in mind. He therefore cannot overlook the glaring similarities between the construction of the Mishkan and CHET HA'EGEL. It cannot be just by chance that: * Bnei Yisrael must collectively donate their gold to build the Mishkan (compare 25:1-2, 32:2-3);Rashi therefore explains that the commandment to build the MISHKAN came AFTER chet ha'egel (during the last forty days), for it served as a form of atonement for that sin. [Nevertheless, it remains unclear according to Rashi WHY the Torah chose to record these parshiot out of chronological order. We'll return to this question later in the shiur.]
L'CHAT'CHILA or B'DI'AVAD? TEMPLE TERMINOLOGY
To reconcile Rashi's interpretation with Ramban's explanation of the Mishkan, we must differentiate between two concepts:
Although both words describe a SANCTUARY dedicated to the worship of God, for the sake of clarity, each word (in our explanation that follows) will be given a more specific meaning. * The MISHKAN is a TEMPORARY Sanctuary (a Tabernacle), a portable, tent-like structure. [Good for travel.]We posit that both Rashi and Ramban must agree that the concept of a Sanctuary, a symbol of God's SHCHINA (the divine presence) dwelling with Bnei Yisrael, is "l'chatchila" and in fact comprises a fundamental theme throughout the entire Tanach. To prove this, we must return to some basic concepts previously discussed in our shiurim on Sefer Breishit. Recall that we first encountered the theme of MIKDASH when Avraham Avinu builds a MIZBAYACH in BET-EL and "calls out in God's Name" (see 12:8 & 13:4). Later, at this same site, Yaakov Avinu awakes from his dream and exclaims: "Alas, this is the site for a BET ELOKIM, for it is the gate to the heavens." (Br.28:17)Yaakov then erects a "matzeyva" (monument) and vows that upon his return to Canaan he will establish the site of his "matzeyva" as a BET-ELOKIM - a House for God. [See Breishit 28:17-22.] Thus, the very concept of a BET ELOKIM clearly preceded the golden calf. Furthermore, even in "shirat ha'yam," the song that Bnei Yisrael sung after they crossed the Red Sea, we already find an allusion the establishment of a MIKDASH immediately upon their arrival in the land: "t'viyamo v'ti'ta'eymo el HAR nachlatcha, machon l'shivtcha... - MIKDASH, Hashem kon'nu yodecha..."Finally, in Parshat Mishpatim we find conclusive proof that the basic concept of a BET-ELOKIM is totally unrelated to the events of Chet ha'egel. Recall that even according to Rashi, the laws recorded in Parshat Mishpatim was certainly given BEFORE Chet Ha'egel. [See Rashi on 31:18, where he explain that these laws were given to Moshe Rabeinu during his first forty days on Har Sinai.] Recall as well that within that set of of laws we find the mitzvah of "aliyah la'regel" - to "VISIT God" three times a year: "Three times a year you shall celebrate for Me... Keep Chag ha'Matzot... and do not VISIT ME empty-handed... Three times a year all your males SHALL APPEAR BEFORE ME... " (23:14-17)The existence of a mitzvah to 'appear before God' implies that there most be some type of sanctuary that would represent Him! Hence, without some sort of a MIKDASH, this mitzvah of "aliyah l'regel" could not be fulfilled. The next pasuk provides final proof that this sanctuary corresponds to the concept of a BET-ELOKIM: "Your first fruits must be brought to BET HASHEM ELOKECHA - the HOUSE of Hashem your God ..." (23:19)Once again, we fine a commandment that clearly implies that there will be some sort of 'sanctuary' that will serve as God's House. Hence, based on the above analysis, even Rashi must agree that there would have been a need for a BET-ELOKIM even had Bnei Yisrael not sinned at "chet ha'egel". In fact, there is no reason why Rashi would not agree with Ramban's explanation that the PRIMARY purpose of the Mikdash is to serve as a physical symbol of God's presence, through which Bnei Yisrael can relive their experience at Har Sinai. Therefore, the dispute between Rashi and Raban over WHEN God issued the command to build the Mishkan relates to a less fundamental question, i.e. why there was a need for Bnei Yisrael to construct a TEMPORARY sanctuary BEFORE they entered the Land of Israel. According to Rashi's interpretation, we must assumed that had Bnei Yisrael not sinned at chet ha'egel, there would have no need for them to build a TEMPORARY Mishkan in the desert. Instead, Bnei Yisrael could have simply waited a few more months and built a PERMANENT Mikdash as soon as they conquered the Land. Ramban would argue that even had Bnei Yisrael not sinned, it was still necessary for them to build a temporary MIKDASH before they left Har Sinai. Let's attempt to explain why.
THE WAY IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN
A CONCEPTUAL JUXTAPOSITION To summarize, the dispute between Rashi and Ramban stems from their different exegetical approaches and pertains only to WHY a TEMPORARY Mishkan was necessary. However, both would agree that a PERMANENT Mikdash would have been necessary even had Bnei Yisrael not sinned at chet ha'egel. Our shiur on Parshat Tezaveh will analyze the internal structure of this unit of chapters 25->31 in order to uncover additional parallels between the MISHKAN and the events of Ma'amad Har Sinai.
3. FOR FURTHER IYUN
B. Review Devarim chapter 12. Note the repeated use of the phrase "ha'makom asher yivchar Hashem" and its context. Pay special attention to 12:5-12, noting when is the proper time to build the Mikdash.
C. Although the Rambam did not write a commentary on Chumash, we can infer his understanding of certain psukim based on his psak halacha in Mishne Torah.
For more articles by Rav Menachem Leibtag, visit his web site, www.tanach.org
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
