Exodus · Chapter 25

And Hashem spoke with Moses, saying:

Now that G-d had told Israel face to face the Ten Commandments, and had further commanded them through Moses some of the precepts which are like general principles to the [individual] commandments of the Torah — in the same way that our Rabbis were accustomed to deal with strangers who come to be converted to the Jewish faith — and now that the Israelites accepted upon themselves to do all that He would command them through Moses and He made a covenant with them concerning all this, from now on they are His people and He is their G-d This is in accordance with the condition He made with them at the beginning: Now, therefore, if ye will indeed hearken unto My voice, and keep My covenant, then ye shall be Mine own treasure, and He said further: and ye shall be unto Me a kingdom of priests, and a holy nation. They are now holy, in that they are worthy that there be amongst them a Sanctuary through which He makes His Divine Glory dwell among them. Therefore He first commanded concerning the Tabernacle, so that He have amongst them a house dedicated to His name, from where He would speak with Moses and command the children of Israel. Thus the main purpose of the Tabernacle was to contain a place in which the Divine Glory rests, this being the ark, just as He said, And there will I meet with thee, and I will speak with thee from above the ark-cover. Therefore He first gave the commandment about the ark and the ark-cover, for they are first in importance. Next to the ark He gave the commandment about the table and the candelabrum, which are vessels just like the ark, and because they indicate the purpose for which the Tabernacle was made. Moses, however, preceded to mention in the section of Vayakheil: the Tabernacle, its Tent, and its covering, and in that order Bezalel made them [first the Tabernacle and then the ark], because from the practical end it is proper to build the house first [and then make its vessels].The secret of the Tabernacle is that the Glory which abode upon Mount Sinai [openly] should abide upon it in a concealed manner. For just as it is said there, And the glory of the Eternal abode upon Mount Sinai, and it is further written, Behold, the Eternal our G-d hath shown us His glory and His greatness, so it is written of the Tabernacle, and the glory of the Eternal filled the Tabernacle. Twice is this verse, and the glory of the Eternal filled the Tabernacle mentioned in connection with the Tabernacle, to correspond with His glory and His greatness. Thus Israel always had with them in the Tabernacle the Glory which appeared to them on Mount Sinai. And when Moses went into the Tabernacle, he would hear the Divine utterance being spoken to him in the same way as on Mount Sinai. Thus just as it is said at the Giving of the Torah: Out of heaven He made thee to hear His voice, that He might instruct thee; and upon earth He made thee to see His great fire, so it is written of the Tabernacle, and he heard the voice speaking unto him from ...

He who gave His children a perfect Torah, who brings every hidden matter to light, who grants understanding of inscribed wisdom — in the portion of "Take for Me a portion" [it says]: "And He spoke." When [Moses] ascended to the summit of the mountain, He spoke to him concerning the Tabernacle. The reason is that they should make a sanctuary for the Glorious Name, and He would dwell among them; there He would speak with Moses, and [Moses] need not ascend the mountain.

“And the Lord spoke, etc. And they shall take for Me a contribution [terumah], etc.” Three contributions [terumot] are mentioned here, etc. There are several questions regarding this matter. Why were the first two contributions attributed to the Holy One, blessed be He? For in the first, He said take for Me, meaning for My name, and in the second, He said take My contribution. But in the third, He mentioned neither of these expressions. On the contrary, it says about it from them, attributing it to the givers. Furthermore, why in the first two contributions did He place the language of “taking” before the language of “contribution,” but in the third, He placed the language of “contribution” before “taking”? Additionally, how did He insert the statement from every man whose heart inspires him to generosity between the first two contributions, which were a half-shekel per head, which was a full obligation upon every man of Israel and was not dependent at all on the generosity of the giver’s heart? Only the third contribution, about which is said gold, silver, and copper, came exclusively as a donation. So why did He mention the language of “taking” with it, implying compulsion, when something that comes as a donation involves no compulsion? Moreover, in the first instance He said they shall take, in the third person, while in the latter two He said you shall take in the second person. And what seems most reasonable to me to say about this, is because, regarding the matter of the shekels, there is a disagreement among the Torah commentators. Some hold that the Israelites were not counted individually [by head], but rather the shekels were counted in order to protect them from the evil eye. And the Abarbanel disagrees with this opinion and said that they were actually counted individually [by head], and the shekels were given as a form of charity either before or after the counting as an atonement for their souls, as explained in his book on the portion of Ki Tisa. So behold, I have room to interpret the term “yidvenu” in two ways. Either as a term of donation [nedavah] in its simple meaning, or as its exact opposite. Since it is not written as “yindavenu” with a nun, there is room to interpret it like “yedvenu” with a vav, because the letters bet, vav, mem, and peh are interchangeable, especially the soft bet which is pronounced like vav. This indicates someone whose heart is sorrowful and pained about giving. Therefore, regarding the first two offerings, which according to all opinions were obligatory for every person — and even if someone did not want to contribute, the collectors could take from him against his will — the Torah preceded the term “taking” before “offering.” This is because through the collectors coming to collect from him against his will, he would come to contribute, as the collectors’ taking prompts the offering. However, the third offering came voluntarily with no obligation at all, and if one did not want to contribute, who could force him? Therefore, regarding this offering, the term “offering” precedes “taking,” indicating that after one gives willingly from his heart and designates and separates from his possessions according to his desire, then the collectors can compel him and take from him what he has already contributed, whether verbally or physically. Thus it says, And this is the offering that you shall take from them, meaning that after he has contributed, then “you shall take from them” forcefully if he regrets it in the meantime. This is what is meant by “Speak to the children of Israel, and let them take for Me an offering.” It means they should appoint collectors who will take the offering from each and every person. But before they ask from others, they themselves should give their portion, to adorn themselves first, and afterward take from others. This is indicated by the letter “vav” in veyikchu [and they shall take]. However, from every person whose heart moves him, refers to one whose heart is pained by giving, as he is a miserly person and doesn’t give willingly. There is concern that he might quarrel with the collectors. In such cases, you shall take — you, Moses and Aaron or the princes of Israel, should collect from them, for surely they will respect your presence and not argue with you about this. But if yidvenu is interpreted like “yindvenu” [will make him donate], which is language of generosity of heart [nediv lev], then it connects to what was said earlier, they shall take for Me an offering from every person whose heart moves him with generosity. Consequently, we understand that what is said afterward, you shall take My offering, implies that you yourselves shall take, referring to someone who is not generous of heart, for the reason explained. However, since it says in the portion of Vayakhel (35:5), whoever is of a generous heart, let him bring it, this implies that here the text is speaking about someone whose heart is pained [daveh] and hurting, and from him you shall take forcibly. But one who is generous of heart will bring it on his own, and there is no need to compel him. However, the term take mentioned regarding the third offering, which comes as a donation, has other implications. That is, if respected collectors come to the donor, undoubtedly he will honor them and donate more than if ordinary people came to him. For this reason, it is customary to make donations in public, in case people will show respect [and give more generously]. According to Abarbanel, who explained that even the shekels, although they were obligatory, were nevertheless like charity and atonement, the statement “from every person whose heart motivates him” indicates actual voluntary giving. This phrase applies both to what was mentioned before and after, teaching that these two contributions also depended on the donor’s willing heart. However, for the third contribution, there was no need to mention this because it was obvious that it was voluntary and not obligatory, as this was already implied by placing the word contribution before “taking.”Since the first two contributions were obligatory and served as atonement for the soul, as it is written to atone for your souls, and it is written Behold, all souls are Mine (Ezekiel 18:4), and through God’s kindness, He takes a half-shekel per person in exchange for the soul, therefore it says first they shall take for Me and in the second My contribution, because God’s name is associated with them. But the third contribution, which was not obligatory, was not attributed to God, rather it was attributed to the donors, as it says, This is the contribution that you shall take from them, because it depends on them. This is why it says from them and not that it was an obligation from God. And it is reasonable to understand another reason, for why He attributed the first two donations to the Holy One, blessed be He, but not the third. Because everywhere that there is humility and submission among the lower beings, there dwells the hidden might of the Holy One, blessed be He, who resides with the crushed and lowly of spirit. But in every place where there is a hint of pride, the Holy One, blessed be He, does not want to associate His blessed name there. Therefore, the first two donations, in which all people were equal, for the rich did not give more and the poor did not give less, and there was no place for anyone to boast over his fellow saying “my donation is greater than yours” — those He attributed to Himself. For in the first it is stated, and they shall take for Me, for My name, as we have already explained above at the beginning of Parashat Miketz and in the verse in every place where I cause My name to be mentioned (Exodus 20:21) that all the letters of the great Name indicate humility, see there. And in the second He said My donation. And so the thing made from these two donations resembles the donation itself, for just as everyone was equal in it and there was no one elevating himself above his fellow, so too from the first donation were made the sockets [adanim], as all the sockets were equal, one like the other, and they were at the bottom of the entire structure like a threshold that is trodden upon, and they were the foundations for the entire structure. “For like them are those who make them,” for just as those who gave that donation were equal in their giving and none of them was elevated above his fellow, so too were made from them these sockets that indicate humility, for humility is the foundation of the structure upon which the entire house of Israel is established. And they are called “adanim” [sockets], which has the connotation of Lordship [adnut] and authority, because anyone who makes himself like a threshold that is trodden upon from below becomes a Lord from above, for whoever humbles himself, the Holy One, blessed be He, elevates him and makes him a foundation and support for the entire structure, like these sockets that were the foundation and support for the entire structure. And so too the term “nasi” [prince/leader] means that he bears [nosei] others, for they all lean upon him. And from the second donation they brought communal offerings, which were also equal every day, one lamb in the morning and the second in the evening, and it is written (Psalms 51:19) The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit, meaning the purpose of sacrifices is to bring a person to a state of a broken spirit. Therefore, He also attributed it to Himself, as it is said, take My donation, because the donation and what is made from it all indicate the virtue of humility. Therefore, the Holy One said, This is My donation. But the third donation, in which not everyone was equal and they varied between less and more, because the rich person who gives more has room to feel superior over the poor person, saying, “I have a greater share in the house of our God than the poor person through my abundant giving,” therefore from it were made all the holy vessels, like the Ark, the Menorah, the Table, the Altar, and the rest of the vessels. And without doubt there was superiority of some over others, because the crown of the Ark corresponds to the crown of Torah, and the crown of the Altar corresponds to the crown of priesthood, and the crown of the Table corresponds to the crown of kingship. And even though according to the holiness of the vessels, the Holy One should have attributed this donation to Himself, nevertheless, since in the collection of the donation there was an aspect of pride and superiority of those who gave more over those who gave less, therefore the Holy One did not attribute it to Himself. And in this I have found a resolution to a certain difficulty. Since the donations were counted in order of their value — gold, silver, and copper — why then are the shoham stones and the filling stones listed at the end, as the stones are undoubtedly more valuable than gold? Although we could resolve this by saying that since the princes brought the shoham stones and filling stones at the end, as Rashi mentions (Exodus 35:27), therefore their donation is mentioned last. Nevertheless, according to our approach, we can also say that the Holy One, blessed be He, wanted to show that whether one gives little or much, all are equal before Him. Therefore, He mentioned the most valuable item last, so that the wealthy would not glory over the poor by saying, “My donation is great, and the Torah lists it first.” Furthermore, He mentioned their donation last because their haughtiness brought them to this — that they donated last, saying, “Let the congregation donate, and whatever they lack, we will complete.” All this is a way of pride and arrogance, saying, “We have the means to fill what they lack.” Therefore, He mentioned their donation last, for whoever exalts himself, the Holy One, blessed be He, humbles him. Not only that, but vehanesi’am [the princes] is written without a yod, because only one letter of the great Name is engraved in the word “nasi” [prince], namely the yod. And because they exalted themselves in their words, God took from their name this letter from His blessed Name, which entirely points to the attribute of humility, as explained in the verse, In every place where I cause My name to be remembered, I will come to you. This matter is one of the secrets of the Torah, and the shape of the yod also indicates humility and smallness.

If you will find that my commentary on the construction of the Tabernacle and the requisite furnishings and priestly garments is relatively brief, the reason is that my grandfather Rashi, of blessed memory, has already elaborated on most of it.

Speak with the children of Israel, that they set apart before Me a portion; from every man whose heart is willing, you shall take My portion.

ויקחו לי תרומה THAT THEY TAKE ME A HEAVE OFFERING — “Me” means to the glory of My Name (Midrash Tanchuma, Terumah 1). תרומה is something set apart (cf. Onkelos); the meaning is: let them set apart from their possessions a voluntary gift in My honour. ידבנו לבו — The word ידבנו is of the same root as נדבה (the נ in the latter being replaced by the Dagesh in the ד); it is a term denoting “good-will”, apaisement in old French (cf. Rashi on Genesis 33:10 and Leviticus 19:5). תקחו את תרומתי YE SHALL TAKE MY HEAVE OFFERING — Our Rabbis said: the expression תרומה is used here three times, being an allusion to three different heave offerings; one is the heave offering which consisted of a beka (half a shekel) a head, and of which the sockets were made, as is set forth in the section אלה פקודי (Exodus 39:26-27); another is the heave offering for the altar — a beka a head that was given to the funds (more lit., “the basket”, in which collections for communal or charitable purposes were made) from which to purchase the communal sacrifices; (see Rashi on Exodus 30:15) and the other one is that implied in the word תרומתי “My heave offering” and referred to by the word כסף in the next verse — the heave offering for the Tabernacle which was a free-will gift from each individual (Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 1:1). Thirteen different articles (cf. Tanchuma) that are mentioned in this section were all required either for the work of the Tabernacle (i. e. the construction of the Tabernacle or making the articles contained therein), or for the priests’ garments, as you will find when you look closely into the matter.

The word "and they shall take for Me." Like the expression "Turn aside to me" (Judges 4:18) — meaning that the one called upon should remove himself from his place and come near to [the speaker]. So too here: that one should take from what he has and give it to Me. Similarly, "Take for me now a little water" (1 Kings 17:10).

דבר אל בני ישראל ויקחו לי תרומה, tell the stewards of Israel that I desire that they should collect a contribution for Me. [the Torah had not specified “who” should take. Ed.] Moses also issued such instructions on his return from the mountain the third time as the Torah reports (Exodus 34,32) ואחרי כן נגשו כל בני ישראל, ויצום את כל אשר דבר ה' אתו בהר סיני, “after that all the people of Israel drew near, and he commanded them all that the Lord had talked about with him on Mount Sinai.” This was followed by ויאמר משה אל כל עדת בני ישראל קחו מאתכם תרומה in 35,4. The עדת בני ישראל who were to carry out this “taking (accepting) of the gifts were the Sanhedrin, the High Court. The Israelites were so anxious to contribute that they did not wait until the High Court organised all this, but they approached Moses personally bringing with them so many contributions that Moses was forced to call a halt to this (36,5). This was also the reason that there was nothing left for the princes of Israel (the tribal chiefs) to contribute other than the gemstones for Aaron’s breastplate and the various oils making up the “oil of anointing.” מאת כל איש, G’d commanded that the procedure should not be like the imposition of every man’s contribution for the public charity fund which was treated as a tax. Contributions were to be accepted only from volunteers.

דבר אל בני ישראל. "Speak to the children of Israel, etc." Why did the Torah have to spell out: "speak to the children of Israel" and did not content itself with the word לאמור at the end of verse one? It was clear that G'd meant for Moses to speak to the children of Israel! Alternatively, the Torah could have omitted the word לאמור at the end of verse one and simply have continued: "speak to the children of Israel, etc." I believe that in order to understand this we must refer to Yuma 4, according to which a person is forbidden to relate to another what he has been told by a third party unless he had been specifically permitted or instructed to do so. The Talmud bases this on the phrase: "G'd spoke to Moses לאמור 'to say'." According to this rule the Torah had to employ the line: "speak to the children of Israel," as otherwise Moses would have understood that whereas he was permitted to convey G'd's words to the people he was not duty bound to do so. When you apply this rule you will be able to account for many other instances in the Torah where the word לאמר is followed by דבר, "speak!" Our Rabbis in Yalkut Re-uveni explain the line "speak to the children of Israel" as meaning that Moses was not to appoint members of the mixed multitude to positions of authority over the children of Israel. They understood the word דבר in this instance as derived from דברות ושררה, expressions denoting authority. ויקחו לי, and they shall take for Me, etc." Why is this paragraph introduced by the conjunctive letter ו? Perhaps we can explain this by a statement attributed to our sages in Shekalim 1,3 according to which a person had to pawn some of his possessions in order to to contribute the half shekel for the building of the Tabernacle. We read in the Tanchumah on our portion that actually the Torah speaks here about three different kinds of תרומות, contributions. Two of these contributions consisted of a shekel per head whereas the size of the third contribution varied in size according to the individual's generosity and ability to contribute. One of the fixed contributions was used for the silver sockets holding up the beams of the Tabernacle, the second one was each individual's contribution for the purchase of the animals required for the public offerings, whereas the third contribution was a free-willed gift towards the materials needed for the construction of the Tabernacle. Keeping the above in mind the conjunctive letter ו before the word יקחו suggests a contrast between this donation and the one following which was determined by the individual's generosity, and which was not imposed on each Israelite. The words בני ישראל indicate that the levy was imposed only on the male Israelites, not on the women. Only the males were counted as we we know from Exodus 30,13. Accordingly, the words: מאת כל איש, "from each man," indicate that the levy was of equal size for each person from whom it was taken. Even if a person wished to contribute more than the half-s...

ויקחו לי תרומה, “they shall take for Me a contribution;” some commentators believe that this paragraph was revealed to Moses during the forty days that he had been on the Mountain immediately following the revelation, and that already at that time, before the sin of the golden calf, he had been instructed to build the Tabernacle, in which the Holy Ark was to be placed that would contain the Tablets.תקחו את תרומתי, “you are to take (accept) My contribution.” Rashi explains that this contribution consisted of 13 different types of materials. They are the following: gold, silver, copper; blue, purple and crimson yarns; fine linen, goat’s hair, ram skins, skins of techashim, acacia wood; oil for incense and oil for lighting; and the princes were to supply the gemstones for the High Priest’s garments.

קחו מוסרי ואל כסף ודעת מחרוץ נבחר, “accept my discipline instead of silver; accept knowledge instead of gold.” (Proverbs 8,10). In this verse Solomon warns man that he should harness his powers of alertness and energy for the pursuit of the ethical values of Torah rather than for the amassing of silver and gold. The reason is that the values Torah has to offer are useful both in this world and in the hereafter whereas silver and gold are useful only in this life. Not only that, a surfeit of silver and gold is potentially quite destructive and brings with it many causes for worry. This is what the sages said in Avot 2,7: “he who amasses silver (money) increases his worries.” The only thing which cannot be amassed to excess without negative results is Torah. The meaning of the words: “and knowledge is preferable to gold” is “accept the knowledge dispensed by Torah for it is superior to gold.” The reason Solomon employed the word קחו for the acquisition of ethical imperatives is that just as material benefits are acquired by the owner “taking” them, i.e. they are not usually the result of a windfall, so a similar effort is required to obtain proficiency in Torah knowledge and for the student to embrace its ethical message. Anyone displaying laziness in his attitude to the acquisition of Torah is liable to punishment even if he does observe the relevant commandment. If he were to pay lip-service to the importance of Torah-study and implementing its teachings but he relates to it with a lukewarm heart, he is guilty of a sin too great to carry. On the one hand, he does perform (go through the motions) the commandment, but on the other hand, he is subject to punishment for the disdain he displayed in the manner in which he fulfills the commandment. The same applies to people who say their prayers regularly, but as a form of routine, possibly even thinking of their business affairs while uttering the holy words of the prayers as composed by our sages. Anyone who acts in this manner is almost guilty of violating the commandment (20,23) “You shall not make (gods) of what is with Me, either out of silver or even out of gold.” We have already explained that the principal meaning of this line is that “while you are standing in My presence, addressing Me, you shall not think of either silver or gold, i.e. your private affairs.” Any petitioner, or even person who simply offers up praises to the Lord, estranges himself from G’d by doing so. It is something one would not dare do during an audience with a mortal king, a king of flesh and blood; how much more offensive is it when done vis-a-vis the King of Kings. When a person wears his phylacteries and is too lazy to take them off before going to sleep, he is guilty of a similar severe offense against G’d. Similarly, one must not pass gas while wearing the phylacteries. Anything the sages legislated with regard to proper respect for the phylacteries applies to the performance of the other commandments also. You have now learned that even while performing a commandment one may become guilty of a sin by the very manner in which one performs the commandment because of the lazy manner in which one performs it. The matter is comparable to vinegar drunk by people at the physicians’ urging. This drink may be beneficial to one’s health or it may even be detrimental. It all depends. While it may cure one’s stomach, it may harm one’s teeth. Similarly, the heat of a fire may be gut-warming and may dissipate the effects of winter. At the same time, the accompanying smoke and its inhalation may cause harm to one’s lungs. What follows from all this is how important it is to ensure that one’s mitzvah-performance does not result in unwelcome side-effects. This is the reason Solomon always condemns laziness, considering it a very negative character trait. (compare Proverbs 10,26: “as vinegar is to the teeth, and smoke to the eyes, so is the lazy man to those who send him on a mission.”) Another verse in which Solomon expresses his disdain for the lazy is Proverbs 13,4: “the soul of the lazy man desires but has nothing;” What Solomon means is that if someone desires something and comes to the conclusion that he does not lack anything worth desiring, this is proof that he is lazy. Had he made a serious effort to find things which need improving he would have found such matters. [An example would be someone looking to do charity but not finding a person in need of charity. Ed.] Our sages (Megillah 6) phrase it thus: if a person says to you: ‘I have tried but could not find, do not believe him’; if he said: ‘I did not try but I did find, do not believe him either.’ If, however, he says: “I have tried to find and succeeded in finding, do believe him!” This is why Solomon was so insistent that laziness is a very bad character trait. Another occasion in the Book of Proverbs where Solomon makes the point of exhorting us in the name of the Torah to be diligent is in Proverbs 6,6: “go to the ant, you lazybones; study its ways and wise up!” The ant is to serve as an inspiration to man. Although it is one of the most inferior of all the crawling insects it uses the summer in order to stock up for a winter without being forced to do so by a ruler. When a person is diligent in perfecting his character traits he will experience that he enjoys constant personality growth. He will find that every day he is walking in a forward direction, never regressing (Jeremiah 7,24). Concerning the people mentioned by Jeremiah, Solomon said (Proverbs 15,19): “the way of the lazy man is like a hedge of thorns, but the way of the upright is paved.” A lazy man has prevented himself from making progress by his very laziness. Instead of progressing morally and ethically he regresses using his lethargic manner to prevent him from accomplishing anything. If we were to compare such a man to a wheat field with all its potential to produce a useful crop, he would instead produce only nettles. Solomon employs this parable when saying in Proverbs 24,30-31: “I have passed by the field of the lazy man, and passed the vineyard of the man devoid of understanding. Here it was, all overgrown with thorns; its surface was covered with nettles, its stone fence was broken down. Solomon compared a person who is too lazy to perfect his personality to a farmer who is too lazy to tend the various forms of labour required to produce a crop. Seeing that most people do have the energy to bestir themselves in the pursuit of silver or gold, Solomon demands that they apply themselves with equal vigour to the study of Torah and the ethical imperatives contained in the Torah. Torah is also called מוסר “ethical teaching,” as we know from Proverbs 6,23 ודרך חיים תוכחת מוסר, “instructive rebukes are a way of life.” By applying these teachings to oneself man acquires eternal life in the hereafter where he will feast on the glory of the Shechinah. Our sages in Proverbs 2,21 interpreted the words: “for the upright dwell on earth, and the blameless will remain on it,” to mean that the word ישכנו in that verse is a reference to these people enjoying the glory of the Shechinah when their time comes to move to the celestial regions. The Shechinah is always close to the Torah. When G’d gave the Ten Commandments at Mount Sinai the Torah wrote (Exodus 24,16) וישכון כבוד ה’ על הר סיני, “the Shechinah of G’d rested on Mount Sinai as the attribute of כבוד, ‘honour, glory.’” “It”, i.e. the Torah, is the cause that the Shechinah rested on Mount Sinai when G’d revealed Himself there, and the word וישכון refers to a hidden presence of the Shechinah, whereas the word כבוד refers to the revealed nature of that appearance of the Shechinah during the giving of the Torah. This was confirmed when the Torah described this manifestation in Exodus 24,17 as ומראה כבוד ה’ כאש אוכלת בראש ההר לעיני בני ישראל. “Now the Presence of the Lord appeared in the sight of the Israelites as a consuming fire on the top of the mountain.” Later on, when the Tabernacle was constructed, this Shechinah was hidden inside the Holy of Holies and in order to proceed with the construction of the Tabernacle housing the Shechinah the people were bidden to bring their respective contributions. ויקחו לי תרומה מאת כל איש אשר ידבנו לבו תקחו את תרומתי, “and from every person whose heart so moves him you shall accept the gifts for Me.” The plain meaning of the text is that these gifts were dedicated to G’d’s name. The word תרומה means something set aside. In other words, the Israelites were to set aside a voluntary contribution for the building of the Tabernacle each out of his or her own funds. The whole concept of the Tabernacle has to be understood as an internalized version of what transpired during the revelation at Mount Sinai (based on Nachmanides). The very attribute כבוד which rested on Mount Sinai for all to see afterwards was manifest inside the Holy of Holies on the ark between the cherubs on an ongoing basis. The principal difference was that it could no longer be seen. Moses had said in Deut. 5,21 “here the Lord has shown us His majestic Presence כבוד וגדלו,“ and this has been repeated in connection with the Tabernacle twice more. Once in Exodus 40,34: “and the Presence of the Lord filled the Tabernacle.” In the verse immediately following, the Torah also writes that Moses was unable to enter the Tabernacle as the cloud had settled over it and “the Presence of the Lord filled the Tabernacle.” Just as the Torah wrote in connection with the Mount Sinai experience (Deut. 4,36) “From the heavens He let you hear His voice to discipline you; on the earth He let you see His great fire; and from amidst the fire you heard His words,” so a parallel experience is described in connection with the Tabernacle in Numbers 7,89: “he (Moses) would hear the voice addressing him from above the cover that was on top of the Ark of the covenant between the two cherubs; thus He spoke to him.” If, at Mount Sinai, the “nobles” were described as: “they saw the G’d of Israel,” we find something similar in connection with the Tabernacle in that the G’d of Israel “sat” on the cherubs (Samuel II 6,20). This is also what the prophet Ezekiel reported as seeing in his vision (Ezekiel 10,19-20) וכבוד אלו-הי ישראל עליהם מלמעלה, היא החיה אשר ראיתי תחת אלו-הי ישראל בנהר כבר ואדע כי כרובים המה, “and the glory of the G’d of Israel was above them; this was the Chayah which I saw beneath the G’d of Israel at the river Kevar.” תקחו את תרומתי, “take (accept) the contribution for Me.” After the Torah had first mentioned whose heart would be moved by generosity of spirit the Torah informs us that such a spirit results in the gift being described by G’d as “My gift,” as if it were G’d’s own contribution. G’d feels close to people who are of generous heart whereas He hates people who are stingy by nature. Furthermore, the word תרומתי, is meant to teach that once the donation has been made (promised), it belongs to G’d, and if the donor does not pay it he is liable to punishment as he has stolen from G’d. Once the gift has left the domain of the donor, he is no longer responsible for what happens to it. It is possible to explain the fact that the word תרומה occurs here three times in two verses as meaning that the Torah speaks of three different contributions by means of which the world is elevated. They are: חכמה, תבונה, ודעת, “wisdom-insight-know-ledge.” This is based on Proverbs 3,19-20: “G’d founded the earth with wisdom; He established the heavens with understanding. By His knowledge the depths were broken up.” The reason why these facts were alluded to here was that the construction of the Tabernacle was comparable to the construction of the universe (Bamidbar Rabbah 12,13). The first of these gifts was the one mentioned here which was used for the construction of the Tabernacle. The second תרומה consisted of the half-shekel which every male over the age of 20 had to contribute after the sin of the golden calf for the construction of the sockets of the beams making up the walls of the Tabernacle (Exodus 30,13). The third was the contribution known as תרומת המזבח, the half shekel contributed by all the males for financing the cost of the daily public offerings to be brought on behalf of the entire people. This is the תרומה mentioned in Numbers 1,2 where Moses was commanded to count the males above the age of twenty. The counting took place by means of each Israelite contributing a coin of a half-shekel. Of these three תרומות, contributions, two were considered sacred (the money), whereas the third, the one mentioned in 30,13 was not of sacred character as the occasion was the need to atone for the donor’s part in the sin of the golden calf. This is spelled out in detail by the words ונתנו איש כופר נפשו, “they shall each contribute (the half shekel) as an atonement for his soul” (30,12). When the Israelites entered the Holy Land they were once more commanded three times to contribute a תרומה. Two of these contributions were sacred in character, whereas the third was profane. The third, i.e. חלה, was profane seeing that it is applicable not only in the Holy Land but also in the Diaspora. The reason that the commandment of חלה, a תרומה for the priest, is the exception in that it also has to be set aside in the Diaspora is to ensure that the knowledge of this commandment will not be forgotten during the long years of exile the Jewish people experienced. In order to make it clear to us that the Tabernacle’s construction equaled that of the creation of the universe the Torah mentioned all the three תרומות which contributed to the founding of earth (as per the verse in Proverbs) at the beginning of the portion before we hear the details of the materials and quantities and measurements required. This is why the Torah writes about Betzalel the master-craftsman in charge of the construction of the Tabernacle: “I have filled him with a Godly spirit, with wisdom, insight, and knowledge, and with every craft” (Exodus 31,3). According to Berachot 55 Betzalel was able to combine the letters of the alphabet or of the Torah in the manner in which they had been used to create the universe. The wording of our verse is what I have just quoted, and the wording in Proverbs is: “G’d founded earth with wisdom, etc.” Our sages wanted to hint when writing all this that there was a parallelism of the wisdom required in creating the universe and in the wisdom required to carry out the instructions pertaining to constructing the Tabernacle and its contents. You will find in Pirke d'Rabbi Eliezer chapter 3 that Solomon employed all of these three elements (wisdom, insight, and knowledge) to build his Temple. You find in Mechilta 7,14 that Chirom (compare Kings I 4,13-14) “was the son of a widowed woman from the tribe of Naftali whose father had been a coppersmith in the city of Tyre. He was endowed with חכמה, תבונה, ודעת,” exactly the same talents as mentioned in connection with Betzalel and mentioned by Solomon in Proverbs. In the future, when the third Temple will be built, the same three attributes will also be employed in its construction. The precise wording is (Proverbs 24,3-4) ”a house is built by wisdom; it is established through understanding; its rooms are filled with knowledge.” G’d will endow the Israelites with all three as a gift as we know from Proverbs 2,6: ”for the Lord will grant wisdom, etc.” You will note that Solomon did not speak about wisdom having been granted but about wisdom which will be granted in the future. All of these three attributes will be granted to King Messiah as we know from Isaiah 11,2: ”a spirit of wisdom and insight, a spirit of counsel and valor; a spirit of knowledge and reverence for the Lord.” A Midrashic approach: “What do the words ויקחו לי תרומה, “and they will take a gift for Me mean?” After I, G’d, already have given them My gift, i.e. the Torah, in which is written כי לקח טוב נתתי לכם תורתי, “for I have given you good instructions, My Torah, etc., I ask you to bring Me a gift” (compare Proverbs 4,2). How are we to understand the words כי לקח טוב נתתי לכם? Tanchuma Terumah 2-3 describes the following parable. There were two merchants. One had pepper the other had silk. They exchanged their respective merchandise, the former one taking the silk, the latter took the pepper. As a result of these transactions, each of the merchants now lacked what he had previously possessed. Not so with Torah. If someone studies tractate Moed this will become his property. If another studies tractate Zeraim this will become his property. He who has mastered tractate Moed can now teach the one who had not learned it as yet without giving up what he already possesses. This is the meaning of “for I have given you good instruction.” You will retain it. It happened once that a certain person found himself on a boat together with many merchants each of whom carried his wares with him. Seeing that the scholar did not have a bundle they asked him: “where is your merchandise?” He answered them: “my merchandise is superior to yours.” The other merchants searched the whole boat without being able to locate that scholar’s merchandise. They began to ridicule this merchant (scholar) who did not have a bundle. In the meantime the boat was attacked by pirates who stole all the other merchants’ wares. When the boat docked and everyone went ashore, the other merchants found themselves in a strange country without money or food, etc. The scholar, however, went to the nearest Torah Academy where the local Jewish population received him with great honour. When the merchants became aware of this they went to the scholar asking his forgiveness for their rude behaviour towards him. They then asked him to do them a favour and to intercede on their behalf with the local population so that they would receive food and lodging. They appealed to him to tell the local people that they had been robbed and were not penniless beggars. Thereupon the scholar turned to them saying: “did I not tell you that my merchandise was superior to yours? Yours has ben lost whereas my merchandise endures. Not only this. Anyone who deals in tangible merchandise can do so only at certain hours on certain days. Customers do not always come to buy. My merchandise is available at any time and I can deliver it both by day and by night. Torah is a standby not only in this life but also in the hereafter.” All this is included in the verse כי לקח טוב נתתי לכם תורתי. A Kabbalistic approach: the words ויקחו לי תרומה may be understood as an invitation for the כנסת ישראל, the spiritual concept of the Jewish nation to gather around G’d. They are to be considered as a gift to G’d, collectively. It is the כנסת ישראל which is referred to by the word זאת in verse 3. This is why the Torah wrote here: וזאת התרומה אשר תקחו מאתם, “and this is the gift you are to take from them.” The word וזאת is also featured in Genesis 49,28 where I have explained this in detail. We have a verse in Psalms 118,23 מאת ה’ היתה זאת, “the זאת is from Hashem,” which makes a similar point. The reason for the wording ויקחו לי “let them take for Me,” is that it is an invitation to bring together the celestial forces with those on earth and vice-versa. Seeing that in all such matters the driving force is the heart and the mind, the Torah states that in order to attain such an objective it is necessary מאת כל איש אשר ידבנו לבו, “for every such person to be motivated by his heart.” This is all alluded to in the Tanchuma 24 on Emor where the point is made that the Torah did not merely write ויקחו תרומה but ויקחו לי תרומה. According to that Midrash the word לי may be understood as אותי, as if the Torah meant: “you will take Me.” G’d meant, so to speak, “take Me to take up residence amongst you.” Another penetrating comment found in Shemot Rabbah 49,2 is that the words mean that it is the כנסת ישראל which is the תרומה, the gift. The Midrash bases this on the verse קדש ישראל לה’ ראשית תבואתו, “Israel is holy to the Lord, the first of His harvest” (Jeremiah 2,3). In the Sefer Habahir item 103 you will find the following explanation of our verse: “they shall take for the Holy One a gift which is equivalent to י i.e. the tenth. How do I know that the tenth is holy? Because we read in Leviticus 27,32 “the tenth shall be holy for the Lord.” What precisely is the meaning of קדש,”holy?” Ezekiel 44,30 explains וראשית כל בכורי כל וכל תרומת כל, “All the choice first fruits of every kind and all terumah of any kind-of all your terumah gifts;” the word ראשית is equivalent to חכמה, compare Psalms 111,10 ראשית חכמה. Thus far the Sefer Habahir. [I believe the intention of the author as well as the author of Sefer Habahir is to read the word לי as ”ל”י “as a tenth.” Ed.] When the Torah writes a little while later on (verse 9) ככל אשר אני מראה אותך, the meaning is that G’d showed Moses all this already while he was on the mountain (27,8). The word אני refers to he attribute of Justice in this instance. This is not the only time the attribute of Justice appears in connection with the Tabernacle or Temple. We find the same, also in connection with construction of a Temple, in (Chronicles I 28,19) where David says that הכל בכתב מיד ה’ עלי השכיל כל מלאכת התבנית. “All this the Lord made me understand by His hand on me, I give you in writing- the blueprint of all the works” (David speaking to his son Solomon). The words יד ה’ in that verse also refer to the attribute of Justice. You should realize that beginning with the words ויקחו לי up until the end of that verse the Torah speaks about a תרומה עליונה, a gift to heaven, whereas the words in the following verse dealing with gold, silver and copper, etc., refer to a תרומת המשכן the contributions to be made for constructing the Tabernacle. The meaning of all this is that when the Israelites would bring such contributions as gold, silver, copper etc., they would be considered as having made simultaneous contributions to the celestial regions. This concept enables us to understand the words ועשו לי מקדש. The contributions for the Tabernacle are considered as making a Temple for G’d, as a result of which ושכנתי בתוכם, “I will dwell within them,” i.e. this is the result of the תרומה עליונה, the spiritual aspect of the gift, the motivation of generosity. The mystical dimension of the words יביאה את תרומת ה’, “he will bring G’d’s gift,” is that this gift will come with the terrestrial gift. The Shechinah moving to earth and taking up residence inside the Tabernacle will be the result of the תרומה עליונה. The gift of gold, silver, etc., only provides the location for the Shechinah if we merit its presence amongst us. To sum up: donating materials without the gift representing the right spirit will result in an empty Tabernacle, one in which the presence of G’d is not manifest.

ויקחו לי תרומה, “let them take for Me a contribution.” After G’d had spoken to Moses face to face when He gave him the Ten Commandments, and He had already communicated some of the other 613 commandments which form the bedrock of the entire legislation known as Torah, a method comparable to our sages when they admitted proselytes to the Jewish faith and nation, the people in the meantime had accepted even all the laws they had not yet had time to become familiar with. G’d had concluded a covenant with them which confirmed them as His exclusive people for all time to come. He, in turn, would be their exclusive G’d. The time had come then to erect a Sanctuary for this G’d on earth, a structure which symbolized G’d’s presence not only on earth generally, but in the midst of His people. This represented the realization of G’d’s promise in Exodus 19,5 which spelled out the special relationship between G’d and the Jewish people. The principal reason for building this structure was to provide a home for the Shechinah, G’d’s benevolent presence among the people. The Holy Ark within that structure represented the holiest part of it. In connection with it, and after giving detailed instructions as to its size, the materials it was to be made of, and the lid and the cherubs adorning it, G’d had announced ונועדתי לך שם ודברתי אתך מעל הכפורת מבין שני הכרובים אשר על ארון העדות, “there I will set My meetings with you, and I shall speak with you from atop the Cover, from between the two cherubs that are on the Ark of Testimony, etc.” This is why Moses began immediately with the construction of the Holy Ark, followed by the making of the Cover, followed by the Table and the Menorah, all of which are the furnishings of that Tabernacle The fact that G’d did indeed speak to Moses from that location, on the Cover of the Holy Ark, has been confirmed in Numbers.

תרומה, the setting aside of the money or materials for the construction of the Tabernacle.

ויקחו לי תרומה, “they shall take for Me a contribution;” this portion had been told to Moses during the forty days that Moses was on Mount Sinai, immediately after the revelation at that Mountain, [In other words, before the smashing of the Tablets, and the golden calf episode. Ed.] G–d, at that time, had already told Moses where to erect the Tabernacle, and that it would house the Holy Ark, inside the Holy of Holies, symbolising G–d’s presence on earth. He told him that it would contain the Tablets, and that the Israelites would be encamped around the Tabernacle. This is what is meant in verse eight of our verse where G–d described Himself as residing in the midst of the people, i.e. as if surrounded by angels as He had been in heaven. Concerning this state of affairs, David had said in Psalms 82,6: אמרתי אלוהים אתם ובני עליון כולכם, “I had said: ‘you are the children of G–d all of you children of the Supreme Being.” [David bemoans the demotion of the Jewish people that followed the golden calf episode in the verse following. Ed.]

And this is the portion that you shall take from them: gold, and silver, and copper;

זהב וכסף ונחשת וגו׳ GOLD AND SILVER AND COPPER etc. — All these came (were brought) as voluntary gifts, each man giving as his heart prompted him, except that silver which was brought by all in equal quantities (cf. Rashi above), a half shekel by each person. For we do not find in the account of the entire work connected with the Tabernacle that any silver was needed for the work there described in detail over and above this, for it is said, (Exodus 38:25-26) “And the silver of them who were numbered of the congregation [was an hundred talents, etc.] … a beka for every man etc.” and vv. 27 and 28 inform us that of this silver were made the Sockets and the hooks. Of the other silver which came (was brought) there, as a free-will gift they made the holy vessels (lit., vessels for service), and it is this silver that is referred to in this verse and which is stated in the preceding verse as having been brought voluntarily.

V’ZOTH’ (AND THIS) IS THE OFFERING. By way of the Truth, [the mystic lore of the Cabala], this is like the expression, And the Eternal gave Solomon wisdom. It is also written: ‘v’zoth’ (and this) is it that their father spoke unto them and blessed them; ‘v’zoth’ (and this) is the blessing; the Eternal’s doing is ‘zoth’ (this). The Rabbis have already alluded to this in Bereshith Rabbah on the basis of the verse, I understand from the elders. The discerning student will understand. And in Eileh Shemoth Rabbah the Rabbis have said: “And this is the offering which ye shall take of them — this refers to the congregation of Israel, which is the heave-offering, as it is said, Israel is the Eternal’s hallowed portion, His first-fruits of the increase.” And it is also said there: “The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Israel: I have sold you My Torah; and I, as it were, was sold with it, for it is said, ‘v’yikchu li terumah’” [which the Midrash takes to mean: “and they shall acquire Me as an offering”]. For the offering shall be Mine, and I am with it, similar to: My beloved is mine, and I am his. Similarly, He said, according to all that I show thee, for it is I who show [the pattern of the Tabernacle, and the pattern of all its vessels]. The statement, it hath been shown to thee, also alludes to the word “I”; similarly, which is being shown to thee. And so did David say, All this [do I give thee] in writing, as the Eternal hath made me wise by His hand upon me, for the hand of G-d was upon David [to show him the pattern of the Sanctuary and of all its works].

"And this." The Gaon [Saadia] said that we find no silver in the Tabernacle except the silver of the census of the congregation — so how is it written that silver was among the freewill donations? He answered that other silver was donated as a freewill offering for the purpose of a silver table, for it is inconceivable that there should be no table there upon which to arrange something, or for cutting or washing — and also for trumpets and basins. But in my opinion there is no need [for this answer], for the text is not troubled by omitting one item out of sixteen; the fifteen [other items] were freewill donations. A parallel is: "These are the sons of Jacob who were born to him in Paddan-aram" (Genesis 35:26), yet Benjamin was born only in the land of Canaan. Also: "your fathers went down to Egypt as seventy persons" (Deuteronomy 10:22), yet the sons of Joseph had not gone down — they were born there. [The verse] mentions first the most prestigious gift, which is gold, and ends with the most prestigious: the onyx stones and the inlaid stones, for these were found only among the princes and not so with gold, which was common among the general public. Note also that there was no iron in the making of the Tabernacle, as it is written of the First Temple: "neither hammer nor axe nor any iron tool was heard in the house while it was being built" (1 Kings 6:7).

וזאת התרומה, the word זאת means that no substitutes for the materials listed would be acceptable, such as perishables, for instance. Even the kind of gemstones (pearls, for instance) not usable for Aaron’s breastplate, were not accepted. The only type of contributions that were accepted were those that in themselves would be usable in the construction of the Tabernacle and its paraphernalia.

וזאת התרומה, This is what the gift consists of, etc. The conjunctive letter ו which introduces the word זאת may indicate that the duty of contributing to the Tabernacle could not be discharged by the offering of only one or a few of the categories of building materials required. Unless all the materials specified were contributed directly, the Israelites had not fulfilled their duty. The letter ו then stipulates an additional directive, i.e. not only must you donate generously, but you must donate of all the thirteen materials required. The Tabernacle which represented a re-enactment of the work of creation could not be completed without the presence of all the ingredients listed. Alternatively, the meaning could be that all of the thirteen kinds of materials should be equally welcome. Someone who contributed flax (linen) or skins was not to be looked down upon when compared to someone who contributed gold, for instance.

זהב וכסף ונחשת, “gold, silver, and copper.” The Torah mentions three types of metal and three types of wool (different colours). We do not find that silk was used in the construction of the Tabernacle. The reason is that silk is the product of the body of a שרץ, a worm, and the only materials which were found suitable for forming part of the materials used in the construction of the Tabernacle are those that originate in ritually pure animals (compare Shabbat 28). In this connection it is well to remember that our sages explain in connection with Tachash (Shabbat 28) that the color derived from such worms as the shamir is not derived from the actual body of the respective animal/worm but from a berry which was also inhabited by a worm which took its name from the berry. This applies also to the expression תולעת השני which does not mean that the red color was taken from the worm but that that worm used to lodge in a berry from which the red color for dying the wool was taken. Afterwards the Torah lists שש, another name for flax, i.e. linen. Immediately afterwards the Torah mentions contributions of עזים, i.e. goats’ wool, not the skins or the animals themselves. This is also the reason that Onkelos does not translate the words as עזיא, goat, but as מעזיא a product of the goat. The product in question is the hair, i.e. the wool. Even though the Torah has prohibited the combining of wool and linen, the priests when they entered the holy precincts had to wear garments in which wool and linen were interwoven. I shall explain the mystical dimension of this in Parshat Kedoshim where the prohibition is written.

And this is the contribution that you shall take from them. According to the Rabbis’ interpretation (Sifrei Deuteronomy 1), this contribution was to atone for the gold of the [Golden] Calf. According to this view, we can explain that the three contributions mentioned here correspond to the three transgressions committed in the making of the Calf. In two [transgressions], all the worshippers were equal, but in the third, they differed in degree. Therefore, they brought three contributions, and only in two were they equal. First, they accepted the Calf as a deity and said, These are your gods, O Israel. In this sin, all the worshippers were equal, as they all called the Calf a god and Lord. Therefore, they brought the first contribution in which they were all equal, and from it were made all the sockets [adanim], as this word derives from the term “Lord” [adon], to atone for calling the Calf a god. The Rabbis said (Sanhedrin 63b) that they desired many deities, meaning many Lords, so therefore many sockets were made from it. Second, they sacrificed to it, as it is said, And they sacrificed to it. In this sacrifice, they were all equal as well. Therefore, the second contribution came, in which they were all equal, and from it were made communal sacrifices to atone for they sacrificed to it. Third, it is said, And they removed the gold earrings, etc. For they donated from their wealth to the making of the Calf, and not everyone’s hand was equal in this, as the rich gave more than the poor. Corresponding to this came the third contribution, in which they were not all equal, but rather each person gave according to his wealth. For this reason, the contribution of the princes — the shoham stones — is listed last, because in the case of the Calf, they also gave more than the poor, and therefore their donation is mentioned last as a penalty, since they had a greater share in this sin. Also, according to the plain meaning, God was not concerned with the quality of the donation but with the quality of the donors, because sometimes an honorable person gives a small amount of money with the generosity of his hand, while a wealthy scoundrel and man of violence gives precious stones. Without doubt, the righteous person’s donation is more acceptable. Therefore, He listed the shoham stones last. And why the Torah did not mention in all of them the language of “giving” but only the language of “taking,” is because everyone who donates charity is actually taking more than he is giving, since God will add to him similarly and doubly. This is the view of the Midrash (Vayikra Rabbah 33:6) which says: When a person purchases an object, can he also acquire its owner along with it? But the Holy One, blessed be He, gave the Torah to Israel and said, “Take Me along with it,” as it says, Let them take for Me a contribution (Exodus 25:2) — it is as if you are taking Me. One must analyze what connection the Torah has to the contribution [terumah]. The explanation is that just as one who studies Torah with his friend receives more than he gives, as the sages said (Ta’anit 7a), “From my students I learned the most,” similarly with this contribution, one takes more than he gives. This is what the same Midrash concludes: In the way of the world, when someone sells an item, the seller is sad while the buyer is happy; but when the Holy One, blessed be He, gave the Torah, He was happy, as it says For I give you good instruction; do not forsake My Torah (Proverbs 4:2). The meaning of this is that anyone who “sells” [teaches] words of Torah to his friend and studies with him, also receives from him in return, and every act of giving contains an aspect of taking. Therefore, proof is brought from the verse For I give you good instruction [lekach, which also means something taken] — and this is clear, sound, and good evidence that giving is called taking. Similarly, with this contribution, giving is called taking. Therefore, the author of this Midrash based all his words on the verse Let them take for Me a contribution. Gold, silver, and copper. Although in the Midrash Tanchuma it concludes that there were 13 items, and Rashi explains this as well, when counting them individually you find 15 items. The Re’em [Rabbi Eliyahu Mizrachi] reconciled this by explaining that the blue, purple, and crimson wool are all considered one type of wool and thus counted as one. The Chizkuni offered a different solution. However, most commentators agree that there were 15 items, and this corresponds to what many commentators have written, that the entire Tabernacle was constructed according to the pattern of three worlds, as written by Rabbeinu Bachya, in the Akeidat Yitzchak, and in Toldot Yitzchak. The Abarbanel wrote that even the sages of the nations agreed on this imagery, and it is written For with Yah, the Lord is an everlasting rock (Isaiah 26:4), meaning that all worlds were created with the Divine Name of “Yah” [the numerical equivalent of which is 15]. Therefore, all the donations for the Tabernacle and its vessels came in the number 15, indicating that the sustenance of the three worlds depends on this Tabernacle built according to this pattern. This is somewhat indicated by the 15 steps that led from the Women’s Court to the Men’s Court, and that it was built by Solomon who was in the 15th generation from Abraham. Commentators have further written that even a human being, who is called a microcosm, is built according to this pattern. This appears to be why it says, Let them make Me a sanctuary and I will dwell among them. It should have said “within it,” but the intention is that through this structure in which God’s glory dwells, He will also dwell within the Israelites, in their very bodies. For His primary indwelling there is for the sake of Israel, not for the sake of this structure made of silver and gold, as it is merely a means through which to draw God’s glory into the children of Israel. And in the Midrash Tanchuma it concludes, gold corresponds to the Babylonian kingdom, as it says You are the head of gold (Daniel 2:38). And silver corresponds to Media [Persia], as it says about it, and 10,000 talents of silver, etc. And copper corresponds to the Greek kingdom, which is inferior to them all. Red-dyed ram skins corresponds to the kingdom of Edom [Rome], etc. The Holy One, blessed be He, said: “Even though you see the four kingdoms acting haughtily and coming upon you, by your lives, I will cause salvation to sprout for you from within the subjugation.” What is written after this? Oil for lighting — this is the King Messiah, as it says There I will cause a horn to sprout for David; I have prepared a lamp for My anointed one (Psalms 132:17), and it is written Arise, shine, for your light has come (Isaiah 60:1). And regarding this midrash and others like it, many have wondered why they removed the verse from its plain meaning and interpreted it as referring to the four kingdoms. And it seems to me that the author of this midrash also believes that everything is according to its simple meaning, and they do not hint at all to the four kingdoms, but his intention is to explain why the Holy One, blessed be He, showed Nebuchadnezzar the wicked all four kingdoms, and why they were compared to gold, silver, copper, and iron. Was this wicked person worthy that God should inform him what would happen after him? Rather, certainly His intention was for the benefit of Israel, so that they would know that they have merits which empower them to stand against all these four kingdoms, and that these kingdoms would not be able to destroy Israel. For the kingdom of Babylon is compared to gold, and Israel has a corresponding commandment that they perform with gold, which is the gold of the wave offering. This gold stands corresponding [keneged, which also means against] the kingdom of Babylon — the term “keneged” indicates that this gold opposes that kingdom which is compared to gold. Similarly, silver corresponds to Media, copper corresponds to Greece, and the reddened ram skins correspond to Edom [Rome], which is compared to iron because from it they make swords that redden [with blood]. The paradigm for all of these is what we find in tractate Megillah 13b: Rabbi Levi said: It was revealed and known before the One who spoke and the world came into being that in the future, Haman would weigh out shekels [of silver] against Israel, therefore He preceded their shekels to Haman’s shekels. From here we have proof that this silver came to preempt Haman, meaning the kingdom of Media. Similarly, this gold came to preempt Nebuchadnezzar, this copper came to preempt Greece, and the reddened ram skins came to preempt Edom. In this way, the term “keneged” mentioned for all of them is precise, because these commandments oppose them. However, regarding the oil for lighting, he did not say that it is “keneged” the King Messiah, because there is no opposition here but rather their matters are one, for in the merit of the oil for lighting, God will arrange a lamp for His Messiah. And so I saw in the Tanchuma that it mentioned the term “keneged” for all of them, not like the version in the Yalkut where the term “keneged” was not written for some of them. And this is the view of the author of this midrash, to teach by what merit Israel has endurance in these four kingdoms, and this is what he concludes: “Even though you see, etc.”

'וזאת התרומה וגו, “and this is what the contribution is to consist of, etc.;” thirteen different categories of contributions are listed here. The prophet Ezekiel in Ezekiel 16,10, lists the thirteen garments (including jewelry) in which the Lord is going to dress the Jewish people in the future which correspond to this. (Tanchuma, section 5 on our portion) וזהב וכסף ונחושת, “as well as gold, silver, and copper.” These three elements correspond to the gifts (tzedakah) a person dispenses; when he does so while in perfect health, it is compared to gold, i.e. as if he had handed out gold. If he dispenses charitable gifts while sick, this is accounted for him as if he had given away silver. If he bequeaths money to charity to be dispensed after he has died, it is considered as if he had handed out copper coins. An alternate interpretation: the word “gold,” is a reference to the Kingdom of Babylon concerning which we read in Daniel 2,38: אנתה הוא ראשה די דהב, “you are the head of gold.” [Daniel speaking to Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon. Ed.] The word: “silver,” is an allusion to the Kingdom of Persia, and the ten thousand talents of silver Haman offered the King in order to be allowed to destroy the Jews [and compensate him for lost tax revenue. Ed.] (Esther 3,) Copper, which is the cheapest of all the metals, is an allusion to the Kingdom of the Greeks, which was the weakest of the three empires mentioned. This is followed, by the skins of the various animals forming the upper layers of the Tabernacle’s roof, which are an allusion to the empire of the Romans, considered inferior by our author. Finally, שמן, ”oil,” is an allusion to the Messiah, of whom we read in Psalms 132,17: ערכתי נר למשיחי, “I have prepared a lamp for My anointed one.” (Compare Sh’mot Rabbah 35,5 as well as Tanchuma, section 7 on our portion).

and blue, and purple, and crimson dye, and fine linen, and goats' hair;

ותכלת AND BLUE PURPLE — wool dyed with the blood of the חלזון (a kind of shell-fish), the colour of which was greenish-blue (Menachot 44a). וארגמן AND RED PURPLE — wool coloured with a kind of dye the name of which is ארגמן ושש — this is what we call LINEN (Yevamot 4b). ועזים is GOATS’ HAIR; therefore Onkelos translates it by וּמְעַזֵּי which denotes something that comes from the goats — not the goats themselves, for the Aramaic translation of עזים is עִזַּיָּא.

"And blue" (tekhelet). Yefet said that it is like the color black, for it is the endpoint of all colors and all [others] return to it, while it itself can never be returned [to another color] by human craft. We rely on our Sages who said that it is green, and it is [spun from] wool. "And purple" (argaman). It resembles red. In Chronicles the form is argon (2 Chronicles 2:6), and in Arabic it is argawan. This color can only be produced in wool or silk. "And crimson" (tola'at shani). It is also written "the crimson thread" (Leviticus 14:6), as in "the flint rock" (Deuteronomy 8:15) [paralleled by] "flint rock" (Deuteronomy 32:13) — the two words reversed in order [yet the same]. The Gaon called it qirmiz, for it is red, only it is not the same shade as the purple. Because of [the word] tola'at [worm], many have said it is silk. "And linen" (shesh). This is the byssus, a species of flax found only in Egypt; it is white and undyed — "linen and embroidery from Egypt" (Ezekiel 27:7). The Gaon translated it in Arabic as wealth, and it is well known to this day. "And goats' [hair]." This means the hair of goats.

ועזים, “and goats’ hair,” according to Rashi. He bases himself on Onkelos who translates: ומעזי, “something derived from goats;” anyone translating the word ועזים, as “and goats,” is in error therefore.

ותולעת שני, wool dyed red is called תולעת. The colour itself is called שני. We know this from Nachum 2,4 אנשי חיל מתולעים, “soldiers dressed in crimson.” The word also occurs in that sense in Lamentations 4,5 האמונים עלי תולע, “the ones who used to be robed in purple, etc.” The prophet Isaiah 1,18 holds out the hope that “if our sins were staining our clothing red, repentance would result in their becoming white as snow.” The prophet considers both the word שלג and שני as dyes, the former being a white dye, the latter a red dye. However the words תולע and צמר both refer to wool, the latter being undyed wool. ושש, and linen. All the other materials used were different kinds of wool, i.e. dyed animal hair. ועזים. Something weaved or spun from goats’ hair.

and rams' skins dyed red, and sasgona skins, and acacia wood;

מאדמים RED — they were dyed red after having been tanned. תחשים TACHASH was a kind of wild beast. It existed only at that time (when Israel built the Tabernacle). It was multi-coloured and therefore it is translated in the Targum by ססגונה, and it is so translated because it delights (שָׂשׂ) and prides itself in its colours (גונא) (Shabbat 28; Midrash Tanchuma, Terumah 6). ועצי שטים AND SHITTIM WOOD — But from where did they get this in the wilderness? Rabbi Tanchuma explained it thus: Our father Jacob foresaw by the gift of the Holy Spirit that Israel would once build a Tabernacle in the wilderness: he therefore brought cedars to Egypt and planted them there, and bade his children take these with them when they would leave Egypt (Midrash Tanchuma, Terumah 9; cf. Bereishit Rabbah 94 and Rashi on Exodus 26:15).

"And rams' skins." These are large [hides]. This craft [of dyeing them red] is found in the land of al-Gudamas, and [the artisans] are called Gudamansiyyin. "Tachash [hides]." From a creature that was known in those days, for it is written: "I shod you with tachash" (Ezekiel 16:10), indicating it was already recognized. "And acacia wood." Some of our predecessors said that Jacob our father planted them, and Israel took them out of Egypt by Moses' command — their proof being the phrase "and all that was found with him" (below, 35:24) [listed alongside] the blue and purple. But one must wonder: why does it say "that was found with him," implying it was for his own use? And if we accept that reading, one must further wonder why they took out acacia wood — what use could they have for it? Moreover, the Egyptians believed they were going to sacrifice [and return], and that is why they lent them [vessels] — so how would they have [openly] carried out great beams, each ten cubits long, plus bars, passing through Egypt, the place of royal authority? What would they answer to those who asked why they were transporting acacia wood if they were going to sacrifice a three-day journey away? We do not know whether it was a tradition in the hands of our fathers that they were taken from Egypt; if so, we defer to their authority. But if it is merely conjecture, one should seek another approach. We may say that there was a forest of acacia trees near Mount Sinai, and when they arrived there, [God] told them they would remain there a long time — and there was no cloud over them as I have explained. So each one made a booth, and the princes made something like courtyards, each according to his standing, and they cut down the entire forest, for they were a great people and made booths. Moses had not yet spoken to them about the Tabernacle — only after Yom Kippur. This is the meaning of "and all that was found with him."

ועצי שטים, “and (boards of) acacia trees.” There were forests in the desert in which these trees grew. This is why the Israelites were described as dwelling at Shittim, (Numbers 25,1) The wood of these trees is light in weight and pleasant to look at. The 48 boards of the Tabernacle, as well as the pillars at the entrance and between the Sanctuary and the Holy of Holies were constructed of that wood and transported on the wagons donated by the princes as per Numbers 3,3634 and 4,3132. So were the bolts that were attached to link the boards to one another. They were all transported on these four wagons which were pulled by eight oxen under the supervision of the Levites from the family of Merari. (Numbers 7,8) Seeing that the boards were ten cubits (six meters) long each and one and a half cubits thick, it is extremely likely that the wood from which they were cut was light in weight.

ועורות תחשים, “and the skins of the tachash.” The tachash was some kind of free-roaming beast. Our sages in Shabbat 28 are of the opinion that the tachash was an animal which existed only during that generation and had a single horn on its forehead. Its whole function was to have its skin serve as one of the coverings of the Tabernacle. Apparently, the colour of their skin was so beautiful that it was not to be used again for secular purposes so that G’d allowed this animal to become extinct as soon as it had fulfilled its purpose. Our sages on that same folio explain that the fact that it had a horn on its forehead was proof that it was a ritually pure animal. According to our tradition the ox offered by Adam as a sacrifice also had only a single horn on its forehead. This is based on Psalms 69,32: “ותיטיב לה’ משור פר מקרן מפריס, “that will please the Lord more than oxen, than a bull with a horn and hooves.” The singular of the word קרן means that a particular bull had only one horn. Although the vowel pattern under the word מקרן suggests more than one, the absence of the letter י suggests that David speaks about a single-horned bull. At any rate, unless the tachash had been ritually pure, none of its parts would have qualified for use in the Tabernacle. We have a strong allusion to this in the words of Exodus 13,9 למען תהיה תורת ה’ בפיך, “so that what goes into your mouth should conform to the Torah of the Lord.” Seeing that the tachash had so many colours Onkelos translates ססגונה, “proud of its being multi-coloured.” ועצי שטים, “and wood of the Shittim tree.” Where did the Israelites take these trees from? According to Tanchuma Terumah 9 Yaakov foresaw in his holy spirit that these trees would be required when the Israelites would build a Tabernacle in the desert and having this in mind he brought acacia trees with him to Egypt which were planted there. He commanded his children that when they would leave Egypt they were to take these trees with them.

ועצי שטים, “and acacia wood.” Actually, the word שטים is a notrikon, an acrostic composed of the respective first letters in the words: שלום, טובה, ישועה, מחילה, “peace, goodness, salvation, and pardon.” There were some forests in the desert from which the Israelites were able to cut boards which they called shittim. This is also why we read in Joshua 2,1 that “Joshua sent out spies from (the forest around Shittim)” This is also what the prophet Isaiah referred to (Isaiah 41,19) when he wrote (in the name of the Lord) אתן במדבר ארז,שיטה, והדס, “I will plant cedars in the deserts, acacias and myrtles, and oleasters.“ This is a very lightweight wood and it is very smooth. If we needed any proof that its wood was very light, consider the size of the boards of the Tabernacle’s which were 48 in number. Add two silver sockets for each board, i.e. 96 sockets, add all the upright boards use to surround the courtyard of the Tabernacle, which all had to be transported only by four wagons pulled by eight oxen, as spelled out in Numbers 4,29. Even though each board was 10 cubits high (6 meters) and their thickness was 1 cubit (60cm) and you will realise that unless the wood itself was extremely light, all of this could not have been pulled by only eight oxen. The other four oxen had to pull the weight of the carpets (4 layers) which formed the “roof” of the Tabernacle. We have been told in addition that the בריח התיכון, (Exodus 36,33), the center bolt, used to be Yaakov’s walking staff, the one with which he had crossed the river Jordan on his way to Lavan. Rashi claims that the shittim wood were trees that Yaakov had planted in Egypt as soon as he had come to Egypt, which the Israelites uprooted and took with them when departing from Egypt and which were used now to make the boards for the Tabernacle from. This is also what the liturgist bases himself on. Another interpretation found in the Midrash is that this was wood from the staff Yaakov had.taken with him on the way to Lavan. [I suppose that what the Midrash means is that Yaakov had planted that walking staff in the earth in Charan already, and it had developed. Ed.] This is why he had referred to it in Genesis 32,11, as a symbol of G–d’s providence guiding him during all the years he had been at Lavan. Ed.] It is not surprising therefore that he took those trees with him also to Egypt.

oil for the light; spices for the anointing oil, and for the incense of spices;

שמן למאר OIL FOR THE LIGHT — “clear olive-oil … to make the flame ascend continually”). בשמים לשמן המשחה SPICES FOR THE ANOINTING OIL which was made for the purpose of anointing the vessels of the Tabernacle and the Tabernacle itself in order to sanctify it. For this oil spices were required as is set forth in the section כי תשא (Exodus 30:23 ff.). ולקטרת הסמים AND FOR INCENSE OF AROMATIC SPICES that were burnt every evening and morning, as is set forth in the section ואתה תצוה (Exodus 30:7). The word קטרת signifies raising vapour (קיטור) and a column of smoke.

SPICES FOR ANOINTING OIL AND FOR INCENSE OF ‘HASAMIM’ (AROMATICS). Some scholars say that this is an elliptical verse, the sense being: “spices for anointing oil and aromatics for incense of aromatics.” And other scholars say that the verse is to be understood as if it were inverted: “and for incense of aromatics they shall bring aromatics.” Scripture mentions them with the definite article [hasamim], in order to indicate that it is referring to those aromatics that are good as incense, for there also [i.e., further in the section of the Torah dealing with the incense — 30:34] He did not explain [fully the compound forming the incense]. And Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra wrote that the verse is to be taken in its simple sense, that spices be taken for both — for the anointing oil and for the incense, for included in the compound of the incense were these spices: spikenard and saffron and cinnamon, according to the words of our Rabbis. It was not necessary for Scripture to mention “spices and aromatics for the incense,” because it said the incense of aromatics, just as it did not say “oil for the anointing oil.” This is the correct interpretation. All these opinions are necessary because according to the view of the linguists [samim and b’samim connote two different things]: samim are curative herbs which are not edible, such as frankincense and galbanum, while b’samim are those that are edible, and are called mis’adim (props) because they have a strengthening power by their fragrant odor. However, in the opinion of Rashi samim is identical with b’samim. And such is the meaning of our Rabbis in the Midrash in saying: “Eleven samonin (ingredients) were told to Moses on Mount Sinai” [which form the incense, and among them were spikenard and saffron and cinnamon which are b’samim, thus proving that they are all called by the term samim]. Onkelos also translates in both cases busmin [“busmaya for the anointing oil, and for incense of busmaya”]. This is correct in the understanding of this verse. But because Scripture changed the terms [calling one b’samim and the other samim] we might possibly say that the most important of aromatics and spices are called b’samim, a term which signifies the choicest and most famous of the spices, just as He said, ‘b’samim rosh’ (the chief spices). ‘b’rosh kol bosem’ (with chief of all spieces). We are also correct in saying that the words b’samim and bosem are composite words: bo sem, bo samim (“in it is spice,” “in it are spices”). Proof to the words of the Rabbis [that the term b’samim includes also samim] is the verse, Take thou unto thee ‘b’samim rosh’ (the chief spices) of flowing myrrh, and myrrh, is counted among the samim since it is a curative, not an edible herb. Scripture further says, Spikenard and saffron, calamus and cinnamon, with all trees of frankincense, and the verse there continues: myrrh and aloes, with all the chief ‘b’samim’ (spices). And with reference to all of these Scripture says, Awake, O north ...

"Oil for the light." For the purpose of the light, as is proper. The scholars of the generation said that the phrase "and for the spice incense" is inverted [in order], meaning: the spices are for the incense offering. If so, why was it not stated [the other element] the same way: "and the oil — the spices — for the anointing oil"? Furthermore: "and the spice, and the oil for the light, and for the anointing oil, and for the spice incense" (below, 35:28). The correct view in my opinion is that the word "spices" (besamim) encompasses both the anointing oil and the spices that are blended with the incense-compounds. This is the received truth.

שמן למאור, “oil for lighting;” since it is not customary for a king to enter his palace until the palace is complete and its furnishings are in place, as well as the illumination having been lit, this is mentioned already here. The same oil was also used for anointing all the sacred vessels. בשמים, ‘fragrant spices;” these were mixed with the oil for anointing; Kings are in the habit of providing their palaces with aromatic fragrances before they take up residence in them. ולקטורת הסמים, “and for the aromatic incense;” this verse has been inverted. We must understand it as if the Torah had written: והסמים לקטורת, “and the spices for the aromatic incense.” It does not mean: “spices needed for the aromatic incense, seeing that the aromatic incense consisted only of these aromatic spices.” Verses 30,34-35 in Exodus make this quite clear.

שמן למאור, “Oil for illumination;” fine olive oil for lighting the eternal flame.” בשמים לשמן המשחה ולקטורת הסמים, “spices for the oil of anointment and the aromatic incense.” The meaning of the words is that in order for the incense to be offered up they were to bring gifts consisting of a variety of spices. There is a difference between spices, בשמים, and סמים, an inedible kind of fragrance. בשמים are a kind of food which are distinguished by their rich fragrance. סמים are medicinal herbs which are quite unsuitable as food or as additives to food. Frankincense is one of such ingredients known as סמים. The reason that gold is mentioned as the very first material that was to be contributed was to indicate that at the time the materials for the Tabernacle were collected, the sin of the golden calf had already been forgiven. This is why it was appropriate that the very material which had served as the instrument to commit such a grievous sin should now be donated freely to demonstrate the about-face of the Jewish people who were now ready to donate their most precious material to serve the Lord (Tanchuma Terumah 8). This is also the reason that when the Torah legislates which animals make fit sacrifices, the calf heads the list. compare Leviticus 22,27. G’d wanted to emphasize that the sin of the golden calf had been forgiven. This entire commandment to contribute materials for the construction of the Tabernacle was commanded on the day following Yom Kippur, the day when the sin of the golden calf had been forgiven, finally (compare Rashi). Even though that sin had been committed prior to the building of the Tabernacle, seeing it had been committed in the month of Tammuz and the building of the Tabernacle had been commanded only after the Day of Atonement, so that the Torah quite clearly does not report things in chronological sequence here, the Torah, whose paths are all designed to promote peace and harmony decided to write things in this order. G’d is normally at pains to provide (make available) the cure before the onset of the disease (Megillah 13). It was important to G’d to show that before we read about the sin of the golden calf that the means to make the people’s repentance effective had been outlined already. We have a verse in Hoseah 7,1 which spells out this concept that G’d prepares the cure before He inflicts the disease, i.e. “When I would heal Israel the guilt of Ephrayim reveals itself.” In order to show that the sin had been completely forgiven, the Torah commences the list of contributions to be donated for building the Tabernacle with gold. This means that the very means which had caused their disgrace would now become the means by which G’d would express His goodwill. A Biblical verse expressing the same sentiment is found in Hoseah 7,3, ברעתם ישמחו מלך, ”with their very malice they make a king merry.” A Midrashic approach (based on Tanchuma Terumah 8): The words “gold, silver, copper,” refer to three different host-countries in which the Jews have been exiles. “Gold” refers to the kingdom of Babylon. We know that Nevuchadnezzar said (Daniel 2,38) “You O G’d are the head of gold.” The word “silver” is an allusion to the exile under the Medes, for it is written of Haman that he was offering ten thousand talents of silver in order to obtain permission to kill all the Jews (Megillat Esther 3,9). Copper is an allusion to the exile under the Greeks which was the most abominable of the three kingdoms mentioned. The words אלים מאדמים “red-dyed ram skins,” are an allusion to the Roman Empire. Esau, the progenitor of the Romans, was described as red-skinned already at his birth (compare Genesis 28,25) ויצא הראשון אדמוני. The allusion to the exile under the descendants of Esau is followed immediately by the words ושמן למאור, “and anointing oil,” i.e. a reference to the מלך המשיח King Messiah of whom it is written in Psalms 132,17 שם אצמיח קרן לדוד ערכתי נר למשיחי, “There I will make a horn sprout for David, I have prepared a lamp for My anointed one.” The words בשמים לשמן המשחה are an allusion to the fact that in the future the High Priest will once more be anointed with this oil; the words לקטורת הסמים are a promise that the Jewish people will once again enjoy being in G’d’s good graces. This has been promised by Ezekiel 20,41 בריח ניחוח ארצה אתכם, “by means of sweet smelling fragrances I will display My goodwill for you.” The words אבני שוהם refer to אבני כדכד of which Isaiah 54,12 said: ושמתי כדכד שמשותיך,”I will make your battlements of rubies.” The words ועשו לי מקדש refer to the Holy Temple which may soon be rebuilt in our days. The words ושכנתי בתוכם are an assurance that when that time comes G’d will dwell in our midst forever.

בשמים לשמן המשחה ולקטורת הסמים, “spices for the oil of anointment, and for the aromatic incense.” Nachmanides says that there are some commentators who consider this verse as having been abbreviated, and that its meaning is as if the Torah had written:וסמים לקטורת הסמים, “and fragrances to be used in the aromatic incense.” Other commentators interpret this verse as if the text had read: ולקטורת הסמים יביאו סמים, “and for the purpose of making the aromatic incenses they shall bring different fragrances.” The Torah mentions these fragrances collectively at this point, as the letter ה in front of the word סמים indicates that the various fragrances alluded to were well known, and did not require being listed. They were not even listed individually in the paragraph dealing with the making of the incense in Exodus 30,34-38, where only 5 out of a total of 11 are enumerated. [the other six are derived by the sages through interpretation of the text. Ed.] Ibn Ezra explains that there was no need to mention the other 6 ingredients as they were used both for the oil of anointment and for the making of the incense. There was no need to repeat the words בשמים and סמים as these words were mentioned already in connection with the “headings” for both the oil of anointing and the incense for burning up. The Torah also did not consider it necessary to write שמן לשמן המשחה, “oil for the oil of anointing,” as the “heading” שמן was implied by the term שמן למשחה as applicable to each of these ingredients. The reason why we need all these different explanations with which the commentators preoccupied themselves, is to counter the argument of the linguists that the word סמים refers to medications, or drugs, in other words, something used internally, in the body, not externally. According to these linguists the word פיטום as in פיטום הקטורת, denotes that these drugs exude a strong fragrance. However, Rashi thinks that the word סמים describes certain categories of spices, and this is also the opinion of Onkelos who translates both the word בשמים and the word סמים as בוסמיא, spices.

לשמן המשחה, from which to make the oil for anointing. ולקטורת הסמים, they brought spices to help make the incense, as is commanded in Exodus 30,34 קח לך סמים.

שמן למאור, “oil for light;” it is somewhat puzzling why this verse has been inserted here, seeing that the entire chapter deals with materials used for building the Tabernacle with the exception of this item, although the requirements for the Table in the Tabernacle have not been mentioned here, although that would have been appropriate, if the Torah had wished to mention the requirements of the menorah, the lampstand. Also the firewood for the altar should have been mentioned, and the animals that were needed to be offered on the altar. Why was only the oil singled out? It is possible to answer this by saying that seeing that the oils for anointing was also used to anoint all the furnishings in the Tabernacle before they could perform their function, this oil had multiple functions and was not only used for providing the raw material from which lighting was supplied for the Tabernacle which had no windows. The same is true of the incense. In a king’s palace, in our physical universe, before the King enters it with a view to take up his residence, different pleasant smelling spices are scattered to dissipate remnants of unpleasant odours that had accumulated during its construction. It is clear therefore that no less would be done when a structure housing the presence of the shechinah, presence of the Creator would be made ready for His occupancy. We find that indeed the presence of the Lord in the Tabernacle was made possible only through the presence of the incense, i.e. the fragrance released by it through burning it; this thought has been spelled out in Leviticus 16,13: וכסה ענן הקטורת, “and the cloud of incense is to envelop the Holy Ark,” as well as again in verse 2 of the same chapter: כי בענן אראה על הכפורת, “for I appear in the cloud upon the cover of the Ark.” Even though the oil of which the Torah speaks here is not required for physical illumination in the Tabernacle, it reflects the honour paid to the Holy Presence of the celestial presence in the midst of the Jewish people.

beryl stones, and stones for setting, to be set in the ephod and in the breastpiece.

אבני שהם ONYX STONES — two were required there for the needs of the “ephod” which is mentioned in ואתה תצוה (Exodus 28:6ff.). מלאים FOR SETTING (lit., filling in) — Because they made for them (for the stones) settings in gold — a kind of indentation — and they put the stone there (in it) to fill the indentation, they were called “filling-up stones”; the spot where the indentation is (i. e. the hollow spot) is called משבצת “setting”. לאפד ולחשן FOR THE EPHOD AND THE BREASTPLATE respectively: the onyx stones for the ephod and “stones for setting” for the breastplate. Ephod and breastplate are described in ואתה תצוה. They were a kind of ornament worn only by the High-Priest.

AVNEI SHOHAM’ (ONYX STONES) ‘V’AVNEI MILU’IM’ (AND STONES FOR SETTING). “Because they used to make a setting for the stone in gold — a kind of indentation — and they placed the stone there to fill the indentation, they are called avnei milu’im (stones for filling-in), and the place of the indentation is called mishbetzet (setting). FOR THE EPHOD AND THE BREASTPLATE. The onyx stones were for the ephod, and the stones for setting were for the breastplate.” This is Rashi’s language. Similarly Rashi explained: “They shall be inclosed in gold in their settings, — surrounded by gold settings of such a depth that each setting shall be filled by the thickness of the stone. This is the meaning of the word milu’otham (their filling), and this is the meaning of every expression of milui (filling) mentioned in this connection.”But it does not appear to me to be at all correct to say that Scripture calls them already now avnei milu’im, because in some time as yet in the future He was to command that the indentations made for them were to be filled with these stones! Moreover, the onyx stones were also enclosed in settings of gold, and yet He did not call them milu’im. Again, our Rabbis have already said in the Gemara: “These stones are not incised with a chisel, for it is said b’milu’otham (in their filling).” Now if the explanation b’milu’otham would be, [as Rashi has it], that they fill the indentations with the stones, there would have been no proof at all from this verse that they should not incise the names [of the tribes] on them with a chisel. Besides, the manner of the setting of the stones which the Rabbi [Rashi] mentioned, namely that it was made in a kind of indentation, is not correct. Instead, it is as Onkelos rendered it: [meshubatzim zahav — inclosed in gold] meramtzan didhav, which means that they made at the bottom a gold setting according to the measure of the stone, and from it they projected a fork-like shape of three prongs which would hold the stone. [The word meramtzan mentioned by Onkelos] is similar to the expressions of the Sages: “and they take it out beramtza (with a pointed tool) made of iron;” “as when he bored a hole in it beramtza (with a pick) made of iron.” This is how they also do it today when they set precious stones in rings, in order that they be seen from all angles and that their beauty and splendor should not be hidden in the indentations. You may know that this is so, for the two gold chains inserted in the two rings of the breastplate were attached to the mishb’tzoth on the shoulder-pieces of the ephod. Now if mishb’tzoth were [as Rashi said] frames for the setting of the stone, how would they attach to them the chains? And even [if there were there other mishb’tzoth not for the setting of the stone but for the purpose of inserting the chains] how would the indentations serve that purpose [as they were not perforated for the chains to go through]? Rather, the mishb’tzoth are the fork-like prongs as we have said a...

"Onyx stones" (avnei shoham). [This phrase] covers both the ephod [stones] together and one from the breastplate. "Inlaid stones" (milu'im). I will explain these further [below].

אבני שהם ואבני מלאים, onyx stones, and stones to be set, etc. Why were these items mentioned only after the other eleven types of materials? They should have been listed even ahead of gold and silver seeing they are of superior value! Perhaps the reason is that the princes who contributed these stones did so only after the people had contributed all their donations. We are told in Bamidbar Rabbah 12,16 that G'd was so displeased with the tardiness of the princes in bringing their donations that the Torah does not even spell the word נשיאים fully in the relevant passage but omits the letter י in their title (compare Numbers 7,10). Mentioning their contribution last was a punishment for their tardiness. Another reason for mentioning these stones last may be the fact that they were not used as part of the Tabernacle but only as part of the priestly garments. We have learned in Yuma 69 that it was permitted to make use of these priestly garments, i.e. that one was not guilty of מעילה, trespass, when having made profane use of such garments. Maimonides writes in chapter five of the laws dealing with such trespasses that the priestly garments are not subject to such laws. It follows that the sanctity of the priestly garments cannot be compared to the sanctity of the Tabernacle itself. It is quite logical then that these gemstones, though intrinsically more costly than gold and silver, should be mentioned last in the order of contributions listed by the Torah. While it is true that some of the other eleven materials also served to make the priestly garments, their principal function was to serve as materials from which to construct the Tabernacle itself. Moreover, there is an opinion cited in Yuma 75 according to which these gemstones originated in the celestial spheres and their attainment did not represent an effort on the part of their owners nor did their being given away represent a loss to those who donated them inasmuch as they had never toiled in order to acquire them.

אבני שוהם, “gemstones called shoham.” These two were affixed to the apronlike garment of the High Priest known as Ephod,” as well as the gemstones to be inserted in the High Priest’s breastplate, choshen, (12 in number).

אבני שהם ואבני מילואים, “shoham stones and (other) stones for the settings.” The sequence of the words in our verse is: “shoham stones for the Ephod, and the other gemstones for the breastplate to be set in it.” There were two shoham stones and twelve stones for the breastplate. Nachmanides explains that the reason the stones for the breastplate are called מלואים is that they were whole gemstones each, had not been polished or cut to size by craftsmen. This is also reflected in the translation by Onkelos who writes אבני אשלמותא, “whole stones.” According to Nachmanides the spiritual value of these various gemstones is dependent on their being whole as found in the ground. This is the reason the Torah instructs in 28,17 ומלאת בו מלואת אבן, “you shall fill it with stone;” we have a second verse concerning this procedure in verse 20 of that chapter requiring that these stones be במלואתם, “in their wholeness.” Significantly, no such restrictions are mentioned in connection with the stones for the Ephod, i.e. the shoham stones. It is possible that the names of the tribes of the Children of Israel were engraved on the shoham stones similar to the way a signet ring is engraved, the seal sticking out when one presses it on to the sealing wax. At any rate, 28,11 makes it rather clear that a jeweler’s craft was required in connection with the two shoham stones and the names to be engraved in them. In connection with the twelve stones to be mounted on the breastplate such words as מעשה חרש אבן, “a jeweler’s handiwork,” are totally absent. However, the Torah did stipulate פתוחי חותם, (verse 21) “engraved like a signet ring.” This was the reason Moses had to use the shamir worm in order to achieve the engraving by chemical means, i.e. through secretions of that worm applied minutely. Had this not been the case, the requirement that they remain במלואותם, “in their wholeness,” could not have been met. This is the way our sages in Sotah 48 describe the procedure: “these stones were not inscribed with ink as the Torah stipulates פתוחי חותם; on the other hand, they were also not engraved with an engraving tool as the Torah stipulates that they were to remain whole, i.e. במלואותם.” What did Moses do? He first wrote the letters with ink and then exposed them to the shamir worm. When thus exposed (at some distance) the stones cracked in the required places, so that the names appeared as if they had been engraved on the respective stones. Nonetheless, not a single splinter of the original stone was missing as a result. Thus far Nachmanides. It is important to realize that there are a total of 15 items mentioned in this paragraph which list the various donations for the Tabernacle. בשמים וסמים are treated as a single item. (Normally, we think of these contributions in terms of 13 different items). The shoham stones and the stones for the settings in the breastplate are considered as items 14 and 15 respectively. When you examine the first verse in Genesis you will find that it has 15 syllables, (not counting the half-vowels called sheva) so that the items which formed the materials of the Tabernacle paralleled the beginning of the creation, i.e. the Tabernacle represented a re-enactment of מעשה בראשית. This was intended by Isaiah when he wrote (Isaiah 26,4) כי בי-ה ה’ צור עולמים, “for in Yah, the Lord you have an everlasting Rock.” [If I understand the allusion correctly it means that the presence of the Shechinah in the Tabernacle demonstrated that unlike human artists, G’d did not withdraw from His creation once He had completed it. Ed.] We also find that in the descriptions of the distances between the seven layers of heaven that the number 500 (years of walking) is mentioned 15 times. Each such רקיע is described as 500 such years distant from the next one (Chagigah 13). This gives us a total of 13 times 500, seeing the thickness of that heaven is also 500 years of walking distance. Beyond the seventh heaven are the chayot, presumably a region of similar distance. Above the chayot is another heavenly region. So this gives us a total of 15 times 500 years walking distance from earth to that highest region. G’d, of course, is above all that. The sages who composed the prayers in our liturgy included 15 different praises in the prayer called ישתבח which is the conclusion of the פסוקי דזמרה, the verses of songs recited daily prior to the קריאת שמע and its benedictions. After the קריאת שמע we recite a paragraph commencing with the words אמת ויציב which contains references to 15 attributes of G’d. Except for the word אמת itself, each one of these attributes is linked to the next one by the letter ו The first one, i.e. the attribute אמת, is not introduced by the letter ו as it is the name of G’d. This is why we find a verse in Jeremiah 10,10: וה’ אלו-הים אמת, showing that the word אמת is also a name of G’d. Furthermore, we find that David composed a list of 15 praises of the Lord when he wrote in Chronicles I 29, 10-11: לך ה’ הגדולה והגבורה והתפארת והנצח וההוד כי כל בשמים ובארץ לך ה’ הממלכה והמתנשא לכל לראש, והעושר והכבוד מלפניך ואתה מושל בכל ובידך כח וגבורה לגדל ולחזק לכל. He also composed 15 hymns commencing with the words שיר המעלות in Psalms 121-134 all in allusion to these 15 items mentioned in 15 syllables in the first verse in Genesis. We also find that the blessing pronounced by the Priests contains 15 words, corresponding to the same concept. In Deut. 26,17 we also find the programmatic verse commencing with the words את ה’ האמרת היום as containing 15 words. This too is an allusion to the relationship between Israel and its G’d being the purpose of creation of the universe.

אבני שוהם ואבני מילואים, “shoham stones, and stones for the settings.” Rashi explains that the reason why these stones were called מילואים, settings, is that they were set in gold which had been recessed to accommodate each stone so that it would be firmly set in its frame. The exact spot of this recessed hole is called משבצות in the Torah. (28,25) לאפוד ולחושן, “for the ephod and the breastplate.” The shoham stones were on the shoulder pieces of the ephod, and the jewels referred to as מילואים were inserted in the breastplate. They were משובצים, surrounded by the golden rim that protruded around the grooves within which these jewels were inserted. Nachmanides is troubled by this interpretation as it does not seem right to him that the stones should already have been named according to their ultimate function, although this was still many months in the future. At this time each jewel had a name by which it was known universally, regardless of which piece of jewelry it was used in. He also finds it strange that the Torah should refer to settings for these stones, seeing that even the breastplate and the ephod for which they were intended did not exist yet, and we have not been told what either of these two garments was. Furthermore, Nachmanides makes the point that the אבני שוהם also required to be placed in settings on the shoulder pads of the ephod, so that the expression אבני מילואים applies in equal measure to these two jewels. They are, however, nowhere described as other than משבצות זהב, “held in place by gold settings.” (28,11) Nachmanides also does not accept Rashi’s comment that the meaning of משבצות זהב is that the jewels set in a groove, depression in the gold, were held in place by a golden rim around the jewel. He prefers the translation by Onkelos מרמצן בדהב, enclosed in gold. This means that underneath each jewel there would be a golden receptacle with small fork-like pincers at the top, which would grip the jewel once it had been inserted in the golden setting. This concept is borrowed from the sages ברמצא דפרזלא, boring a hole with an iron pick. (Shabbat 103, Niddah 62) What is described is a kind of fork, the extreme ends of which can be bent so as to hold a precious object firmly in place. The jewels would be placed at the curved bottom of such a “fork,” before the prongs at the top would be bent over to hold the jewel inside firmly in its position. This is still the way it is done in our days (author speaking) The meaning of the word מילואים is that the stone be whole, stones that have not been worked over by diamond cutters and such. Just as hewn stones, אבני גזית, were not to be used in constructing the altar, so the jewels for the breastplate and the ephod of the High Priest had to be in their original state. It is an accepted assumption by people who believe in the therapeutic and other value of certain jewels, that if these jewels are not in their original state they will have no such therapeutic value. The reader interested in the subject, is encouraged to read up in my translation of the commentary of Rabbeinu Bachya, pages 1286-1294 where he explains the therapeutic values of each of the stones in the breastplate of the High Priest. Some gemstones’ therapeutic value cured diseases of the body, others had beneficial effect for people mentally underprivileged. [The author claims that scientific texts in his time claimed that there are actually no more than12 kinds of genuine gemstones. Ed.] Apparently, when such gemstones are found in a river bed, they are flawed as far as their use both in the breastplate or as therapeutic aids is concerned, as the constant contact with the water of the river makes it impossible for them to be retrieved in their natural state. This is why here Onkelos translates the word מילואם as אשלמותא, emphasising the wholeness, whereas in connection with filling of vessels or filling in a hole, he translates it as מילוי, as this is an expression used when it concerns such an activity. When the Torah discusses the אבני אפוד, (28,11) it speaks of מעשה חרש אבן פתוחי חותם תפתח על שני אבנים, usually translated as “with a jeweler’s handiwork, engraved like a signet ring, shall you engrave the two stones.” In those instances, each gemstone had to have holes in them to accommodate engraving the names of the various tribes. This was the kind of work done by stonemasons. Concerning the gemstones on the breast plate however, the Torah does not use the expression חרש אבן, but ומלאת בו מלואת אבן, an expression which is repeated in 28,20 יהיו במלואותם, perhaps best translated as “in their mountings.” In view of all these considerations, Moses had no choice but to use the secretion of the shamir worm to accomplish this objective. He showed this worm to helpers of Betzalel, demonstrating that the gemstones would split by themselves in the desired places without the use of stonemasons’ tools, jewelers’ engraving tools. Seeing that the word במלואותם occurs only in connection with the jewels inserted in the breastplate, even though the sages say that Moses brought the shamir also to go to work on the jewels of the ephod, by moving that worm above the surface of these two jewels in a manner parallel to writing the respective names of the tribes on them. This is probably an incorrect reference to the jewels on the breastplate, seeing that the breastplate, after all, is known also as the חשן האפד “the breastplate of the ephod” seeing it was fastened by chains to the ephod. The meaning of the words אבני שוהם, accordingly, is: the three places where jewels were affixed, i.e. 2 on the shoulder pads of the ephod itself, plus the four rows of jewels on the breastplate. The expression אבני מלואים however refers merely to the jewels worn on the High Priest’s breastplate. If it was indeed the opinion of the sages that the jewels on the shoulder pads of the ephod were mounted in the same way as those on the breastplate, it is conceivable that they derived this from the wording in our verse, and they understood the words אבני מלואים as applying equally to the jewels of the ephod and the choshen, respectively.

מלואים, for the gemstone to fill the recessed area intended for it to be set in, similar to the rings used as signet rings.

אבני שהם, “onyx stones;” these, and the jewels which follow, were required for the breastplate and the epaulets of the garments of the High Priest. How precisely did this work? The two onyx stones were affixed each to one of the shoulder pieces of the ephod. (Exodus 28,9 as well as 28,12) The stones collectively described as אבני מלואים, “jewels to be placed within the twelve settings provided for them on the breastplate of the High priest.” (Exodus 28,9). These jewels are referred to euphemistically on numerous occasions in the Bible, perhaps the best known example being Psalms 113,5-6: המגביהי לשבת המשפילי לראות בשמים ובארץ, “Who, though enthroned high, sees what is below, and Who sees what is in heaven and what is on earth.” You find an onyx stone mentioned also in Exodus 28,20, where it is one of the jewels on the breastplate of the High Priest.

And they shall make a sanctuary before Me, and I will cause My Shechinah to dwell among them.

ועשו לי מקדש AND LET THEM MAKE ME A SANCTUARY — Let them make to the glory of My Name (cf. Rashi on v. 2) a place of holiness.

"And they shall make." It is called a sanctuary (mikdash) because it is the dwelling of the Holy Name.

'ושכנתי בתוכם ככל אשר אני מראה אותך וגו, “I will dwell among them permanently in order to receive their prayers and their sacrificial offerings in a manner similar to the way I displayed My presence at the mountain.” Henceforth My presence will be manifest between the two cherubs on the lid of the Holy Ark as part of the overall structure called the Tabernacle. [I will paraphrase from here on in. Ed.]The author perceives of different degrees of holiness, just as the kabbalists perceive holiness in the extra terrestrial world as consisting of spiritually progressively higher different levels. The outer structure known as תבנית המקדש, “the format,” visual image, lead up to the cherubs in the innermost part of that structure. The very concept of the Tabernacle leads the intelligent viewer to conclude that hidden deep within it, G’d’s presence, שכינה must be manifest. The prophet Isaiah 6,2 phrased this as the שרפים עומדין ממעל לו, the types of angels of a rank known as “Seraphim” were in attendance above G’d’s throne. This was the closest to G’d’s essence that the prophets were shown in their visions. The terrestrial Tabernacle, if viewed as parallel to G’d’s throne in the celestial domains, contained different sections of progressively higher levels of sanctity which progressively restricted the type of people allowed to approach those levels. The Torah itself, for which the Holy Ark served as repository, was in an ark constructed of wood but overlaid with gold on the inside and on the outside, to reflect the saying of our sages in Yuma 72 that every Torah scholar whose external appearance did not reflect his internal stature is not a Torah scholar at all. The levels of sanctity in the Tabernacle, beginning already with the courtyard around it, were not sealed off from one another, but, on the contrary, were connected to one another all the way to the innermost sanctuary to demonstrate that sanctity is attainable progressively. On top of the physical box containing the spiritual teaching, the Torah, there was placed a lid also made from pure gold which symbolised the image of G’d. [in the sense that man was created in the image of G.d.] This lid was not linked, attached, to the ark itself at all. The detached nature of this “lid, כפורת,” symbolised that at a certain level of holiness there is no longer a physical bond with the human body, with the terrestrial domain, a domain which is essentially mortal, i.e. requiring regeneration from time to time. The description of the cherubs on top of the כפורת facing each other (verse 20) symbolises the interaction of the spiritual message contained in the Torah and its transmission to the human being studying it. The cherubs themselves are described as facing the lid, i.e. facing the Torah that is beneath that lid. As a result of such an attitude to Torah, i.e. looking to it for inspiration, the cherubs are then described as spreading their wings in an upward direction, as if reflecting that they had rec...

ועשו לי מקדש, "and they will make a Sanctuary for Me." Why does the Torah refer to the structure as מקדש, Sanctuary, whereas immediately afterwards and many times subsequently it is described variously as "Tabernacle" or "Tent of Meeting?" We may assume that the term Sanctuary covers the instruction to erect a Temple both at the time and during later periods of Jewish history. It is a comprehensive positive commandment basically applicable not only in the desert but whenever the Jewish people reside in the Holy Land. Actually this duty is incumbent upon Israel even while the nation is in exile. The only reason this commandment cannot be fulfilled when the people are exiled is that G'd has specifically forbidden that any site other than the Temple Mount in Jerusalem serve as such a Sanctuary once the first Temple had been built by Solomon. Compare the legislation in Deut. 12,9, where G'd speaks of Israel's having attained מנוחה ונחלה, "rest and inheritance," as prerequisites for the erecting of a permanent (as opposed to collapsible) Sanctuary for G'd. This is why the Torah does not introduce this subject matter by referring to a משכן, a temporary structure. Had the Torah mentioned this term first we would have thought that the commandment was of a temporary nature. Once the Torah had introduced the concept of a Sanctuary for G'd it could proceed to give us the details that were applicable in the desert at the time the Torah had been given. You will find that Maimonides writes in the first chapter of the section of his code dealing with the laws applicable to the Temple that it is a positive commandment to build a house for G'd as the Torah has written: "and they shall construct a Sanctuary for Me." He based himself on the fact that the Torah called the Sanctuary משכן already in the very verse following this commandment. Another reason it is called Sanctuary is that as soon as the people would begin construction it was already considered sacred although the structure had not yet been completed and G'd's presence had not yet taken up residence therein. That I may dwell among (within) them: It does not say "within it," which means that the place that God will sanctify to dwell there is within the children of Israel that encircle the Tabernacle with four banners.

ועשו לי מקדש, “they will construct a Holy Temple for Me.” A building designated for meetings at appointed times. Compare: בית מועד. (Rash’bam) Compare also Numbers 11,18: התקדשו למחר, “be prepared for tomorrow.” We also have an announcement by G-d in Exodus 29,43: ונועדתי לבני ישראל, “I will keep my appointment with the Children of Israel.”

ועשו לי מקדש, “They shall make a Sanctuary for Me.” The reason the Torah refers to the Tabernacle as Temple, Sanctuary, from the word קדש holy, is that it was sanctified by the very Presence within it of the Shechinah. According to Shemot Rabbah 34,4 the words ועשו לי imply that Israel are G’d’s flock and He is their shepherd. This is the meaning of Ezekiel 34,17: “As for you, My flock, thus said the Lord G’d, etc.” The fact that G’d considers Himself our shepherd is based on Psalms 80,2: “Give ear, O shepherd of Israel! Appear, You who are enthroned on the cherubim.” There are numerous other verses quoted by the author, such as Isaiah 5,7, Psalms 121,4, Deut. 14,1 and Jeremiah 31,8 all making essentially the same point about the G’d-Israel relationship. This relationship bespeaks honour for the children when they are in the proximity of their father, and honour for the father when he is within the home of his children and feels welcome there. All of this is the meaning of the reciprocal relationship suggested by the words: “they shall make for Me a Sanctuary and I shall dwell amongst them. The words ושכנתי בתוכם may also be read as ושכינתי בתוכם, “so that My Presence will be amongst them.” The numerical value of the letters in the word ושכנתי alludes to the 410 years the first Temple stood, i.e. the word לשכני בתוכם in Exodus 29,46. When we break up the word ושכנתי into ושכן ת’י we get the same result, i.e. “He will reside for 410 (years).” By re-arranging the letters to read ושני ת’כ “and the second (Temple) 420,” you get an allusion to the length of time the second Temple remained standing.

מקדש, an alternate description of אהל מועד, a place where G’d would be sanctified and from which He would address the Israelites. Compare Exodus 29,43.

According to all that I show you — the pattern of the Tabernacle and the pattern of all its vessels — so shall you make it.

ככל אשר אני מראה אותך ACCORDING TO ALL THAT I AM SHOWING THEE here, את תבנית המשכן THE PATTERN OF THE DWELLING. — This verse must be connected with the verse that precedes it, thus: And let them make for Me a sanctuary … according to all that I am showing thee (the words ושכנתי בתוכם being a parenthesis). וכן תעשו AND SO SHALL YE MAKE IT also in future generations (cf. Sanhedrin 16b); if one of the vessels is lost, or when you make for Me the vessels for the “House of Eternity” (another name for the Temple in Jerusalem), — as e. g., the tables, candlesticks, lavers and stands which Solomon had made — you shall make them after the pattern of these (the vessels of the Tabernacle), If, however, the verse were not to be connected with the preceding one but formed a new statement, Scripture ought not to have written: וכן תעשו “and so shall ye make them” but כן תעשו “so shall ye make them” and then it would be speaking of the making of the tent of meeting and its vessels and not of the vessels of the Temple, and the translation would be: according to all that I am showing you the pattern of the Tabernacle and the pattern of all its vessels, even so shall you make them.

AND SO SHALL YE MAKE IT — [also] “in future generations. If one of the vessels is lost, or when you make the vessels of the Sanctuary of Jerusalem, such as the tables, the candelabrums, the lavers, and the bases which Solomon made — after the pattern of these you shall make them. If, however, this [part of the verse] were not connected with the preceding part [which reads: According to all that I show thee, the pattern of the Tabernacle, and the pattern of all the vessels], Scripture should not have written: ‘and’ so shall ye make it, but: “so shall ye make it,” and then it would be speaking of the making of the Tent of Meeting and its vessels.” Thus is Rashi’s language. But I do not know if this is true, that Solomon was bound to make the vessels of the Sanctuary of Jerusalem after the pattern of these vessels [of the Tabernacle]. The altar of brass which Solomon made was twenty cubits long and twenty wide! And Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra wrote: “And so shall ye make — the vessels, for at the beginning He said, And let them make Me a Sanctuary.”In line with the plain meaning of Scripture there is no need for all this. Rather, the duplication [and so shall ye make it] has the purpose of expressing emphasis and eagerness. Thus He said: “And let them make Me a Sanctuary” — a house and vessels — as a Royal Sanctuary and seat of Majesty, that I may dwell in the midst of them in the house and on the Throne of Glory which they will make for Me there. According to all that I show thee the pattern of this Tabernacle of which I have said that I will dwell in the midst of them, and the pattern of all the vessels thereof. He repeated, and so shall ye all make it with eagerness and diligence. This is similar to the repetition found in the verse, and the children of Israel did according to all that the Eternal commanded Moses, so did they. Here, because the verse speaks of a command, it says, and so ‘shall’ ye make it, [whereas in the other verse the repeat states so ‘did’ they, because it speaks of a deed accomplished].

"Its form, which I show you" — by means of visual sight, for the visions of Ezekiel were in a prophetic dream. [The text] added the definite article he and said "the Tabernacle" (ha-mishkan), after having mentioned "sanctuary" — and additionally added the conjunction vav. "And so shall you make" — for the purpose of the vessels, for the earlier [command] was "and they shall make for Me a sanctuary."

ככל אשר אני מראה אותך, "According to all I shall show you, etc." In Midrash Hagadol on our verse it is reported that when G'd told Moses to build a Sanctuary for Him, Moses was dumbfounded asking G'd that seeing that neither the heavens nor the heaven of heavens could contain Him, how could a structure on earth possibly house Him? G'd reassured him saying that Moses had misunderstood what G'd had in mind when He issued this directive. When G'd spoke of a Sanctuary He showed Moses a structure of twenty beams in the North, twenty beams in the South joined by eight beams in the West. G'd explained that he would "reduce Himself" in honour of Israel and out of love for them. We must ask ourselves who is the source that can tell us exactly what transpired between G'd and Moses at that time? Although the words of our sages are all based on tradition, the fact remains that scripture does not even hint at such a conversation. I believe we must assume that the sages of the Midrash were troubled by the fact that the verse does not make sense in its present form. If the verse is connected to what follows in verse 10, the Torah should not have spoken of תעשו in our verse at all. Moreover, verse 8 should have read תעשו לי מקדש. Besides, the letter ו in וכן תעשו makes no sense. On the other hand, if the words ככל אשר אני מראה אותך refer to the previous directive ועשו לי מקדש, the Torah should not have interrupted the verse by mentioning "so that I shall dwell amongst them." Seeing that G'd had mentioned prior to our verse that He was going to dwell amongst the Jewish people, this seemed to indicate that He had already completed the directive to build a Sanctuary for Him to dwell in. Our verse then would have been entirely unnecessary. It would have been sufficient to describe all the measurements of the Tabernacle without referring to something (a blueprint) which G'd showed Moses. It appears therefore that the report in the Torah indicates that the Torah corrected itself in order to prevent misunderstandings. Our sages in the Midrash concluded from all this that G'd and Moses had a conversation along the lines described in Pessikta Rabbati. They tried to reconstruct what could have transpired prior to the Torah correcting itself, as it were. It is a case of arriving at the nature of the question after one has heard the answer. The answer in our case was: "according to all that I show you." All that transpired was that Moses thought about the implications of what G'd had said. There is no need to authenticate the conversation between G'd and Moses as it was perfectly natural for Moses to have asked G'd what he did. G'd showed Moses a vision of the blueprint of the Tabernacle at that time. This is why the Torah did not use the future tense i.e. ככל אשר אראה. I will explain in due course why G'd did not content Himself with telling Moses but insisted on showing him. We will pursue the same method to explain what our sages said in Berachot 55 concerning Exodus ...

וכן תעשו, “and this is how you shall do it.” The letter ו at the beginning of the word וכן, is not necessary in this context; some commentators understand it as referring to what follows about the construction of the individual items of furniture for the Temple. The idea of the connective letter ו then would be: ”just as I instructed you first to build the structure, I will now instruct you to construct the furnishings to be housed in that structure.”

את תבנית המשכן ואת תבנית כל כליו, “the pattern of the Tabernacle, and the pattern of all its vessels.” It is an accepted concept that the various components of the Tabernacle on earth were replicas or symbols of concepts which exist in higher regions. One of the outstanding features of the Tabernacle was the fact that it was divided into three parts. 1) The area beyond the dividing curtain, the western part; 2) the area in front of the dividing curtain known as אהל מועד. 3) The courtyard in front of the Tabernacle which was enclosed by curtains. These three sections symbolized the three parts of the cosmos, 1) the world of the disembodied beings, the angels; 2) the world of the inert bodies, the stars and the planets; 3) our terrestrial universe, inhabited by living creatures with bodies (and souls, some of them). Upon examination we shall find that man, the most important creature in our lower world, is also composed of three parts representing the division of the whole cosmos into three parts. This is why man is called a microcosm, a world in miniature, by the sages (compare our author’s comment on Genesis 1,27). The three parts are: 1) the world of דבור, creatures capable of verbal communications. 2) the world of חיות, all kinds of living and moving creatures. 3) the world of vegetation, life and motion limited to the roots of these plants in the soil. The innermost part of the Tabernacle contained the Holy Ark, the Tablets, the cherubs, all of which were interior vessels that remained hidden from view as they housed the entourage of the Shechinah. This is what was meant in Ezekiel 10,19: וכבוד אלו-הי ישראל מלמעלה, “and the attribute כבוד of the G’d of Israel was above.” This attribute has also been described as dwelling with the cherubs in Psalms 80,2. This part of the Tabernacle was patterned after the celestial regions, the home of the angels. They are not visible, partly because they are disembodied spirits, forming the entourage and throne of G’d. Man’s equivalent to that part of the cosmos is his head, i.e. what is inside it, his brain; it is the Temple of his wisdom, and it is the region in which disembodied שכל, intelligence, makes its impact on man’s brain. A truly righteous man is himself an entourage for the Divine. Our patriarchs were such people. The Shechinah rests over such צדיקים by means of the phylacteries they wear on their heads and on their arms. These phylacteries inspire man’s head and heart respectively. They do for the צדיק what the cherubs accomplished within the Holy of Holies in the macrocosm. Having had this explained to you, you can now understand the tremendous importance of the commandment to lay תפילין and the great potential contained in that commandment. The second part of the Tabernacle, the one without the dividing curtain, was the part containing the table, the candelabra, and the altar for incense, all of which were very important interior vessels although they were not of the prime importance of the vessels inside the Holy of Holies. They corresponded to the world of the planets and stars which have all been infused with intelligence by their Creator and whose constant orbit is directly responsible for keeping this cosmos a going concern. In the microcosm called the world of man, they are represented by the heart which is an interior organ without which the body could not function. The constant pumping of blood to different parts of the human body does for our bodies what the motion of the stars and planet does for the cosmos. The third part of the Tabernacle, the courtyard around it, contained the copper altar, the one on which most animal sacrifices were offered up. This was where the animals used in that procedure lost their lives. The courtyard corresponded to our terrestrial universe which by definition is populated by creatures all of which die sooner or later, just like the animals on the altar. The corresponding part to the courtyard of the Tabernacle in man is the part from the navel downwards, the area where his life originated and which in turn is usually the beginning of the process of his life disintegrating. The very loss of life is simultaneously the cause of its coming into existence. If our world were not condemned to the death of its inhabitants there would be no need for new life to be generated. You have now learned that the Tabernacle in its three sections corresponded to the cosmos in its three parts concerning which David said (Psalms 103,20) “bless the Lord, O His angels, mighty creatures who do His bidding, bless the Lord, all His hosts.” David’s son Solomon followed in his father’s footsteps when he said in three consecutive verses in Song of Songs 5-13,14,15) “His cheeks are like beds of spices;” “His hands are rods of gold;” “His legs are like marble pillars;” I have already explained the meaning of these allusions in connection with Yaakov’s dream of the ladder in Genesis 28,12. A Midrashic approach: the words את תבנית המשכן ואת תבנית כל כליו teach that G’d had shown to Moses “green fire, black fire, white fire, and red fire.” He now told him: “in accordance with all that I have shown you” (verse 40). He instructed him: “construct it like this.” The matter can be illustrated by means of a parable. A King had a very costly pearl-studded garment. He instructed one of his servants to make him another one like it. The servant replied: ‘My lord king where am I going to get the raw materials to make another garment such as this?’ This is precisely what Moses asked G’d: “where am I going to take green fire, black fire, white fire and red fire from in order to construct a replica of the cosmos?” G’d said to him: “You do the best you can with the materials at your disposal.” Not only that. But, “if you will construct something comparable to what you have seen in My celestial spheres down on earth, I shall leave My celestial court and confine My Shechinah to the extent necessary in order to take up residence in the Tabernacle you will construct on earth.” Just as in the celestial regions there are upright standing Seraphim (angels) so on earth there will be upright standing columns of acacia wood (compare 26,15). Just as there are stars in the heavens there are stars down on earth.” Rabbi Chiyah added: “this teaches that the golden clasps appeared like stars on the carpets forming the ceiling of the Tabernacle.”

And so shall you do. Rashi explained that this refers to future generations, but this is not explicitly stated in the Scripture. It seems to me that because the Holy One, blessed be He, first showed Moses the form of the Tabernacle and afterward showed him the form of all its vessels, as it is written the form of the Tabernacle and the form of all its vessels, but when He commanded him regarding those who would do the work, He began with the vessels first, saying and they shall make an ark, etc., and afterward mentioned the Tabernacle. Moses was confused about whether they should make the Tabernacle first, according to what he saw on the mountain, and then the vessels, or whether he should make the vessels first, as mentioned in the command for construction. Therefore it says and so shall you do with the letter vav [and]. Because if it had said so shall you do [without the vav], I would have been compelled to say that it refers to the form of the Tabernacle and its vessels, and not to the order of precedence. But since it says and so shall you do, this implies that before this verse the subject was interrupted. Therefore, certainly what is said, according to all that I show you, the form of the Tabernacle and the form of all its vessels, refers back to what was stated above, and they shall make Me a sanctuary. If so, the making of their form has already been mentioned, and how am I to understand and so shall you do? It means that in this order you shall make first the Tabernacle and afterward its vessels. And the reason the Ark is mentioned first is because this is the order of their hierarchical status, and the end of the action is the beginning of the thought. For the main purpose of this building is for the Ark of the covenant of the Lord, because there is the place of the Divine Presence, therefore it was mentioned first.I do not know what compelled Rashi into this difficulty, to say that Moses commanded Bezalel to make the vessels first, when we see the opposite of his words. For also in the portion of Ki Tisa and also in the portion of Vayakhel, in every place, he commanded regarding the Tabernacle first. Therefore, certainly the reason the Ark is mentioned here first is because of its superiority over the Tabernacle and all its vessels. And who does not know in all this that the crown of Torah is above all of them (see Berakhot 55a).

וכן תעשו, “and so you shall do.” According to Rashi these words are an instruction that the materials and dimensions mentioned here are applicable not only to the Tabernacle, its furnishings and the priestly garments about to be constructed, but that the same rules apply throughout later generations. Nachmanides is not sure at all that this is in fact so, as it would have obligated Solomon to make exact replicas of the vessels used in the Tabernacle, and we have clear evidence that Solomon built an altar of 20 by 20 cubits instead of 5 by 5 cubits as described in (compare Chronicles II 4,1) Ibn Ezra explains the need for the words וכן תעשו, as due to the fact that up until this point the Torah had spoken of the structure, not the furnishings. According to the plain meaning of the text, there is no need for all these explanations, as whenever the Torah repeats something, the objective is to urge the party addressed to proceed with the task at hand without any delay. G’d had first said: ועשו לי מקדש, “they shall make a Sanctuary for Me,” and now He repeats: “now that I explained what it is to consist of, I tell you to proceed with the job.” All the Israelites are addressed by the word תעשו, and they all responded, as we know from Seeing that in this verse we are dealing with a command, and instruction, the people are addressed in direct speech: “you are to do.” 25,10 ועשו ארון, “they shall construct an ark.” This refers to the Israelites referred to in verse 2. When the Torah switches to direct speech in the following verses, making it sound as if these commandments were all addressed to Moses personally, this must be understood in terms of Moses representing the entire Jewish people. The reason that the Torah first employed a plural mode was to encourage all the Israelites to take an active part in the making of the Tabernacle by contributing of their wealth, so that their participation in a sacred undertaking would guarantee each one of them a share in the Torah. However, only skilled people could take part in fashioning the parts and the furnishings. Actually 3 separate arks were made. The outer and inner one were made of gold, whereas the middle ark was of acacia wood. The reason that the Torah does not use the expression וצפית אותו זהב, “you are to overlay it with gold,” is that the ark was enclosed only from 5 out of 6 sides, the top remaining open, until the lid was placed on it, as a separate part.

ככל אשר אני מראה, corresponding to all the likenesses of the various utensils that have been shown to you in a vision. Compare Ezekiel 40,2 where the prophet was also shown a vision of all that pertained to the building of the second Temple. The meaning of the vision was then explained to the prophet in detail.

And they shall make an ark of acacia wood: two cubits and a half shall be its length, and a cubit and a half its width, and a cubit and a half its height.

ועשו ארון AND THEY SHALL MAKE AN ARK (ארון) — It is so called because it had the appearance of boxes (ארונות) which people make without feet — in the shape of a chest which is called escrin in old French which rests on its bottom.

AND THEY SHALL MAKE AN ARK. The plural [and ‘they’ shall make] refers back to the children of Israel mentioned above. But afterwards Scripture states: And thou shalt overlay it, And thou shalt cast for it — all in the singular, as Moses is the leader of all Israel. It is possible that [in using the plural — and they shall make] He is indicating His wish that all Israel should share in the making of the ark because it is the holiest dwelling-place of the Most High, and that they should all merit thereby [a knowledge of] the Torah. Thus the Rabbis have said in Midrash Rabbah: “Why is it that with reference to all the vessels it says, and thou shalt make, and in the case of the ark it says, and they shall make? Said Rabbi Yehudah the son of Rabbi Shalom: The Holy One, blessed be He, said, Let all the people come and engage themselves in the making of the ark, so that they should all merit [a knowledge of] the Torah.” The “engaging themselves” of which the Rabbi speaks means that they should each offer one golden vessel [for the making of the ark, in addition to their general offering for the building of the Tabernacle], or that they should help Bezalel in some small way, or that they should have intent [of heart in the making thereof].

"And they shall make." Because [the verse] began earlier with "and they shall make for Me," it continues accordingly: "and they shall make an Ark." We do not know whether this measurement is exterior or interior. If it is exterior, then the sides of the Ark, covered with gold inside and out, would each be a quarter-cubit [thick] on both sides — so that the dimensions of each Tablet of the Covenant would be one cubit in length and one cubit in width. And if we further say that the height was also a half-cubit, then each stone [tablet] would be exceedingly heavy — perhaps God gave Moses extraordinary strength in his hands [enabling him] to carry a heavy stone tablet in one hand. It is written "on their two sides" (below, 32:15) — perhaps that was so, for a tablet is a solid body with six faces. It is also written that there were three [nested] arks, and one must wonder about the weight. Furthermore, the thickness of the cover (kaporet) was one handbreadth. Also, we see that the gold of the Tabernacle was only a tiny fraction — less than one part in three thousand four hundred — of the gold that David set aside. The cherubim were made of olive wood, and the incense altar was not solid gold throughout. It seems plausible that the gold overlay was for appearance only, and a small amount of gold suffices for an overlay. For the planks, the bars, the table, and the incense altar are all overlaid — nothing is wholly gold except the menorah. And if the Ark were [solid] gold, what purpose would the wood serve? The fact that it is an overlay is proven by the analogy that Solomon overlaid the vestibule and the Temple chamber with gold.

ועשו ארזן, "They shall construct an ark." It is strange that G'd phrased the directive to build the ark in indirect speech whereas the directives to construct the Tabernacle, the Altar, the Table, and the Lampstand are all phrased in direct speech, i.e. ועשית. Not only does the Torah employ indirect speech in this verse, but when elaborating on the details of the construction the Torah reverts to use of direct speech, i.e. "you shall cover it with pure gold, etc." Perhaps we can find in this anomaly a hint that the bulk of Torah cannot be fulfilled by any individual but requires participation of the entire nation. No single individual can fulfil all the commandments of the Torah, however much he may desire to do so. If an individual happens to be a priest he cannot fulfil the commandment of allocating the 24 gifts which the Torah directs the Israelite to give to the priest. He cannot fulfil the commandment of redeeming his firstborn son. A Levite also is prevented from fulfilling certain commandments by the mere fact that he is a Levite. The phrasing of ועשו ארון in the indirect plural may be intended to remind us of this fact. Possibly, the use of the indirect plural here is an introduction to the construction of all the parts of the Tabernacle and its furnishings. By using the indirect plural at this point the Torah may wish to remind us that even where it uses the direct singular when giving directives, these directives are addressed to individuals only inasmuch as those addressed represent all the חכמי לב, (compare 36,1). It is also possible that seeing that prior to receiving the second set of Tablets Moses himself constructed a wooden ark (compare Rashi on Deut. 10,1) in which he placed them as soon as he descended from Mount Sinai, the instructions given here refer to an alternate ark, the one to be constructed by Betzalel. In order to distinguish between these two arks the Torah changed its grammar. G'd had already used direct speech when He commanded Moses to construct the original ark in Deut. 10,1. At that time He added the word לך,"for yourself," to indicate that pending the construction of the permanent housing of the Tablets, Moses was to construct a temporary home for them. Whereas the directives ועשית in our portion always refer to the construction by Betzalel of something permanent, the same word in Deut 10,1 did not refer to something permanent. Moses complied personally with G'd's directive to construct a temporary ark (Deut. 10,3) as we know from: "he placed the Tablets inside" (Deut. 10,5). Phrasing the present directive in indirect plural, i.e. ועשו, was to make plain that G'd spoke of an additional ark. Had G'd merely said ועשית, I would have thought that just as the original ark was meant to be his, personally, i.e. to be paid for out of his own pocket, so the permanent ark was also meant to be paid for by himself. Alternatively, Moses could have thought that G'd spoke of the very ark Moses had already made and that now...

ועשו ארון, “they shall construct an ark;” the introductory letter ו in the word ועשו tells us that, of course, the building housing this ark had by that time already been constructed. As long as the building had not been constructed there was no place where to put the ark. We find a similar problem in Deuteronomy 10,1, when Moses recalls that G-d had told him to carve out the tablets on which the Ten Commandments would be inscribed a second time, and he constructed the ark first as he said himself in verse 3 in that chapter where he said: “I made an ark and then I carved out the Tablets.” This was not in accordance in which G-d had instructed him to proceed in verse 9 of our chapter. He had even reminded him that He had shown him an illustration of how to proceed, in that verse. If the Torah nonetheless reports matters in the reverse order, it is because we must remember to put first things first, i.e. that the structure would have been meaningless if not for the furnishings which it was to provide a home for.[Our author does not apparently accept the view of the commentators who claim that Moses had forgotten the right order and that Betzalel had to remind him when he received instructions he did not consider logical. Ed.]

ועשו ארון עצי שטים, “They shall construct an ark made of acacia wood.” When the Torah introduces the instructions to construct any of the other furnishings of the Tabernacle it always uses direct language, i.e. ועשית שלחן, “you shall construct a table, etc.” Why does the Torah switch to issuing the instruction to make the ark by using the third person, “they shall construct?” Shemot Rabbah 34,3 discusses this anomaly. Rabbi Yehudah son of Shalom said that G’d said: “let them all come and be occupied with the construction of the ark in order that all of them will acquire the merit of providing a housing for the Torah. They were all to contribute for the making of the ark.” According to the plain meaning of the text, the ark was a kind of box within which the Tablets of the covenant were to be stored and hidden. Seeing that Torah was called ראשית “a first,” it was appropriate that the ark should be the first of the furnishings to be constructed. The reason this box was called ארון is that the word is connected to the word אורה, “light.” Seeing that this box contained the Torah, the description of it by means of a word recalling “light” is most appropriate. The height of this ark which the Torah described as being “one and a half cubits,” takes into consideration the fact that cubits used in the Torah are six handbreadths long. The height of that ark therefore was 9 such handbreadths. When you add the fact that the lid (kapporet) had a thickness of one handbreadth you will find that the total height of the ark was ten handbreadths. The number 10 also resurfaces in connection with the table of which the Torah also writes that its height was to be one and a half cubits (verse 23). Seeing the Torah also designated what is termed a “crown”, i.e. sort of a frame around the top of the table, and this “crown” was one handbreadth high, the overall height of the table was also 10 handbreadths. The same height was designated for the candelabra (verse 31) where the word תיעשה is spelled with an unaccountable letter י. This motivated Solomon to construct 10 candelabras. The meaning of the letter י was not that Solomon was to make 10 candelabras out of the one in the Tabernacle. Similarly, we find that Solomon constructed 10 tables for his Temple as well as 10 basins for the priests to wash their hands (Chronicles II 4,7-8). He did not do so arbitrarily but there had been a long-standing tradition that when the Temple would be built there should be this number of such furnishings. There is another allusion to the number 10 connected with the candelabra seeing the Torah speaks about 7 arms, 1 knob, 1 cup and 1 flower to be part of each of the seven arms (verses 31-35). The number 10 is again prominent in connection with the Tabernacle itself whose beams were 10 cubits high (26,16). The “carpets” forming its inner ceiling were also ten in number, though they were joined to each other (26,1). The number 10 is featured again in connection with the copper altar which was five cubits long and five cubits wide (27,1) giving the altar a combined length and width of ten cubits. Furthermore, the height of the altar was also 10 cubits as I will explain at the end of this portion [seeing the Torah first describes it as 5 cubits high. Ed.] As a result of all this you find that the number 10 was of cardinal importance in all aspects of the Tabernacle. A Midrashic approach based on Bamidbar Rabbah 4,13: there are allusions in our paragraph to the kabbalistic statement that the composition of the Holy Ark was as dear to G’d as His throne in the celestial regions. They base this on Exodus 15,17 מכון לשבתך פעלת ה’, “You G’d have made the foundation of Your dwelling place.” This teaches that the Temple corresponds to the throne in the celestial regions. The two cherubs are as dear to G’d as are heaven and earth, both of whom contain residences of the Lord. The entire Tabernacle was constructed only for the sake of the Holy Ark as the Shechinah resided within it. All the miracles performed for the Jewish people after the construction of the Tabernacle were performed by means of the Holy Ark which always traveled in front of the camp of the Israelites (Numbers 10,33). It would kill poisonous snakes on the way as well as any other antagonists lying in wait for the Jewish people. Rabbi Eleazar son of Pedot quotes in the name of Rabbi Yossi ben Zimta (Shir Hashirim Rabbah 3,5): “two sparks used to come forth from between the lid of the Ark killing snakes, hornets, etc., and burning the nettles and other harmful growths in the desert. The smoke rising from this fire would rise and sweep the whole earth with a pleasant fragrance. The nations of the world would react to this phenomenon with the words of Song of Songs 3,6: ‘Who is she that comes up from the desert like columns of smoke in clouds of myrrh and frankincense of all the powders of the merchant?’” Thus far the words of the Midrash. We have to add to this that the words: “they shall construct an Ark out of acacia wood” refer to the people who preoccupy themselves with the Torah (Yuma 72). וצפית אותו זהב טהור, “you shall overlay it with pure gold.” This is an allusion to the tradition that in the future G’d would make a special “shade” for the people studying Torah and generally supporting Torah, concerning whom Solomon said in Kohelet 7,12: “for to be in the shade (shelter) of wisdom is also to be in the shelter of silver.” Solomon also wrote in Proverbs 3,18: “she (the Torah) is a tree of life for all those who support it.” He did not write: “for those who study it,” but “for those who support it.” If merely supporting Torah and its institutions is considered holding on to ”a tree of life,” how much more must this be so for the people who actually study the Torah!והבאת את הבדים בטבעות, “you are to insert the staves into rings, etc.” This is a reference to the multitude whose duty it is to maintain Torah scholars in a manner similar to the staves maintaining the Ark. This is the meaning of the words לשאת את הארון בהם, “by means of which they will be carried (sustained) by the Ark.” People who support Torah institutions will find themselves uplifted by what they do.” Our sages in Sifra Emor section 1,2 explain these words as meaning that such supporters of Torah (the Ark) will be raised to a higher level than their brethren. We find an explanation very similar to this in Chulin 92 where the Talmud states: “let the grapes pray for the leaves; for if it were not for the leaves there would not be any grapes either.” The meaning of this parable is: “when one plants a vine one should not have in mind the grapes exclusively, although, of course, they were the reason that one plants the vine; nonetheless the leaves fulfill a crucial function protecting the plant from excess heat and cold, etc.” There is a statement by our sages according to which “all the cubits inside the Ark were ‘broken.’” [I believe this means that after allowing for the insertion of the golden overlay on the inside of the Ark, the height, length, and breadth measurements left inside were fractions of cubits rather than whole cubits. Ed.] At any rate, the lesson to be derived from that fact is that a Torah scholar should always feel as well as deport himself in a somewhat broken manner, as opposed to appearing haughty and of an imposing appearance. A rational approach to these measurements: it is possible to explain the words: “they shall make an Ark for Me,” as an instruction that the Ark and its lid with the cherubs were to symbolise the three parts the human being is made of, i.e. body-soul-intellect. The wooden part of the Ark represents the body of man; the four rings represent the four basic materials that the body consists of. These materials are what keep him alive and functioning. The two staves correspond to the two “strings” which run through man’s body, i.e. the spine (vertebrae) and the spinal cord inside it. The two tablets which were to be deposited inside the Ark represented two special organs within man’s body which enable him to understand the wisdom of the Torah, i.e. the brain and the heart. The two cherubs represent the soul and the intelligence, the former being feminine the latter masculine. You are aware already that the masculine element is the predominating one. The male is the active element, the female element is responsive by nature. This is what Solomon referred to in Proverbs 19,2 when he wrote: גם בלא דעת נפש לא טוב, “it is also not good for a person (soul) to lack knowledge.” He meant that the soul cannot attain its objective, its fulfillment, unless it possesses intelligence. There is no need to add that if this is true of the creatures in our “lower” terrestrial world this is certainly true of the world of the planets and the stars. In that part of the cosmos we also have male and female forces such as the sun being a masculine, active force, whereas the moon is responsive, feminine. This is why both of these forces appeared in Joseph’s dream (Genesis 37,9), i.e. the masculine and the feminine force in the middle part of the cosmos, the world of the planets and stars. Even in the celestial regions this division between masculine and feminine forces exists as it is the function of the soul to eventually return to G’d as a soul which has absorbed divine intelligence [as if the feminine נפש after it had become impregnated with the masculine שכל, intelligence, had achieved its purpose, Ed]. Both of the cherubs, which represented the male and female elements in the celestial spheres were constructed out of the pure gold of the kapporet, the lid. of the Ark, in a single piece, מקשה. This kapporet was an allusion to the throne of G’d the source of חכמה, wisdom. The word כפורת, of course, is derived from כפרה, atonement. A return of the soul to its origin is impossible unless atonement for sins committed while inside the body had first been obtained. Similarly, without knowledge of the Torah a return to its holy roots is also impossible as during its stay on earth the soul otherwise becomes contaminated by the body. We learn from this whole description of the construction of the Holy Ark that by means of knowledge of the Torah which is stored inside the Holy Ark the soul as well as the intelligence, both of which were “emanated” from celestial regions down to man on earth from their origin near the throne of the attribute כבוד will be able to regain their roots if they make prudent use of their potential. This is hinted at when the Torah describes the cherubs as סוככים בכנפיהם על הכפורת, “they shall have their wings spread out shielding the cover with their wings.” Another way of looking at the Ark is that it symbolised a garden (Gan Eden) and that the two Tablets inside it symbolise the two kinds of commandments respectively, i.e. commandments to be fulfilled by one’s body and the ones to be fulfilled with one’s intellect. This corresponds to the tree of knowledge and the tree of life in the original Gan Eden. The kapporet represents the ערבות, the highest of the seven heavens, the one which covers all the other heavens. The cherubs on top of this kapporet are an allusion to the angels above this highest of the seven heavens. The are the region from which prophecy emanates to all the other prophets. The cherubs extending their wings upwards symbolized their readiness and eagerness to receive spiritual input from G’d directly, a prophecy which was direct such as that of Moses which came directly from G’d without intermediaries. This is what the sages meant when they described the Shechinah as speaking to Moses from between these two cherubs. A Kabbalistic approach: the words: “they shall make an Ark” mean that this Ark was a symbol or replica of the throne of the attribute כבוד. This is the deeper meaning of the words ואת תבנית כל כליו, “and a pattern of all its furnishings.” It means that G’d showed Moses a “sample” of all the furnishings of the Tabernacle. The reason why the Ark had to be covered with a blue colored garment was that the color blue is reminiscent of the sky and the sky in turn reminds us of the throne of G’d (Sotah 17), and this is what is meant in Numbers 4,6 that when Aaron and his sons would approach the Ark prior to the Israelites breaking camp, “they are to cover the Ark completely with a blue-colored woolen cloth and adjust its staves.” The word כליל תכלת used by the Torah in that connection means that it was to resemble the color of the sky in its entirety. The color was to symbolize the color of the celestial spheres which is also perceived as consisting of that shade of blue. Seeing that I have explained in connection with 24,10 that the throne of G’d consisted of three foundations of three colors, Betzalel made the Ark out of three separate “boxes” to reflect that concept (Compare Tanchuma Vayakhel 7). He based himself on the instruction to overlay the Ark with gold both from the inside and from the outside (verse 11). Although there were in fact three separate boxes, they looked as if there were only a single box. This is also why you find in this paragraph all the letters of the alphabet except for the letter ג which the Torah wanted to conceal in order to conceal the fact that the throne of G’d consisted of three foundations. Betzalel, on the other hand, hinted at this missing letter ג by constructing three Arks which looked like one. This is also the reason that in Parshat Noach the Torah wrote the word קשת, “rainbow,” three times in the paragraph where G’d explains the rainbow as the symbol of His covenant with mankind not to bring on another deluge, ever (compare Genesis 9, 13-14-16). One of the peculiarities of the Holy Ark which we must try and understand has been described in Pirke d'Rabbi Eliezer (chapter 4?) in connection with the Ark’s uncanny ability to carry its carriers as we know from Joshua 4,11. According to Rabbi Eliezer, just as the chayot appeared to be carrying (supporting) the throne of G’d whereas in fact the throne carried them (supported them), so something similar occurred with the people assigned to transport the Holy Ark. Our sages in Sotah 35 explained Joshua 4,11: “when all the people finished crossing, the Ark of the Lord carried its carriers and crossed with the priests ahead of the people.” There is another verse (Joshua 4,18) “the soles of the feet of the priests carrying the Ark of the covenant were torn away onto dry ground, and the waters of the Jordan resumed their flow.” According to this the feet of the priests were torn away backwards, raising the question how the Ark crossed the Jordan river afterwards. The only explanation is that the Ark carried its carriers across subsequent to what was reported in verse 18. The operative letter enabling us to understand all this is the letter כ which is read instead of the letter ב which is written in the verse, i.e. בעלות. This is what was meant by the words in verse 11 “the Ark of the Lord crossed and the priests were in front of the people.” Had the author of the Book of Joshua meant that the priests crossed the river on foot, he would have had to write ויעברו, “they crossed.” Just as the throne of G’d carried the four chayot described in the vision of Ezekiel, so the Ark carried the four men who were assigned to carry it upon their shoulders. You find this spelled out in Menachot 98. We find that the Holy Ark is also referred to as אדון כל הארץ, “master of the whole earth,” in Joshua 3,11. This is so because the Shechinah cleaves to the Torah. You also find a verse in Chronicles II 6,41 in which the Ark and G’d are almost equated when Solomon said אתה וארון עוזך, “You and the Ark representing Your power.” The word עזיך, “Your might, or Your power,” is spelled with the letter י as if the word were in the plural. When we find the Ark described as ארון העדות, as “the Ark of testimony” in verse 22 the meaning is that the presence of the Ark is proof that the Shechinah is present in Israel (compare Shabbat 22). The sages in Baba Batra 99 stated that the Ark did not take up measurable space in the Temple. What they meant by this was that one of the miracles in connection with the Ark was that its presence did not diminish the space in the Tabernacle or Temple. [In other words it did not occupy the three-dimensional space which forms the basis of our measuring things. Ed.] This was another aspect in which the Ark paralleled the throne of G’d whose location or measurements we also do not know. This is why the angels are reported as formulating their blessing by saying ברוך ה' ממקומו “blessed be the Lord wherever His location” (compare Pessikta Zutrata).

And they shall make an ark of acacia wood. Regarding the construction of the Tabernacle and all its vessels and the laws of their making, all the details of their laws have already been found in the Talmud — nothing should be added to them and nothing subtracted from them, and there remains nothing new for us to innovate about them. However, all commentators have agreed to make allusions with them to hidden or revealed matters, for it is not reasonable to say that all these details were without intention. Most authors have followed this approach, making allusions according to their own understanding, one saying this and another saying that. Even Rashi, whose words are all straightforward, nevertheless in places where he found an interpretation close to the literal meaning, he did not refrain from explaining it. For instance, in this portion he explained that the copper altar was to atone for brazen foreheads [stubbornness], and likewise the 12 springs of water and 70 palm trees And they came to Elim, where there were twelve springs of water and seventy palm trees (Exodus 15:27) he interpreted as corresponding to the 12 tribes and 70 elders. Therefore, I too will not hold back from saying what my understanding captures, to add somewhat to those allusions that the commentators have spoken about in these two portions, Terumah and Tetzaveh. Before I begin to discuss them, I will say in general about the three main vessels upon which a golden crown was made — the Ark, the Table, and the Altar. Our Sages said (Yoma 72b) that they correspond to the three crowns: the crown of Torah, the crown of priesthood, and the crown of kingship. Look to the right and see that these three vessels differed in their measurements of cubits: the Ark had all its measurements as broken [fractional] cubits, the Altar had all its measurements as whole cubits, and the Table had some broken and some whole measurements. Surely this means something. What seems most plausible to me to say about this is according to what the Sages said regarding levels: Look at those above you, because through this one will perceive in his soul that he is lacking in perfection and has not reached the level of his fellow, and he will come to be envious of him and add to the completeness of his wisdom, for the envy of scholars increases wisdom. But regarding matters of this world, meaning all physical successes such as wealth and honor, one should look at those who are below him, and through this cause he will rejoice in his portion when he sees that he has much more than many people. And as they said, “One who prays should direct his eyes downward and his heart upward” (Yevamot 105b). This means that one who prays for the needs of the soul and body should direct his heart, which perceives much wisdom and knowledge, toward one who is above him, and pray to God to incline his heart toward wisdom so that he may reach the level of those who are complete. Thus Solomon asked nothing from God except that He give him a heart that listens. And his eyes, which see the physical desires that are tangible, should be directed toward one who is below him in level, and then he will rejoice in his portion and not seek an abundance of wealth. Thus Solomon said, Give me neither poverty nor riches (Proverbs 30:8). Therefore, all the cubits of the Ark were broken [fractional], to teach that every person should perceive in his soul as if he is lacking in the perfection of wisdom and still needs to measure to fill his deficiency. For every incomplete cubit indicates something lacking that needs to be filled. Similarly, the essence of wisdom is found from where? (Job 28:12) — from one who considers himself as nothing and lacking, but not in one who is wise in his own eyes, mistakenly saying to himself that he has already reached its ultimate goal. For who is wise? He who learns from every person (Avot 4:1) — one who thinks that he is lacking in wisdom and still needs to learn more. And likewise, regarding knowledge of the existence of God, they said (Bechinat Olam 13:45), “The ultimate knowledge is to know that we do not know You.” Therefore, all the cubits of the Ark were broken in length, height, and width, corresponding to the three things that stand against those who seek to attain wisdom, which are: the limited understanding of the seeker, the depth of what is sought, and the length of the propositions. For the height represents depth, as the matter is deep — who can find it? This is the depth of what is sought. The width stands against the limited understanding of the seeker, and the length refers to the length of the propositions. As it is written, It is deeper than Sheol — what can you know? (Job 11:8) and Its measure is longer than the earth and wider than the sea (Job 11:9). But the table, which symbolizes the crown of kingship, and all the human successes which Israel merits from the table of the High One [divine providence], had some of its cubits [measurements] complete and some broken. This is because every wise person rejoices in his portion and imagines in his soul as if he has everything and lacks nothing, as Jacob said, I have everything (Genesis 33:11). However, some [of the measurements] were broken to teach that a person should not completely fulfill all his desires, and should not give the material body all that his soul desires. Rather, one needs to break his desires. For this reason, the term “breaking” [shevirah] is mentioned regarding bread, as it is written (Genesis 43:2), Buy [shivru] us a little food, and it is written (Leviticus 26:26), When I break your staff of bread. This will be further explained shortly in the section about the table. But the incense altar had all its measurements complete, and so did the burnt offering altar, because the purpose of both is to complete what a person lacks due to his deeds. For everything that comes to atone for a person completes what he lacks, since the burnt offering altar atones for the body of the sinner through the offering of animal bodies, and the incense altar atones for the soul and the spirit of God that ascends upward like the smoke of the incense. Therefore, all those measurements were complete. After this brief introduction, we will explain in detail the matter of the Tabernacle and its vessels. And they shall make an ark. The reason why in all other places it says and you shall make but here it says and they shall make, is that the Torah is saying that everyone should come and be involved in making the ark so that everyone will have a share in the Torah. For the crown of Torah is free for all. Another explanation: because it is written It is a tree of life to those who grasp it (Proverbs 3:18). It does not say “to those who learn it” but rather to those who grasp it, alluding to those who support the hands of Torah scholars. And while not every person is suited for Torah study, nevertheless there is a way for every person to have a share in the Torah. For even if one is not capable of learning, one can still support those who learn, and it is considered as if they themselves had learned, like the arrangement between Issachar and Zebulun. Therefore it says And they shall make an ark of acacia wood, because by virtue of the ark being made of wood [etz], which alludes to it is a tree [etz] of life to those who grasp it, therefore everyone can participate in making it. That is why it says and they shall make because this is something that everyone can do. And it may be that this is the opinion of Rabbi Yochanan who said in the tractate (Yoma 72b) that from here we learn that the townsfolk of a Torah scholar are obligated to do his work for him. And afterward, it says, “And you shall overlay it with pure gold, inside and outside you shall overlay it.” In making the acacia wood, it says they shall make, but regarding the gold overlay, it says you shall overlay. This is because everyone can support those who study Torah, which is alluded to by the wood, but not everyone can comprehend both the revealed and hidden aspects of Torah, which is alluded to by saying inside and outside you shall overlay it. Similarly, not everyone’s inside matches their outside, as will be explained. It’s reasonable to say that the Ark itself was made of wood because every tree produces fruit, which hints at the good reward for those who engage in Torah study, as it says He who guards the fig tree shall eat its fruit (Proverbs 27:18). This is something everyone desires, and therefore it says, They shall make an ark of acacia wood. But the gold overlay inside and outside, which alludes to the essence of the deed, is not something in which all people are equal. It is unique to Moses and exceptional individuals of his caliber, therefore it says, you shall overlay. The overlay is mentioned twice to distinguish between the inside and the outside, because first it says, you shall overlay it with pure gold inside, and afterward it says, and outside you shall overlay it, without mentioning “pure gold” for the outside. Although undoubtedly it was all made of pure gold, nevertheless, it doesn’t mention “pure gold” in relation to the outside because every craftsman’s way is to beautify a vessel more on the outside than on the inside, for the sake of those who see it. Therefore, it was only necessary to mention pure gold for the inside, but for the outside, there is no need to caution that the overlay should also be of gold, as this is all the more obvious based on the interior. This was given to teach that those who make them should be like them themselves, for all Torah students need extra caution regarding the purity of their inner heart, which is seen only by God alone. But regarding their exterior, they don’t need as much caution, because everyone naturally tends to beautify themselves in order to find favor in the eyes of others. Another explanation for why it does not mention “pure gold” regarding the exterior: This teaches us that whatever a person does to honor themselves in the eyes of God is certainly completely pure, but whatever appears externally pure is not necessarily completely pure, because one might act this way for the sake of observers while their heart is not faithful to God. Another explanation: Because internal purity is accepted by the Holy One, blessed be He, when one’s thoughts are pure, but to purify oneself externally is very difficult, because it is the way of our people to judge everyone unfavorably. For who is greater than Moses, yet they fabricated things about him and suspected him of things he was innocent of. And if the arrows of their sharp tongues fell upon the cedars [great people], what will the hyssop on the wall [common people] do? Another explanation: Inside and outside alludes to the revealed and hidden aspects of the Torah. And it is known that the hidden aspects contain more purity and holiness than the revealed aspects, therefore it only mentions pure regarding the inside. Behold, I have room to further explain “from inside and from outside,” according to what we find in the tractate Moed Katan (16a) where Rabbi [Judah HaNasi] decreed to his students that they should not study [Torah] in the marketplace, etc. And it concludes there: But is it not written Wisdom cries out in the streets (Proverbs 1:20)? Rava said: Anyone who engages in Torah study indoors, his Torah proclaims about him outdoors. According to this, there is more perfection in Torah [study] inside the house than in Torah that is taught outside. Therefore, the verse mentioned pure gold regarding the inside but did not mention this regarding the outside. And perhaps for this reason, the verse prioritized the inside before the outside, as it began with pure gold from inside, and from there we can also learn about the outside. Similarly, one who engages in Torah study in his house — from there the matter will spread to the head of all streets.

ועשו ארון, “they shall construct an ark.” This refers to the Israelites referred to in verse 2. When the Torah switches to direct speech in the following verses, making it sound as if these commandments were all addressed to Moses personally, this must be understood in terms of Moses representing the entire Jewish people. The reason that the Torah first employed a plural mode was to encourage all the Israelites to take an active part in the making of the Tabernacle by contributing of their wealth, so that their participation in a sacred undertaking would guarantee each one of them a share in the Torah. However, only skilled people could take part in fashioning the parts and the furnishings. Actually 3 separate arks were made. The outer and inner one were made of gold, whereas the middle ark was of acacia wood. The reason that the Torah does not use the expression וצפית אותו זהב, “you are to overlay it with gold,” is that the ark was enclosed only from 5 out of 6 sides, the top remaining open, until the lid was placed on it, as a separate part.

ועשו ארון עצי שטים, seeing that the words belong together, i.e. “an ark of acacia wood,” the vowel under the letter א in the word ארון is a chataph patach instead of a kametz. [This had to be so as the tone sign tipcha under the word ארון suggests that the word belongs to the word ועשו preceding it. Ed.] Even so, when it came to the carrying out of these instructions we find that Betzalel, contrary to Moses’ instructions, first constructed the Tabernacle itself before fashioning the furnishings thereof, seeing he would not have a place wherein to place all these furnishings. Nevertheless, at the time of the instructions, the Ark, Table, etc., had to be mentioned first. The reason was that the construction of the Tabernacle was, after all, secondary to the furnishings inside it. It became necessary to build the Tabernacle only in order to house the Ark and other sacred furnishings.

ועשו ארון, “they are to construct an Ark;” it is noteworthy that the Torah, in these instructions about construction of the furnishings of the Tabernacle, addresses the artisans as individuals, i.e. ועשית, you, the individual, shall construct, whereas when speaking of the Holy Ark, it uses the impersonal plural of ועשו, “they shall construct.” The reason is that seeing that the Holy Ark, repository of the Tablets and the original Torah scroll, is to be something that every Israelite must feel that he had a part in making its construction possible. (Sh’mot Rabbah 34,2). If inert objects deserve such treatment with respect, how much more so do the Torah scholars, each in their own town, living bearers of the Torah’s wisdom, deserve to be treated with respect and be given honour by each Jew. מבית ומחוץ תצפנו, “you are to overlay it both from the inside and from the outside. The famous Talmudic scholar Rava, derives from this phrasing that a Torah scholar, in order to deserve that title, must demonstrate that he is on the inside just as pure and faithful as what he projects to be on the outside to people he comes into contact with. Furthermore, the use of the impersonal plural “they” in our verse is an instruction to each Israelite to preoccupy himself with the study of Torah so that he can qualify for the reward in store for people doing so.

And you shall overlay it with pure gold; within and without you shall overlay it, and you shall make upon it a rim of gold all around.

מבית ומחוץ תצפנו WITHIN AND WITHOUT SHALT THOU OVERLAY IT — Bezalel made three arks, two of gold and one of wood, each having four walls (sides) and a bottom, being, however, open at the top. He put the wooden ark into the larger golden one and the smaller golden one into that of wood and covered its upper rim (that of the wooden ark) with gold; consequently it can be said that the wooden ark was overlaid with gold within and without (Yoma 72b; Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 6:1). זר זהב A BORDER OF GOLD — a crown-like ornament encompassed it (the ark) round about above its rim, for he (Bezalel) made the outer ark which was of gold higher than the inner ones so that it stood up over against the thickness of the cover which was made for it and even somewhat beyond it (Yoma 72b). Now when the cover lay upon the thickness of the sides of the two smaller arks the crown-like ledge rose a little above the entire thickness of the cover. It was a symbol of the “crown of the Torah” which was placed within that ark (Exodus Rabbah 34b).

"A rim (zer) of gold." [Derived] from the root of the phrase "You winnow (zerita) my path" (Psalms 139:3).

וצפית אותו זהב, “you are to cover it with gold.” The ark was actually designed to be constructed completely of pure gold, but it would have been too heavy to carry, especially since the Torah had commanded the sons of Kehat to carry it on their shoulders. Compare Numbers 7,9. We find that the altar was also hollow and filled with earth, presumably for the same consideration. (Exodus 27,8) טהור, “pure;” not containing any foreign particles. זר זהב סביב, “surrounded by crown like golden molding.” The purpose of this was to cover the wooden center part at the top completely. The wooden interior was to remain invisible.

וצפית אותו זהב טהור מבית ומחוץ תצפנו, “you are to overlay it with pure gold, from the inside and the outside you are to overlay it.” This verse is used by our sages (Yuma 72) to demand that Torah scholars must be able to demonstrate that they practice what they preach. They base this on the Ark which was gold on the inside as well as on the outside. Although no one actually saw the inside, it had to correspond to its exterior. Another verse which alludes to this subject is Job 29,14: “I clothed myself in righteousness and it robed me; Justice was my cloak and turban.” The repetition in this verse means that one’s inside must match the image one creates for oneself on the outside. Our sages add further on this subject: “why were the words of Torah compared to glass?, i.e. (Job, 28,17) “gold or glass cannot match its value?” Answer: just as glass is transparent and allows you to see not only the outside but also the interior, so bearers of Torah must be able to be equally transparent, not hiding character weakness not visible to their students or to their peers. ועשית עליו זר זהב סביב, “you are to construct on it a golden crown all around it.” When the Torah issues similar instructions concerning the table and the altar, the wording is not עליו, ”on it,” but לו “for it.” The reason is that the table itself was a symbol of the “crown” of Royalty, whereas the altar was a symbol of the “crown” of priesthood (compare Avot 4,13). The “crown” of priest-hood as well as the “crown” of Royalty is acquired by its wearer at birth, through inheritance. The “crown” of Torah is not acquired by birth. The word לו implies that this crown is an integral part of the table or altar respectively, i.e. “it belongs.” Seeing that the crown of Torah has first to be earned by the eventual wearer, the word עליו, “upon him” indicates that it will be placed on the Torah scholar at the appropriate time, at his ordination. Hereditary Royalty in Israel was the exclusive right of Kings descended from David, whereas hereditary priesthood was reserved for the descendants of Aaron. The word לו in a similar sense is used by the Torah in connection with the duty of the King to write two Torah scrolls for himself. We read in Deut. 17,18 וכתב לו את משנה התורה וגו', “he is to write for himself two copies of the Torah, etc.” The Torah immediately (verse 20) continues to supply the reason for this by writing למען יאריך ימים על ממלכתו, “in order that the days of his dynasty be long ones, etc.” We find something similar in connection with the priesthood where the Torah writes in Numbers 25,13 after Pinchas had been elevated to the priesthood: והיתה לו ולזרעו אחריו, “and it shall be his and for his offspring after him a covenant of an eternal priesthood, etc.” Seeing that the crown on the Ark represents a different kind of concept, one based on יחוס עצמו, “personal achievement,” the preposition the Torah chose to use in connection with it is עליו instead of לו. A Midrashic approach to this wording (Shemot Rabbah 34,2): the reason the Torah writes the word עליו in connection with the crown on top of the Ark as distinct from the way it describes the crowns of the table and the altar respectively, is that the crown of Torah is considered the most superior of the three (4) crowns mentioned in the Mishnah in Avot we quoted before. By writing the word עליו, “above,” the Torah indicates that he who has acquired the crown of Torah is as if he had also acquired the other crowns mentioned in that Mishnah. This thought is also expressed in the word סביב, “around it,” i.e. the crown of Torah is all-embracing. Note that the word זר for “crown” is spelled without the letter י. This is a hint that unless a person merits wearing this crown Torah is considered alien to him, i.e. זר, “strange, uninitiated.” [The assumption is that because of the vowel tzeyreh under the letter ז, the normal spelling of the word ought to have been זיר. Ed.]

“And you shall make for it a golden crown all around.” Our Rabbis of blessed memory said (Yoma 72b) that this hints to the crown of Torah. And regarding the table and the altar, it says and you shall make for it/him [lo] because the crown of priesthood and kingship is for specific people, as priesthood is only for those who are from the seed of Aaron, and kingship for the seed of David, therefore it says for it/him [lo]. But the crown of Torah is available to all, therefore it does not say “for it/him” [lo]. And it uses the language of zer [crown/border] to teach that one who uses the crown of Torah inappropriately is treated as a “zar” [stranger/outsider] who draws near and is put to death. And similarly regarding the crown of priesthood it says And the stranger who draws near shall be put to death (Numbers 18:7). And likewise the crown of kingship is a “zer” [crown] for the seed of David and a “zar” [foreign/forbidden] for strangers. And regarding what is said: “two and a half cubits its length, etc.” We have already stated that all the cubits [measurements] were broken [fractional] so that every person should imagine in their soul as if they are lacking and have not reached the ultimate purpose of wisdom. And our Sages of blessed memory said (Avot 6:6) that the Torah is acquired through 48 qualities. A hint to this: And they shall make an ark of acacia wood, two and a half cubits — the final letters [of these Hebrew words] add up to 156 [the numerical equivalent of which spells out, acquire, kenu]. Its length and a cubit and a half its width and a cubit and a half its height — the final letters add up to 48, as if to say “acquire the Torah through 48 things.”And the hint comes through broken cubits because most of the things upon which the acquisition of Torah depends are connected to the attribute of humility, as this is the foundation and source of all those 48 things. Similarly, the broken cubits indicate a broken and contrite heart, which belongs to one who is humble and of low spirit. It is possible that for this reason Rabbi [Judah the Prince] decreed that they should not teach in the marketplace, etc., so that they would not accustom themselves to learn out of arrogance, in order to show off before onlookers — as is the custom in our generation, where most learners seek to glorify themselves and increase their sharp reasoning and pilpul [intricate analysis] in public.

זהב טהור, this does not mean that gold cannot become ritually impure; we know it can become defiled from Numbers 31,22. The expression טהור here means: ”pure, refined.”

וצפית, “you are to cover it;” actually the Holy Ark was meant to be made of pure gold, not merely gold plate. The reason that it was not all gold, was that gold is very heavy and the Holy Ark plus its contents had to be carried on the Levites’ shoulders. [Even as it was, according to a calculation by Rabbi Eliyahu ki tov, the weight was 78000lbs. Ed.] The reader will wonder how a few Levites could possibly carry even such a weight, and having this in mind the Talmud in tractate Sotah folio 35, states that far from the Levites carrying the Ark, the Ark was transporting its carriers. [Especially while the entire nation crossed the river Jordan under the command of Joshua and the Levites carrying the Ark had to position themselves in a manner which would stop the waters of the Jordan flowing south until the last man had crossed.] (Joshua 3,17) Normally, and for brief periods, the Levites were able to carry the Ark, (with G–d’s help, of course, as when Yaakov rolled away a stone that several shepherds had been unable to move as much as an inch.) Our author questions that if carrying the Ark on their shoulders was a command that applied only on a certain occasion, why was Uzza punished when he tried to steady the wagon transporting the Ark. (Chronicles I 13,9-10, as well as Samuel II 6,7) He leaves the question unanswered. [The Talmud there even states that Uzzah went straight to the world to come, as a reward for his noble intention, I suppose. Ed.] Not only the Ark, but also the Table and the “golden” altar were not made of solid gold but their wooden base was overlaid with gold plate both from the outside and the inside. The same applied to the copper altar, which also had to be carried on the shoulders of the Levites during the journeys in the desert. (Compare Exodus 21,1) [This editor sees no contradiction in all this, as until the 40th year in the desert the Israelites lived on miracles, miracle water, miracle bread, clothing that did not wear out, complete protection against heat and cold by special clouds, etc. This only changed partially during the fortieth year when they conquered land, flocks and herds, etc. Presumably, crossing the Jordan river, brought that period to an end, as immediately after that the commandment to set aside challah from dough made from grain that had grown in the Holy Land, became applicable. Ed.] ועשית עליו זר זהב, “you will make around it a crown of gold.” The purpose of this was decorative. It was to symbolise the crown of the Torah. The expression זר, meaning “crown,” instead of the better known word: כתר, occurs in the Talmud, tractate Yuma, folio 72, where it is stated that there were three such “crowns.” The crown over the Holy Ark symbolised the “crown” of Torah, the “crown” around the surface of the Table symbolised the “crown” worn by monarchs, and the ”crown” surrounding the top of the altar symbolised the crown of the priesthood.” The latter crown was appropriated by Aaron, the High Priest, the crown symbolising hereditary monarchy was appropriated by King David, and the crown symbolising Torah was not appropriated by any individual or family, but is available to be worn by any individual worthy of it.

And you shall cast four rings of gold for it, and place them on its four corners: two rings on one side and two rings on the other side.

ויצקת — a term used of casting metal, as the Targum has it. פעמתיו — Understand this as the Targum renders it: ON ITS CORNERS. It was on the upper corners near to the cover that the rings were placed — two on one side of the ark and two on the other along the breadth of the ark, and the staves were put into them (the rings). The length of the ark thus formed a space of two cubits and a half between one stave and the other so that two men who were carrying the ark could walk with ease between on the same side. Thus is it explained in Treatise Menachot in the section beginning with the words, "Shtei HaLehem" (Menachot 98b). שתי הלחם ושתי טבעות על צלעו האחת AND TWO RINGS IN THE ONE SIDE OF IT — These are the very four rings spoken of in the beginning of the verse but here Scripture explains to you where they were fixed. This ו of the word ושתי (the first time the word occurs here) is really redundant and the interpretation is as though it read, שתי טבעת (see Note on Exodus 24:12). Since however the ו is there you may make it fit in thus: and two of these rings shall be on the one side of it and two on the other side thereof. צלעו means THE SIDE OF IT.

AND THOU SHALT CAST FOUR RINGS OF GOLD FOR IT, AND PUT THEM IN THE FOUR ‘PA’AMOTHAV’ (CORNERS THEREOF). “The word pa’amothav is to be understood as the Targum rendered it: ‘corners thereof.’ It was on the upper corners near to the cover of the ark that the rings were placed. And two rings shall be on the one side of it, and two rings on the other side of it. These are the very four rings which are mentioned at the beginning of the verse, but here Scripture explains that two of these rings were placed on one side [and the other two on the other side].” Thus did Rashi explain, and he explained it well. But I do not know why Rashi wrote that “on the upper corners near to the cover” the rings were placed. For in that case, the weight [of the ark and the tables of law hanging down from the staves] would be very much heavier. Moreover, the respectful way is that the ark be lifted up, resting high upon the shoulders of the priests [when carrying it].Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra wrote: “I have searched in all Scripture and I have not found the term pa’am to mean ‘corner’ but only ‘foot.’ Thus: How beautiful are p’amayich’ (thy feet); the feet of the poor, ‘pa’amei’ (the feet of) the needy. Therefore I felt bound to explain that the ark had feet to it [upon which it rested].” And so Ibn Ezra explained the meaning of the verse to be that there were altogether eight rings, the four bottom ones being those through which the staves were inserted to carry the ark with, whilst the four upper rings were purely for ornamental purposes. His words are, however, not at all correct. For if, as he said, pa’am means foot, then Scripture is commanding that the rings should be in the lower corners upon which the ark rests, and these bottom corners are called “feet” because the Sacred Language adapts all forms according to the image of man. Thus it calls the upper part of any object rosh (head), and the bottom part regel (foot). [Accordingly there is no need to say as did Ibn Ezra that the ark had feet to it upon which it rested, since Scripture calls the bottom corners “feet.”] And this is indeed true, that the rings for the purpose of carriage were at the bottom corners, and the ark was thus lifted up above the staves, as I have explained above. But in my opinion pa’am does not mean “foot” but is a term meaning “step.” How beautiful are ‘p’amayich’ — your steps. This usage is similar to the phrase in the Talmud: “How beautiful are the steps of this maiden.” Similarly: why tarry ‘pa’amei’ (the steps of) his chariots? The word pa’amothav here is Scripture’s reference to the steps of the priests that carry the ark, thus hinting at two things: that the rings be in the corners right at the bottom, near the seat of the ark, and that the whole length of the ark should interpose between the two rings. For, assuming that the length of the ark was placed in an east-west position, then there were two rings on its north side, one at the eastern head and one at the western, and likewis...

"Its corners" (pa'amotav). I have searched the entire Scripture and have not found pa'am [used] as a corner, but only in the sense of foot/leg: "the foot of the poor, the steps of the needy" (Isaiah 26:6), "He sets his steps toward the road" (Psalms 85:14), "How beautiful are your steps" (Song of Songs 7:2) — and many similar uses. I was therefore compelled to explain that the Ark had legs, for it would be disrespectful for the Ark to rest on the ground. Furthermore, what is the meaning of the added vav in "and two rings of gold" — if these were the same [rings mentioned before], it would have said simply "two rings," to indicate they are the four gold rings mentioned [earlier], as is normal usage. One of the scholars of our time understood this and said that the poles were inserted into the rings that were on the [upper] corners, but when it was necessary to carry the Ark, [the poles] were removed from the lower rings and placed in the upper rings. So too it is written, "they shall place its poles" (Numbers 4:6). In my view, once the poles were placed in the upper rings they were never removed again, for it is written, "they shall not be removed from it" (below, v. 15). And the meaning of "they shall place its poles" refers to the priests who would place the Ark's poles on the shoulders of the Kohathites. When the Ark was placed in the inner sanctuary (devir), it had to be positioned close to the wall so that the cherubim would cover the Ark and its poles — and that is why the tips of each pole extended outward: "the poles were so long that the tips of the poles were seen" (1 Kings 8:8). The four lower rings were thus for beauty and adornment, as is customary with Arks.

פעמותיו, the corners at its outer edges. ושתי טבעות על צלעו האחת, the side, wall of the Ark, is called צלע. G’d had commanded therefore that these rings be attached at the four corners of the Ark. G’d therefore commanded that there were to be four such rings at the four corners. Furthermore, G’d commanded that they not be attached along the short sides of the Ark but along the long sides of the ark. [this contradicts the commentary of both Rashi and Rash’bam. Ed.]

ויצקת לו ארבע טבעות זהב, “you shall pour four golden rings for it.” According to the plain meaning these were small rings which were actually an integral part of the outer wall of the ark. על ארבע פעמותיו, “on its four sides. There is another explanation which understands the word פעמון, as leg, in the sense of feet taking steps. Compare Song of Songs 7,2: מה יפו פעמיך בנעלים, “how lovely are your feet in sandals?, or Isaiah 26,6: רגלי עני פעמי דלים, “by the feet of the needy, the soles of the poor.” According to this view it would not be appropriate for the Holy Ark to stand directly on the floor. There would be also two large rings as housings for the staves by which the Ark would be carried on the shoulders of the Kehatites while the people were wandering. These were lowered with the small rings permanently attached to the walls of the ark, as G-d did not wish for the carriers of the Ark to come into direct contact with the Ark while inserting the staves through the rings. [Once inserted, the staves were never to be removed from the Ark. Ed.] (verse 15) על צלעו האחת, ושתי טבעות על צלעו השנית, “on one of its sides and two rings on its opposite side.” In other words, seeing that there were four sides, on the four corners. The ark was positioned inside the Holy of Holies with its longer side facing north. so that the carriers would walk on its eastern and western side.

ונתתה על ארבע פעמותיו, “you shall place it (them) on its four corners.” Rashi writes that the word פעמותיו is to be understood in accordance with the rendering by Onkelos i.e. זויתה, “its corners.” The rings were attached at the corners close to the top of the Ark, immediately beneath the kapporet. I believe that the correct explanation of the verse is found in the commentary by Nachmanides who understands the word פעמותיו as derived from, or similar in meaning to, פסיעות, steps. The word פעמות occurs as meaning “steps” in Song of Songs 7,2 מה יפו פעמיך, “how lovely are your steps.” It is a fact that the rings were attached at the respective corners near the very bottom of the Ark as it would not have been seemly for the Ark to be sort of suspended below the shoulders of the priests who carried it. It was much more dignified and in keeping with the lofty ideals that the Ark represented that it be carried above the shoulders of those priests charged with transporting it.

על ארבע פעמותיו, “on its four corners.” Rashi, following Onkelos, understands the word פעמות as referring to the four corners of the ark, and suggests that these rings were fastened at the upper third of the ark close to the כפורת, the lid. There were altogether only four such rings. When the Torah writes later ושתי טבעות וגו', these are not additional rings, but the reference is to two out of the four rings being fastened on one of the sides of the ark. Nachmanides writes that there certainly were not more than four rings, but that he cannot agree with Rashi that these rings were fastened in the upper third of the ark, something he considers physically impossible, as it is a well known fact that the higher the rings for the staves were positioned the more difficult would it be for the carriers of the ark to carry their load. [this editor has seen a calculation by the late Rabbi Eliyahu Ki Tov, of sainted memory, that the ark with its combined content weighed approx 39000kg. If so, it could only be lifted with the help of a miracle, and Nachmanides’ concern is of no practical significance. Ed.] A second argument by Nachmanides against the view of Rashi, is that it is far more dignified that more of the ark would be exposed to view when it was being transported, seeing it was borne on the shoulders of the sons of Kehat. [I find this argument also irrelevant as the ark, in common with all the other furnishings was covered by blue woolen cloth, and thus not visible to the people at large while it was being transported. Ed.] The following is the commentary on the location of the rings. by my late father of sainted memory the רא'ש. “Personally, I prefer Rashi’s commentary to that of Nachmanides, seeing that the Talmud in tractate Shabbat chapter 8 states that if someone carries a load on the Sabbath more than 10 tefachim (100 cm) above ground he is guilty of carrying in the public domain on the Sabbath, the reason being that the sons of Kehat carried the ark at a level higher than that. [This in itself is an unusual halachah as the domain known as רשות הרבים, the public domain, is not considered as such at a level above 10 tefachim. However, since all the details of forbidden activities on the Sabbath are directly derived from what was forbidden on the Sabbath for the Israelites in the desert, this anomaly resulted. Ed.] The Talmud derives this from the fact that according to the measurements given in the Torah, the height of the ark at one and a half cubits was 9 tefachim without the lid, which was an additional tefach thick. It is derived from there that any load that is transported by means of staves, (such as the ark) has the staves affixed at the juncture of the first and the second third from the top. The rationale given in the Talmud is that the major part of the height of the ark would be above the level of the shoulder height of the carriers, would be in constant state of swinging to and fro, a most uncomfortable if not impossible manner of transporting such a heavy load. On the other and, when two thirds of the height of the ark was below the shoulder height of the Kehatites carrying it, the task of carrying it would be much easier. I believe (Rosh speaking) that there were not 4 but 8 rings, 4 small rings attached to the 4 corners, in order to enable the ark to be properly positioned. There were another 4 rings along the respective sides each about one quarter of the distance from the respective corners. They were attached to the sides forming the width of the ark. The staves of which the Torah writes, were inserted through these latter 4 rings along the sides. This explains why in connection with the first 4 rings the Torah added the words על ארבע פעמותיו, whereas no mention of these corners is made in connection with the second set of 4 rings that were attached along the walls of the ark. Ibn Ezra writes that wherever else the word פעמות appears, it refers to legs. He quotes verses from Isaiah, Psalms, and Song of Songs, to prove his point. He therefore concludes that the ark had legs attached to its four corners, and that it would have been disgraceful for such a holy vessel as the ark to be simply resting on the floor of the Tabernacle, [especially as the “floor” apparently was not even a carpet over the desert sand. Ed.] The four rings by which the ark was carried, were attached near the bottom, immediately above the legs. The other 4 rings were decorative, much higher than the ones by means of which the ark was carried. Nachmanides, while agreeing that the word פעמות appears elsewhere in our Scriptures always as meaning ”feet,” comes to the conclusion that it means the steps taken by the feet here, but that the feet referred to were those of the priests carrying the ark [through the Jordan river, for instance compare Joshua 4,15 Ed.] The Torah thereby hints that the rings were attached at the corners at the bottom of the ark, the length of the ark faced the eastern wall of the Tabernacle, whereas the rings faced north, one at the north east corner and the other at the northwestern corner. The two southern rings were exactly opposite them at the southeast and southwest corners respectively. The feet of the priests would move between the positions of the rings.

ויצקת לו, they would protrude beyond the outer edges of the Ark and not be an integral part of it. ושתי טבעות, of the total of four such rings. על צלעו האחת, along the width of the Ark (the shorter side) seeing that the staves protruded in the direction of the sanctuary (backwards, seeing the Ark itself was in the inner sanctum) The length of the Ark had to be positioned in a north/south direction so that the staves would face east/west.

And you shall make poles of acacia wood and overlay them with gold.

בדי means STAVES.

And you shall make poles of [badei] shittim wood. These are the carriers of the ark, for with them they held the ark. It should have said, “And you shall make poles [badim],” but according to the hint, it alludes to the 16 men who read from the Torah on Sabbath, Monday, and Thursday, as the numerical value of badei [poles of] indicates. And you shall overlay them with gold — zahav, which is composed of the letters the numerical equivalents of which are seven, five, and two — meaning the seventh day [Sabbath], the fifth day [Thursday], and the second day [Monday]. Similar to this, we explained in Olelot Ephraim, essay 269, about a certain butcher who had a golden table that required 16 men to carry, etc. And the poles shall not be removed, for a covenant has been made — God said, They shall not depart from your mouth, nor from the mouth of your descendants, etc. As it is written, This book of the Torah shall not depart from your mouth (Joshua 1:8).

And you shall insert the poles into the rings on the sides of the ark, to carry the ark with them.

In the rings of the ark shall the poles remain; they shall not be removed from it.

לא יסרו ממנו THEY SHALL NOT DEPART THEREFROM for ever (cf. Yoma 72a).

"In the rings" — those that are on the sides (tzela'ot) of the Ark.

לא יסורו ממנו, "they shall not be removed from it." The reason that the Torah had to add the word "from it," and could not simply write: "they must not be removed," may be that without the words "from it" we would have understood that as long as the staves were not taken out of the rings completely it did not matter. However, we are taught in Yuma 72 that Rabbi Yossi bar Chanina queried an apparent contradiction between verse 15: "the staves shall remain in the rings of the ark," and 27,7, where the Torah writes: והובא את בדיו בטבעות, "and its staves shall be placed through the rings." This appears to indicate that the staves were inserted in the rings again and again. If so, how could one comply with the need for the staves to remain within the rings? The respective ends of the staves must have been thicker so that they could not slip out of the rings as demanded by the words: "they shall not be removed from it," i.e. they had to be attached so that they could not move. Thus far the Talmud. It is clear from the words of the Talmud that the words לא יסורו are enough to teach us that movement of these staves is forbidden. Perhaps the word ממנו has a different meaning, i.e. that even motion of the staves backwards and forwards within the rings was prohibited. In order to prevent us from thinking that this was also not allowed, the Torah wrote והבאת in verse 14. It is also possible that but for the word והבאת I would have assumed that whereas the prohibition of removing the staves is not punishable by malkot, i.e. 39 lashes, as long as the staves had not been completely removed from the rings it is nonetheless forbidden. The word והבאת therefore comes to teach that if the Torah had wanted to forbid any kind of movement by these staves it would have written וקבעת, "you shall affix them," or וחברת "you shall attach them," instead of והבאת, "you shall insert them." I have seen that Tossaphot on Yuma 72 ask why Rabbi Chanina based his query on the word והובא seeing that that verse deals with the staves that the copper altar was to be carried by while he ignored the word והבאת in our verse? Tossaphot ask further why Rabbi Chanina did not mention Numbers 4,5-7 which implies that the staves were removed each time the Israelites broke camp and dismantled the Tabernacle. This would contradict the Torah's directive not to remove the staves from the Holy Ark. Tossaphot answer that there were a total of eight rings and four staves attached to the Holy Ark. They base themselves on the wording: (Exodus 25,12) according to which four rings were to be attached to the four corners of the altar and another 4 rings, two each, to opposite sides of the ark. Accordingly, there would have had to be four staves, etc. I cannot justify the opinion expressed by Tossaphot. Many objections can be raised against that interpretation of the verse quoted. The matter is really very simple. The copies of the Talmud quoting Rabbi Chanina as basing himself on the word והובא are simp...

לא יסורו ממנו, “they shall not be removed from it.” In the Talmud tractate Yuma, folio 72, the question is raised that seeing the Torah had already written: “the staves for carrying the Ark are to be affixed to the Ark,” and it had instructed its craftsmen to insert the staves through these rings, its appears that the purpose was to insert these staves only when the need arose to carry the Ark. This could only be done if they were to be inserted from time to time when the occasion demanded this? The staves in the process of lifting the Ark or lowering it would slip out of the rings! How could the commandment never to remove them be possible to be observed? Answer: The staves were thicker at their respective ends so that they could only just fit through the rings, whereas in the middle they were thinner. [The reader who is interested in the mechanics of this is referred to the commentary by Or Hachayim on this verse, or on my translation of it on pages 775-776. Ed.] This is also how Rashi explains the problem in his commentary on Talmud Yoma 72a. An alternate explanation: both in this instance and again in Exodus 40,18, it was Moses who had to insert the staves through the rings. In the Book of Numbers 4,56 however, we read that Aaron and his sons were to position the ark inside the Tabernacle as well as to position its staves in the proper places. The commandment for the staves not to be moved only came into force at that time. Alternately, although Moses had placed the staves through the rings (without having been instructed to so), G-d wished for this to be done by Aaron and his sons who were priests. It was at that point that the Holy Ark attained the pinnacle of its holiness. The fact is that even during the Israelites march through the desert there were only a few days during which the people were on the march, whereas during more than 99% of the time the people and the Tabernacle remained stationary in a part of the Tabernacle that even the High Priest only entered one single day during the year. (four times during that day). During all this time, there was no need for the staves to be attached to the Ark This is why the Torah wrote with regard to the copper altar (in Exodus 27,7) בשאת אותו, “when it is being carried.” Since this altar was located in the Temple courtyard where people were constantly around, the staves if permanently attached would interfere with the people coming and going. Therefore, for the altar the staves were attached only during the time that they were travelling from one location to the next.

לא יסורו ממנו, ‘they are not to be removed from it.” Our sages in Yuma 72 explain that the staves were never totally removed from the rings through which they had been placed. Anyone who did remove the staves from the Ark contravened this commandment. Another comment found on that folio on the words והבאת את הבדים בטבעות is that the staves moved to and fro within the rings. You might assume that this means that sometimes they would slip out of the rings altogether? The Torah reassures you by saying לא יסורו הבדים, the staves will not be totally removed, i.e. “fall out of the rings.” Had the Torah only written these last words I would have thought that the staves never moved at all. This is why the Torah added והבאת את הבדים בטבעות, “place the staves through the rings.” How was this to be accomplished?” Answer: they were thicker at the extremities and thinner in the middle so that they could be introduced with ease but could be extracted only with great difficulty. [If you are interested in the tricky question of how both parts of the instructions in the Torah could be observed, see Or Hachayim on our verse. Ed.]

לא יסורו ממנו, “they (the staves) must not be removed from it.” The reason that these staves must not be tampered with, i.e. removing it and re-attaching it, was due to the sacred nature of the Holy Ark. When the Ark needed to be moved, the bearers took hold of the respective ends of these staves. As soon as they would have deposited it at its next destination, the bearers would immediately step away from it in order not to become ritually impure by any misstep they might make. Briefly, it was Moses who attached these staves to the Holy Ark the first time, and they were not ever to be detached from it again.

And you shall place in the ark the testimony that I will give you.

ונתת אל הארן — It must be explained as though it were written בארון: [AND THOU SHALT PUT] INTO THE ARK, העדות THE TESTIMONY — the Torah (the Tablets; cf. Rashi on Exodus 40:20) which is a testimony between Me and you that I have ordained the commandments written in it (Midrash Tanchuma, Pekudei 4).

"And you shall place." The tablets are the Testimony, as though they are like a marriage contract (ketubah), and they are the Tablets of the Covenant and the faithful witness. "He took and placed the Testimony into the Ark" (below, 40:20). Furthermore, Moses did not write a Torah scroll [to place inside] — the Torah scroll was placed by the priests on the outside of the Ark of the Covenant of Hashem. And it is written: "there was nothing in the Ark but the two stone tablets" (1 Kings 8:9). This is a matter of dispute. One may ask: the text says to Moses, "you shall place in the Ark the tablets which I will give you," and it is written, "He gave to Moses when He had finished speaking with him" (below, 31:18) — yet [Moses] broke them, and thus did not fulfill God's command. One may answer that perhaps for this reason our Sages said that the fragments of the tablets are placed in the Ark — and Scripture does not contradict them, for both the first and second [tablets] are Tablets of the Covenant. We can also answer that Scripture speaks only of the second tablets. There is no argument from the word "which I will give to you" (v. 21), for the same expression is used of them: "and Hashem gave them to me" (Deuteronomy 10:4). Furthermore, we do not find that God told Moses to make the Ark and place the first tablets there — for God knew that Moses would break them. He spoke only about the tablets that Moses himself hewed: "make for yourself an Ark of wood" (Deuteronomy 10:1). Our predecessors said that this [temporary] Ark is not the one that Bezalel made, and that is correct. According to the plain sense, it is not far-fetched in my view [to say] that Scripture speaks of the Ark that Bezalel made, as it is written: "and they shall make an Ark of acacia wood" (above, v. 10). Nor need we ask where these tablets were kept until the Tabernacle was erected — there is no need to mention that. I was led to this explanation because of what is written: "and I placed the tablets in the Ark which I had made" (Deuteronomy 10:5). If we say that [Deuteronomy] narrates the event as it occurred even though we do not understand the reason for its mention — what do we do with the next verse, "and they were there as Hashem commanded me" (ibid.)? This is a sign that it speaks of the tablets that Moses placed in the Ark of the Covenant, which remained there to this day — and this is the meaning of "they are there to this day" (1 Kings 8:8). This is also a sign that the Torah scroll was not in the Ark, for at the outset [Moses] placed the tablets in the Ark, and afterward the cover (kaporet) with the cherubim — and the Glory rested upon the cherubim, as it is written, "He who sits upon the cherubim" (Psalms 80:2). If so, how could Moses place the Torah scroll in the fortieth year inside the Ark without removing the cover and the cherubim from upon it? There is no need for all of that [if the scroll was placed outside].

ונתת אל הארון, the details were spelled out seeing this vessel had nothing to do with, and would not have been suitable for, sacrificial service.

ונתת אל הארון וגו, “you are to deposit inside the Ark, etc;” this verse provides the justification for the words written earlier that the Ark be treated with the utmost reverence. This was because it contained the Tablets upon which the words of the covenant between G-d and the Jewish people had been written by G-d himself. The word אל here has been chosen instead of the prefix letter ב, which means “in,” or “into.” This is not a unique construction as we have found it also in Exodus 15,25: וישלך אל המים, “he threw it into the water,” as well as in Numbers 19,6: אל תוך שרפת הפרה, “into the fire consuming the cow;” or Numbers 19,17: מים חיים אל כלי, “fresh water from a well into a vessel.”

את העדות, the Tablets which represented the testimony and covenant between G’d and Israel. This is also the reason why Moses refers to them as לוחות הברית, “Tablets of the covenant,” in Deuteronomy 9,9.

ונתת אל הארון את העדות, “you (Moses) will place within it the testimony which I will give to you.” This verse does not contain the essence of this commandment, as in verse 21 this line has been repeated. The reason it appeared in our verse is merely to tell us why the Ark was not to be moved, (unless for accompanying the Israelites on their journey through the desert). It sanctity was such that any unnecessary moving of the Ark would diminish its sanctity in the eyes of the beholder. It possessed such sanctity already on account of housing the Testimony and the original Torah scroll in the future, after G–d would give the Tablets to Moses upon his having completed his lengthy visits to the top of Mount Sinai.

And you shall make a cover of pure gold: two cubits and a half shall be its length, and a cubit and a half its width.

כפרת — A cover for the ark which was made open on top. He laid it upon it, flat like an ordinary slab. אמתים וחצי ארכה TWO CUBITS AND A HALF SHALL BE THE LENGTH THEREOF, as was the length of the ark, and its (the cover’s) breadth was as the breadth of the ark (i. e. of the inner wooden ark, cf. Rashi on v. 11); thus it rested on the thickness of its four walls. Although it does not assign any size for its (the cover’s) thickness our Rabbis have explained (applying to it a ג"ש) that the thickness thereof was one handbreadth (Sukkah 5a).

"And you shall make a cover" (kaporet). It is like a covering. Yefet said that it is like "to atone for it" (Leviticus 1:4) — like a covering of sin (Psalms 32:1). In my opinion the word "to atone" (lekhaper) is from the root kofer [ransom], as is made explicit: "each man [shall give] a ransom (kofer) for his soul" (below, 30:12), and there it is written, "to atone (lekhaper) for your souls" (ibid. v. 15). The thickness of the cover is not mentioned.

ועשית כפרת, “you are to construct a lid;” the Torah did not give measurements for the thickness of this lid, seeing that only the surface of it would be visible. The height of the outer golden wall of the Ark would completely enclose its depth.

And you shall make a cover. A covering from above, hinting that one must cover the secrets of the Torah and not reveal them to the public, for things that the Ancient of Days has covered, do not reveal them. As it is written, He who is of faithful spirit conceals a matter (Proverbs 11:13). And it is written, It is the glory of God to conceal a thing (Proverbs 25:2). And two cherubim in the likeness of angels who are called cherubim, and in the likeness of small children, to teach that if the rabbi resembles an angel of the Lord of hosts, and he is clean from sin like a one-year-old child, then they should seek Torah from his mouth. And he needs to be clean before God and man, because to fulfill one’s obligation to Heaven, the cherubim had wings spread upward, and to fulfill one’s obligation to people, their faces were toward one another, which also indicates the peace given to those who love the Torah, and they were together, twins in peace and friendship. Toward the cover shall be the faces of the cherubim, that all the direction of their faces shall be toward the Torah that is in the ark, not like those who are wise in their own eyes and seek their own honor and not the honor of the Torah.

כפורת, an expression meaning “cover.” 'אמתים וחצי ארכו וגו, corresponding to the dimensions of the Ark.

And you shall make two cherubim of gold; of hammered work you shall make them, at the two ends of the cover.

כרבים CHERUBIM — They had the form of a child’s face (Sukkah 5b). מקשה תעשה OF BEATEN WORK SHALT THOU MAKE [THEM] — i. e. thou shalt not make them separately (apart from the actual lid) and join them to the ends of the lid after they have been made, like goldsmith’s work which is called in old French souder (English solder) — but lay down a large mass of gold (lit., much gold) when thou beginnest to make the lid and beat upon the middle part of it (the gold) with a hammer or with a mallet, so that its ends will project upward (stand out in relief), and then shape the cherubim out of the projecting edges. מקשה batediz (beaten work) in old French Similarly we have (Daniel 5:6) “and his knees knocked (נקשן) one against another”. קצות הכפרת means THE EXTREMITIES OF THE COVER.

"And you shall make." Our predecessors said that the form of the cherubim was like two youths, and they explained that keruvya in Aramaic means [just that], with the kaf serving as a connector — and they spoke well, that they had the form of children, if it is a tradition. The word is treated as masculine, like the word Hanukkah, and the kaf of keruv is part of the root. The proof is "and the cherubim were" (v. 20), where the he is the definite article, not an exclamatory he, as in "Is it [as] when he smites his smiter?" (Isaiah 27:7). When I investigated the word cherubim, I found that it refers to forms — as in "You are a cherub, the anointed guardian" (Ezekiel 28:14). Ezekiel said he saw a four-faced creature, one of whose faces was that of an ox; and elsewhere, for the same creature, "instead of an ox [was] the face of a cherub" (Ezekiel 10:14). This means the form described in the first passage [as an ox] is referred to in the later passage — and it is written: "and I knew that they were cherubim" (Ezekiel 10:20), calling all four [creatures] cherubim. Thus the kaf is part of the root. "Hammered [work]" (mikshah). [This means] uniform [in surface]. Similarly: "instead of hammered work" (Isaiah 3:24), where the sense of "work" (ma'aseh) is as in "he had not tended his mustache" (2 Samuel 19:25). The reason is that each cherub was uniformly smooth from the edge of the cover.

שנים כרובים, “two cherubs.” Compare Ezekiel28,14, את כרוב ממשח הסוכך, “like a cherub with outstretched wings;” they are a certain type of bird. Seeing that birds are both clean animals and move in a clean atmosphere most of the time; even though the Torah in the second of the Ten Commandments had expressly forbidden us to make anything that is like creatures on earth or in the sky, the reason why the making of the cherubs is exempt from this was that it was not made to be worshipped, but to remain hidden inside the most inaccessible part of the Temple. We have a parallel of this in Isaiah 6,12 where the prophet described having had a vision of the Lord seated on His throne surrounded by such creatures each having six wings. Even in the Torah we find exceptions to overriding commands, such as “anyone who performs forbidden work on the Sabbath being guilty of legal execution,” (Exodus 35,2) while the priests performed such work in the Temple every Sabbath when offering the daily communal sacrifices. Not only that, even individuals, when becoming fathers of a boy baby born on the Sabbath circumcised him on the following Sabbath. (Leviticus 18,16) The Torah strictly forbade marrying the wife of a brother, but made an exception if said brother had died without children, and encouraged a surviving brother to marry the widow who had been his brother’s wife in order to provide him with issue. Similar exceptions are in place for wearing wool garments with tzitzit, ritual fringes, including wool and linen. There is a positive commandment to this effect (Compare Deuteronomy 22,12)

ועשית שנים כרובים, “you are to construct two cherubs, etc.” According to the plain meaning of the text the reason that such figures of angels were placed both in the Tabernacle and in the permanent Temple is to keep alive the idea that there are such beings whom G’d designated from time to time to perform miracles on earth. Just as we have been commanded to have a firm belief in the existence of G’d Himself and the fact that He is the original Existence, and this is one of the fundamental concepts of the Torah as proven by the first words of the Decalogue: “I am the Lord your G’d, etc.,” so we are required to believe in the existence of angels as the second fundamental concept in the list of our religious beliefs. Had there not been such angels, i.e. instruments by means of whom G’d makes His will known from time to time to His prophets, there would be no prophecy, no Torah, in short no “hot line” to the Creator. This is why G’d commanded that these figures be made and installed inside the Tabernacle (where nobody could see them). The reason that two such angel-like figures had to be made was to ensure that none of us would think that the solitary angel-like figure represented the Creator Himself, the One whom we worship and serve. If you were to reply that by making two such figures people might conclude that there are in fact two domains, i.e. that G’d shares power with another, this is not a valid objection seeing both of these cherubs’ wings were pointed upwards towards heaven indicating that they themselves were recipients of Divine input rather than original dispensers of Divine bounty. This is Maimonides’ view concerning the cherubs though I changed his wording a little (compare Moreh Nevuchim section 3 chapter 45). Seeing that I believe that the cherubs represented the existence of the angels and there are many angels, we can surely say that the word כרובים was chosen to convey the idea that there are many such beings. This is also why G’d Himself is described (Psalms 80,2) sometimes as יושב הכרובים, “enthroned above the Cherubs.” G’d is described there as taking care of flocks of such cherubs. According to Sukkah 5 the meaning of the word כרוב is the same as כרביא in Aramaic, i.e. “young child.” From the above it appears that the word כרובים has two meanings, “a multitude of something,“ and ”children.” In both of these meanings the first letter כ is not part of the actual noun but is additional. It symbolises the כסא, the throne of G’d. In fact we have a tradition that the name כסא is based on the letter כ. (Compare what we wrote on Leviticus 27,2 under the heading “a kabbalistic approach.”) At the same time, the letter כ also alludes to the word or attribute כבוד, and we have already explained that it is this attribute of G’d which occupies the throne כסא. The function of some of the angels is to welcome this attribute of G’d as it is written וכבוד אלו-הי ישראל עליהם מלמעלה, “and the attribute כבוד of the Lord G’d of Israel was above them (the cherubs)” (Ezekiel 10,19). We may say further that the cherubs were positioned at a height which corresponded to the high end of the lower third of the overall height of the Tabernacle. The same was true of the position of the cherubs in Solomon’s Temple as our sages pointed out in Sukkah 5. The reason for this is that the angel is considered as “one third of the world,” this is why the cherubs were positioned only in the lower third of the Tabernacle. This was to demonstrate that though the angel’s regular habitat is in the upper third of the three parts of the cosmos, nonetheless they represent the lower third of that domain in relation to the Lord Who “rides” above them. This is not so in connection with the mezzuzah which is affixed on the upper third of the frame of the door or entrance (compare our comments on Deut. 6,9). When the Torah writes here: “you shall construct 2 cherubs of gold,” using the word שנים instead of שני to describe the possessive clause, the word שני denotes the equality of the two cherubs such as in שני לוחות העדות, or in שני כשבים, “the two Tablets of testimony,” or “two sheep.” In order to teach that these two cherubs were not identical, could not be interchanged, the Torah had to write the word שנים instead of שני. One of the cherubs was male, the other female. This is confirmed by the fact that once we established that these cherubs were indeed different from one another, the Torah could write in verse 22 מבין שני הכרובים. Similarly, in 37,2 the Torah was able to write ויעש שני כרובים זהב, as in these verses the Torah emphasised what the two cherubs had in common, i.e. that both of them were constructed out of gold. An approach based on the plain meaning of the text. The words שנים כרובים are necessary to teach that the two cherubs were male and female. The Torah wanted to teach that the Children of Israel are as beloved of Him as the love that exists between man and woman. This corresponds to what the sages said in Yuma 54: “Rabbi Ketina said that at the time when the Israelites are in the habit of appearing at the Temple on the three festivals requiring them to do so, they used to roll back the dividing curtain so as to show the pilgrims the cherubs on top of the Ark which were embracing one another and they would say to them: ‘see how beloved you are in the eyes of the Lord, just like the love that exists between man and wife.’” There is a verse in Kings I 7,36 which expresses the words of Rabbi Ketina where we read: כמער איש וליות סביב, “joined in an embrace (of their arms) like man and woman.” It is necessary to understand these similes correctly. The Rabbis meant that the very shape and position of the cherubs was such that they suggested a readiness to embrace each other. They did not mean that these cherubs performed such activities, especially not when exposed to public view. The idea the Rabbis wanted to convey was that as opposed to the Gentiles who require an intermediary in their approach to the Lord, the Jewish people are so beloved of G’d that they do not require an intermediary just as man and wife do not require an intermediary if they want to express their love for one another. For He, the Exalted, leads Israel all by Himself without the help of any intermediary (compare Deut. 32,12). The Gentiles, on the other hand, are assigned to intermediaries as we know from Deut. 4,19). It would have been possible to construct the cherubs in a way that one was the figure of an adult and the other the figure of a child. Ezekiel saw it like this in his vision (Ezekiel 10,14) “the appearance of the face of one was that of a minor whereas the face of the other looked like that of אדם, “an adult person.” In his vision the message would have been that the love of G’d for Israel was like the love of a father for a son, a very formidable kind of love. However, in the Tabernacle the intention was to describe an ongoing close relationship. Seeing that it was impossible to inform us of the type of relationship which exists between G’d and the Jewish people, the Torah decided to describe this by means of the cherubs in the Tabernacle. Another reason for telling us all this by means of a visible symbol is to encourage us to pray for this relationship without intermediary to be maintained. This was the reason that the Ark was placed in the Holy of Holies, the site where the Shechinah resides, the ruin towards which all the eyes of Israel focus in prayer. If you will study the writings of Maimonides carefully (Moreh Nevuchim 3,3) you will find that he understood the cherubs in the Tabernacle as corresponding to the cherubs which Ezekiel saw in his vision, i.e. the chayot hakodesh. Even though Ezekiel reported seeing four chayot, in reality they were really only one. We can confirm this from the wording in Ezekiel 10,20 when he refers to them in the singular, i.e. היא החיה אשר ראיתי תחת אלו-הי ישראל בנהר כבר ואדע כי כרובים המה, “they are the chayah which I had seen under the Lord G’d of Israel at the river Kevar. So now I knew they were cherubs. After Ezekiel had earlier described 4 chayot, he had subsequently realised that they were in reality a single chayah and the same as the cherubs. After Ezekiel had understood this he mentioned a second insight he had acquired that they are the Ophanim which he had previously observed next to the chayot though somewhat lower than the chayot. The wording in the text (Ezekiel 1,15) is as follows: וארא את החיות והנה אופן אחד בארץ אצל החיות, “When I saw the chayot, and here one Ophan was on the ground near the four-faced chayot.” Already during his first insight (Ezekiel 1,4) when he had the vision of the chayot he had said: וארא והנה רוח סערה גדולה: “I saw that there was a stormy wind,” etc. Still later Ezekiel speaks of a third insight he had, an insight superior to the previous ones, the understanding of the phenomenon called Chashmal. Concerning these three separate insights granted to him he applied the word Chashmal. He used the word וארא three times to indicate that he had three separate visions. These visions are what is described in Chagigah 13 as מעשה מרכבה, the traditional name for Ezekiel’s vision. There is some disagreement as to how far the מעשה מרכבה extends. Rabbi says that it concludes with the words וארא where this word appears for the last time (1,27), whereas Rabbi Yitzchak holds that it extends only until the word חשמל, (1,4) and that what follows are headings for different aspects of what is known as מעשה מרכבה, “a description of G’d’s entourage.” [The author goes to some length to compare the construction of the cherubs, their appearance, the gold they were made of, etc., to the vision of Ezekiel. I have decided to omit this. Ed.] ... Our sages in Bereshit Rabbah 1,20 explain that the angels were created on the second day of creation and that the heaven described as רקיע was created on the same day. They understand the meaning of the directive יהי רקיע in Genesis 1,6 as a reference to the “heaven” inhabited by the angels known as chayot. It is important for us to appreciate that the habitat of these chayot is in the seventh רקיע, the one known as ערבות. Our sages in Chagigah 12 stated this specifically. Some Kabbalists believe that above that region is one called מעון, i.e. an eighth heaven. This heaven supposedly contains what are known in kabbalistic circles as נהרי שמחה, “rivers of joy.” This is why in the seven benedictions and the introduction to the grace after meals during wedding festivities we speak of the heavens as שהשמחה במעונו, “the heaven called Ma-on which contains joy.” Above that region is yet another heaven, the ninth, known as מכון. All the last three heavens together are part of what is known as ערבות. The holy chayot are within the general domain known as ערבות. The region known as מעון is inclined above their heads. The ninth heaven, the one called מכון, contains the throne of G’d’s attribute כבוד. We know that this is also part of the general region known as ערבות from David who speaks of סולו לרוכב בערבות בי-ה שמו, “extol Him who rides the regions of heaven known as ערבות, ‘the Lord” is His name” (Psalms 68,5). We have another verse referring to the region called מכון in Kings I 8,13 where Solomon describes that region as the one where G’d has His residence, eternally. A kabbalistic approach to the two cherubs. Both the cherubs in the Tabernacle and the ones in the Temple were symbolic of the fire and the thunder the Israelites experienced during the revelation at Mount Sinai. Moses had reminded the people of their experience in Deut. 4,36 when he emphasised that the origin of these phenomena had been in heaven, i.e. מן השמים. They were both constructed of gold seeing that both were recipients of input from the attributes חסד and דין, Love, and Justice. They were constructed of a single chunk of gold, מקשה, to symbolise the underlying unity of these attributes. They were male and female respectively in order to teach that these two genders represent the משפיע and the מושפע, the initiating force and the responsive force respectively. The reason they were placed at opposite ends of the kapporet (verse 19) was that one represented the “head” i.e. the beginning of the בנין in the lower, terrestrial world, whereas the other represented the סוף, the conclusion of that בנין “construction.” This is what is implied in the wording מן הכפורת תעשו את הכרובים על שני קצותיו, “from the kapporet shall you make the two cherubs at its two ends.” והיו הכרובים פורשי כנפים למעלה, the meaning of these words is that the cherubs are to receive spiritual input from the celestial regions. ופניהם איש אל אחיו, “with their faces opposite each other.” Our sages (Baba Batra 89) explain that as long as the Jewish people carry out the will of their Lord the faces of the cherubs will be turned towards the kapporet like the student who lowers his eyes before the teacher out of deference and fear. We need to understand that the kapporet together with its cherubs is an allusion to the five “lower” regions who raise their wings in an upward direction, i.e. facing the five “upper regions.” This concept helps you to understand how appropriate it was that the Tablets were underneath the cherubs inside the Ark. By facing the Ark with their faces (as opposed to their wings), the cherubs indicated that they looked for inspiration from the Torah (Tablets) below them inside the Ark. Just as we heard the Torah i.e. what is inscribed on the Tablets, through fire and thunder at Mount Sinai, the cherubs’ facial direction symbolised this. The reason that the Torah repeats once more ואל הארון תתן את העדות אשר אתן אליך, “and into the Ark you shall place the Testimony which I will give you,” is a warning that the Ark is not to remain empty, without the Tablets. This is similar to the instructions (Menachot 99) that the table is not to be empty overnight of the show-breads. The Tablets inside the Ark were a symbol of G’d’s Presence as described in Isaiah 26,4 and in Exodus 23,21, where the Presence of G’d in the Tabernacle is referred to. The cherubs which Ezekiel saw, i.e. the chayot hakodesh, corresponded to the cherubs in the Temple on the lid of the Ark. This is the meaning of what he said (Ezekiel 10,20): ואדע כי כרובים המה, “I realised that they were the cherubs.” Seeing that he had already seen cherubs which were chayot hakodesh, he realised that in a still higher region there were other cherubs, angels which he had not seen although he had seen a “sample, a pattern,” of them. The cherubs which Ezekiel did see as well as the cherubs in the Tabernacle and the Temple all were a pattern of the cherubs in the higher celestial regions which he knew of but had not seen. The term “cherubs” includes such phenomena as the throne of G’d’s attribute כבוד; they are the ones to which Isaiah 64,10 referred when he said בית קדשנו ותפארתנו אשר הללוך אבותינו, “our holy Temple, our pride, where our fathers praised You.” You are aware that the sound of G’d’s voice was heard by Moses as emanating from between the two cherubs on the kapporet, from the single handbreadth of open space between their outstretched wings. This is where G’d had “compressed” His Shechinah. He did so although we have been told elsewhere (Jeremiah 23,24) “for I fill heaven and earth, says the Lord.” You also find in Tanchuma Vayakhel 7 that Rabbi Joshua from Sakinin said: “the way to understand all this is by means of a parable: there was a cave at the beach of the sea. Whenever the sea was rough the cave was filled with water; nonetheless the sea did not appear to have lost any of its volume.” In a similar manner G’d compressed His Shechinah into a small space without impairing the truth of the statement in Psalms 148,13 הודו על ארץ ושמים, “that His splendour covers heaven and earth.” When we consider the framework of man you will find that man possesses three special organs, each one of which is about the size of the space between the wings of the cherubs in the Tabernacle. These three organs contain the letters of the tetragrammaton, each organ, one of them. (The organs are מילה, פה,לשון — the male organ, the mouth and the tongue). The word הלב has the fourth letter of the tetragrammaton i.e. the second letter ה of the name “Hashem.” Our sages in Bamidbar Rabbah 12,10 say that the kapporet on the Ark corresponds to the Seraphim in the celestial regions which are above the throne as we know from Isaiah 6,2 שרפים עומדים ממעל לו “Seraphim were standing ‘above’ him.” These Seraphim are “advisors” of the Shechinah. There are two of them. They too are part of the beings called cherubs.

כרובים. Birds. (shapes of) We base this on Ezekiel 28,14 את כרוב ממשח הסוכך, “as a cherub with protective outstretched wings.” (compare Rashi) It is a large bird. Our sages (Sukkah 5) understand the word to mean “having the faces of young children, toddlers.” מקשה, hammered out of the thickness of the lid, i.e. the whole was a single chunk.

Make one cherub at one end and one cherub at the other end; from the cover you shall make the cherubim, at its two ends.

ועשה כרוב אחד מקצה AND MAKE ONE CHERUB FROM ONE EXTREMITY — In order that you should not say that the preceding verse means two cherubim on each extremity, it was necessary to expressly state: “one cherub from the one extremity and one cherub from the other extremity”. מן הכפרת FROM THE COVER itself, תעשו את הכרבים SHALL YE MAKE THE CHERUBIM — This is the explanation of: (v. 18) “of beaten work shalt thou make them” — that thou shalt make them out of the cover itself and that thou shalt not make them by themselves and afterwards join them to the cover.

"One cherub." The cherubim faced along the length [of the Ark], and therefore the poles ran along the width of the Ark. An objector has argued that tzela' is used only along the length, citing "the second side of the Tabernacle" (below, 26:20) — but the answer is beside it: "five bars for the planks of the side of the Tabernacle, for the far end" (ibid. v. 27). And from the cover itself the cherubim were made — at the two ends of the Ark.

מן הכפרת תעשו, “you shall make them integral parts of the Ark’s lid.” Incidentally, the cherubs constructed in Solomon’s Temple were not mounted on the Ark’s lid. (Kings I 6, 23-27)

מקצה, from the center of the border in the width of the Ark so that the cherubs would be facing the sanctuary when mounted on the Ark.

And the cherubim shall be with wings spread upward, sheltering the cover with their wings, with their faces toward one another; toward the cover shall the faces of the cherubim be.

פרשי כנפים [AND THE CHERUBIM SHALL] SPREAD THEIR WINGS [ON HIGH] — i. e. that you shall not make their wings touching the body but spreading on high slightly above but almost on the same level with their heads so that the hollow space between the wings and the cover shall be ten handbreadths, as it is explained in Treatise Sukkah 5b.

"And they shall be." Yefet said that the faces of the cherubim should be toward the cover, toward the middle of the cover. In my opinion, the faces of the cherubim were not set at right angles to where they stood; therefore their faces were slightly turned toward the cover.

והיו הכרובים, our prophets have already explained to us that when they had visions involving angels, such angels appeared to them in the guise of cherubs. This means that they had faces like humans but were equipped with wings. In spite of appearing as if physical beings, the fact that they represented disembodied intelligence was indicated by the fact that their motion was ever upwards when the prophet observed them as if being in motion. In other words, any motion ascribed to them was in the direction of facing towards G’d exclusively. Each one of these cherubs, whenever and to whomsoever they appeared, did so according to his respective level, rank, in the celestial hierarchy. והיו הכרובים פורשי כנפים, the cherubs were always in a posture of having extended wings. The human intelligence is one that aspires to attain union with its counterpart (the source from which it is derived). The process leading to this involves the understanding of certain mental disciplines in which the owner of this intelligence divests himself of any and all consideration involving concretization, i.e. concepts involving the material universe. Only in this manner can a human being attain the kind of understanding of the Divine that he is willing and capable of attaining, each according to the level of his intelligence and his piety. Such insights are achieved by intelligently looking at the manifestations of G’d in this world, studying about His attributes by gaining knowledge about how and when He does intervene in history by overriding the laws of nature which He Himself formulated and instituted. Knowing under what circumstances G’d will resort to such extraordinary miracles, and appreciating the rationale behind it, is what enables the prophet at certain times to evoke G’d’s direct involvement in the fates of individuals. When Moses asked G’d הודיעני נא את דרכך, “please instruct me in Your ways,” (33,13) he wanted precisely these kinds of guidelines. When the Torah describes the cherubs as פורשי כנפים למעלה, this describes the source from which all this inspiration has to come. The sages already explained that these cherubs had the faces of a young boy and a young girl, (Yuma 54) a reference to the initiation of actions originating in a domain which is part of the abstract world. What is initiated there resembles something masculine, as the male is symbolic of initiating matters whereas the female’s role is more responsive in nature. ופניהם איש אל אחיו, this describes that what is initiated in abstract, disembodied regions of the universe, i.e. in heaven, is accepted, received willingly and in a complementary fashion by the creatures in this concrete, i.e. physical part of the universe, Only by a merging of these two basic constituent parts of our universe can “perfection” on earth be attained. The reason why the Torah continues in describing these cherubs as facing the lid of the Ark, i.e. looking downwards whereas their wings are spread upwards, is a reminder...

פורשי כנפים, “spreading wings;” to make them look like birds; the reason for this was that birds are viewed as the cleanest creatures (compare what we wrote on verse 18), למעלה, “upwards;” above their head; in a posture of modesty and humility. This is matched by the way Isaiah describes his vision of these seraphim covering their bodies with their wings including their faces, (Isaiah 6,2) ופניהם איש אל אחיו, “and they are to face one another;” these details all prove that these cherubs were not intended to be deities to be worshipped, else they would have faced their onlookers so that these could prostrate themselves in front of them. How is this proof? Supposing there had been only one cherub on the lid of the Holy Ark, or if the face of one of them (if there were two) had been turned toward the people, one could have perhaps understood the symbolism as meaning that their purpose was to inspire awe of them in their onlookers. Seeing, however, that they faced each other, is clear proof that they had no interest in any onlooker. Furthermore, though their wings were pointing upwards, their faces were looking down at the lid, i.e. the space from which G-d’s words would emanate to Moses, and the area in which the Torah was kept. The most important proof that they were not meant to be worshipped by anyone, is the fact that they were in a place that was inaccessible to the people on pain of death. Their function therefore was merely to be servants of G-d rather than His competitors, just as the cherubs (seraphim) in Isaiah 6,2 were perceived as G-d’s servants standing in attendance before G-d’s throne.

סוככים בכנפיהם על הכפורת , “spreading their wings over the kapporet.” This verse refers to these cherubs which were 10 handbreadths in height; this is the source of the sages proving that the interior height of the Sukkah, exclusive of its covering must not be less than ten handbreadths (Sukkah 5). The cherubs occupied the lower third of the Tabernacle seeing that the interior of the Tabernacle was 10 cubits high and the cubit comprised 6 handbreadths. We have already shown that the height of the Ark including the kapporet but excluding the cherubs was also ten handbreadths, so that the cherubs occupied the upper ten of the lower 20 handbreadths. This is what was meant by the statement that they were standing in the “third” of the Tabernacle, i.e. the lower third. The words סוככים על הכפורת mean that there was enough space beneath their wings to form the minimum height for a Sukkah.

למעלה, toward their heads. ופניהם איש אל אחיו, facing the center area on the surface of the lid. (from the outside toward the center and each other)

פורשי כנפים מעלה, “spreading their wings upwards;” the wings were spread above their heads. This was to symbolise humility. [If the head were to be above the wings, this would be a sign of arrogance; this is why Jews always cover their heads when under an open sky. Ed.] אל הכפורת, “in the direction of the lid of the Ark.” Their faces were turned downwards.

And you shall place the cover upon the ark from above; and into the ark you shall place the testimony that I will give you.

ואל הארן תתן את העדות AND IN THE ARK THOU SHALT PUT THE TESTIMONY — I do not know why this is repeated for it has already been commanded, (v. 16) “and thou shalt put the Testimony in the ark”. One may say that it intends to tell us that whilst the ark is still by itself — i. e. without the cover — he should first put the Testimony into it, and only afterwards should he put the cover on it for the first time. Thus indeed do we find: that when he (Moses) erected the Tabernacle it is stated, (Exodus 40:20) “and he [took and] put the Testimony into the ark”, and afterwards it says, “and he put the cover upon the ark above it” (cf. Talmud Yerushalmi Shekalim 6:1).

AND IN THE ARK THOU SHALT PUT THE TESTIMONY THAT I SHALL GIVE THEE. “I do not know why this is repeated, for it has already been stated [in Verse 16], And thou shalt put into the ark the Testimony which I shall give thee? One may answer that it intends to teach us that while the ark was still by itself, without its cover, he should first place the Testimony into it and then place the cover on it [for the first time]. Thus we find also when Moses set up the Tabernacle that Scripture says, And he put the Testimony into the ark, and after that it says, and he put the cover of the ark above.” This is Rashi’s language. But if this be a command [as Rashi has it], the sense thereof would rather seem to be that after he puts the cover on the ark as G-d had commanded, [he should then remove the cover and] put the Testimony into the ark, for the term “ark” applies also when there is a cover on it. Moreover, one can also ask why did Scripture repeat the phrase from between the two cherubim which are upon the ark of the Testimony, when it is known already from the preceding verses that the cherubim are upon the ark of Testimony? And what need is there to explain this again, seeing that He has already stated, from above the ark-cover, from between the two cherubim? But the explanation thereof is as follows: Because He had commanded that the cherubim shall spread out their wings on high, but had not said why they should be made altogether, and what function they should serve in the Tabernacle, and why they should be in that form, therefore He now said, and thou shalt put the ark-cover with the cherubim, for they are all one, above upon the ark, because in the ark thou shalt put the Testimony that I shall give thee, so that there be for Me a Throne of Glory, for there will I meet with thee and I will cause My Glory to dwell upon them, and I will speak with thee from above the ark-cover, from between the two cherubim because it is upon the ark of the testimony. It is thus identical with the Divine Chariot which the prophet Ezekiel saw, of which he said, This is the living creature that I saw under the G-d of Israel by the river Chebar; and I knew that they were cherubim. This is why He is called He Who sitteth upon the cherubim, for they spread out their wings on high in order to teach us that they are the Chariot who carry the Glory, just as it is said, and gold for the pattern of the chariot, even the cherubim, that spread out their wings, and covered the ark of the covenant of the Eternal, as I have mentioned. In the opinion of our Rabbis the cherubim had the forms of a human being, the word being of the Aramaic language which calls a lad ravya. In that case the letter kaf in the word k’rubim (cherubim) is not part of the root of the word, but merely serves in a comparative function [meaning “as lads”], the name indicating their substance. If you will further contemplate as to why their faces were turned one to another, and why they were of beaten work, yo...

"And into the Ark" — as is the normal usage of the language, and he would already have placed the Testimony in the Ark, after which you shall set the cover.

ונתת את הכפרת על הארון מלמעלה, "And you shall put the lid on top of the ark, from above;" Why did the Torah have to repeat that the "testimony" (Tablets with the Ten Commandments) should be placed inside the ark? We have already been told of this in 25,16! Rashi answers this problem saying that Moses was to first put the Tablets inside and subsequently to put the lid on the ark. He quotes 40,20 where the Torah describes Moses carrying out the instructions given here. Rashi's commentary suggests that unless the Torah had repeated itself one could have erred and thought that the Tablets were to be placed on top of the lid of the ark. I am not satisfied with this. First of all, there was no room on top of the lid for the Tablets as the whole top of the lid was taken up by the cherubs. Besides, if the Torah was concerned about the reader making such an error, it only had to add the word בתוך, "inside," in verse 16 instead of writing אל! There are other objections that could be raised against Rashi's commentary. The comments by Rabbi Eliyah Mizrachi on this duplication are not compatible with his usually profound insights. He wanted to defend Rashi by using the fact that Rabbi Avraham ibn Ezra did not see any need to comment as proof that there is no difficulty at all. With all due respect, I feel that Rabbi Mizrachi succeeded in defending Rabbi Ibn Ezra's words rather than those of Rashi. The instructions in verse 16 had to precede those in verse 21 as otherwise the Torah would have commanded placing the lid on an empty ark, seeing that the instruction to put the Tablets inside it would have been issued after the directive to put the lid on top of the ark! I believe that the correct interpretation of our verse is to underline that not only are the Tablets to be placed inside the ark but they are not to be taken out again forever, similar to the original Torah scroll which Moses was commanded to place next to the Tablets. Our sages in Devarim Rabbah 9,9 say that if ever there is a discrepancy between the Torah scrolls of one tribe and that of another tribe [the 13 original ones were all written by Moses personally, Ed.], the Torah scroll to be used as the one to compare to is the one which was kept inside the ark. [One could compare what was written in that scroll without removing the scroll from the ark. Ed.] This also helps us to understand why the Torah in our verse mentions the placing of the lid on the ark before mentioning the fact that the Tablets were to be placed in it. All the verse came to tell us is that once the Tablets had been placed inside the ark and the lid had been placed on top they were to stay there forever. Another meaning of the verse, i.e. the repetition of what was mentioned in verse 16, is that Moses was to wait with placing the Tablets inside until all three parts of the ark had been completed together with the lid and the cherubs on it. This would appear to be so, based on the sequence of the words: ונתת את הכפרת…follow...

ונתת את הכפרת על הארון מלמעלה, “you are to position the lid on top of the Ark.” This is followed by the instruction to place the Tablets inside the Ark after G-d would give these to Moses. How is this to be understood? As of the previous month of Ellul, when Moses had received the second set of Tablets they had rested in the ark which Moses had constructed prior to ascending the Mountain in order to receive them, as pointed out in Deuteronomy 10,3, when he said: “I made an Ark of shittim wood, and then I proceeded to carve out the two stone Tablets.” On the 25th day of Kislev following, when the construction of the Tabernacle and all its furnishings had been completed, he put the lid on the ark for the first time. This is what the commandment: “place the lid on the Ark,” (in our verse) refers to. The Tablets remained in the ark which Moses had constructed until the first day of Nissan when the Tabernacle together with all its furnishings was anointed. Concerning that Ark, the Torah said that Moses was to place the Tablets inside the Holy Ark. This was the Ark constructed by Betzalel. Of this Ark the Torah wrote: ואל הארון תתן את העדות, “and put the Testimony inside the Ark.”According to the plain meaning of the text (according to Ibn Ezra), Moses had already placed the Tablets inside, and after that he placed the lid on the Ark. Seeing that the lid had been mentioned already several times it states once more that once the lid had been put on the Ark the entire Tabernacle could be considered as having been completed. ואל הארון תתן את העדות, “and into the Ark you are to place the Testimony.” At this point this was a commandment. Previously when the Torah wrote: ונתת אל הארון, “you will place into the Ark, etc,” we would do well to understand these words as a prediction, or explanation for the purpose of the lid. According to one opinion it would also be an explanation for why the Ark, i.e. with the staves attached to it, were never to be moved. אשר אתן אליך, “which I am going to give you.” This was a reference to the second set of Tablets, seeing that G-d knew that the first set would never get there in one piece. Not only that, but these words were spoken to Moses on the fortieth day of his last stay on the Mountain. (The first set of Tablets had been smashed on the 17th day of Tammuz)

ואל הארון תתן, “and you are to place within the ark, etc.” Rashi explains that the reason why this verse appears to repeat what has been written already in verse 16, is to tell us that the Tablets were to be placed inside the ark even before the lid was placed on it. I might have thought otherwise that only after the lid had been constructed was the ark considered complete enough to house the Tablets. After that the lid would be placed on the ark. I do not understand what Rashi is saying. It is the most obvious thing that the Tablets could not have been placed inside the ark unless the lid was off at the time. Perhaps Rashi meant to say that the lid was not to be put on the ark at all, not even in order to move it from one site to another, unless the Tablets had already been placed inside it. Nachmanides, referring to Rashi’s commentary, writes that if indeed our verse is an instruction, this sounds most illogical; it would be far more likely that the Torah would instruct not to put the Tablets into an as yet incomplete piece of furniture, and only after the ark had been fitted with the lid were the Tablets to be placed inside. After all, the Torah writes that the Tablets are to placed inside the ark, and the ark is not called “ark,” unless it has been fitted with the lid first. Nachmanides also questions the words מעל הכפורת אשר על ארון העדות, “from above the lid, which is on top of the ark of the testimony.” Why would this information have to be repeated? We know that the cherubs were part of the lid, the כפורת! He therefore explains that seeing the Torah had neither explained the need for the cherubs, nor why they had to have their wingspans extended vis a vis each other, it is explained now that the voice of G’d when He spoke to Moses would appear to emanate from precisely this spot between the extended wings of the cherubs on top of the lid of the ark. Keeping all this in mind, the Torah repeats that seeing that the Shechinah will speak to Moses from between the outstretched wings of the cherubs, it is fitting that they are placed on the equivalent of a “throne,” כסא הכבוד. This “throne” for the Shechinah on earth, is the Holy Ark, when it is the repository of the Tablets that had been written by G’d Himself. Some commentators think that the reason the line was repeated is simply to teach that the first set of Tablets, the ones Moses had broken, were also to be placed inside the same Ark.

And I will appoint My Memra for you there, and I will speak with you from above the cover, from between the two cherubim that are upon the ark of the testimony, all that I will command you concerning the children of Israel.

ונועדתי AND [THERE] I WILL BE MET [BY THEE] — When I shall appoint you a place of meeting to speak to you that place will I appoint as the place of meeting whither I will come to speak to you. ודברתי אתך מעל הכפרת AND I SHALL SPEAK WITH THEE FROM ABOVE THE COVER — In another passage, however, it says, (Leviticus 1:1) “And God spake unto him out of the appointed tent, saying” — this is that part of the Tabernacle outside the partition veil whilst the ark and the cover were on the other tide of the veil — consequently we have two verses contradicting each other! But there comes a third verse and reconciles them: (Numbers 7:89) “And when Moses came into the appointed tent to speak with Him, he heard the voice speaking unto him from off the covering etc.” This verse explains exactly what happened. Moses came into the Tabernacle and as soon as he had passed the entrance a voice fell from heaven to the place on the cover which was between the cherubim, and from there it issued and was heard by Moses in the tent of meeting (outside the Holy of Holies; cf. Sifrei Bamidbar 58 and Rashi on Numbers 7:89). ואת כל אשר אצוה אותך אל בני ישראל AND OF ALL WHICH I SHALL COMMAND THEE CONCERNING THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL — This ו of the word ואת is redundant and without import; there are many sentences similar to this in Scripture. However if you wish to explain this ו the verse must be interpreted as follows: [I shall speak with thee from above the cover] and that which (ואת) I shall speak to you will be everything I shall command thee concerning the children of Israel.

"And I will meet with you." I do not understand how this verse contradicts "Hashem spoke to him from the Tent of Meeting, saying" (Leviticus 1:1), for "Tent of Meeting" is a general name encompassing the Tabernacle and all that is within it, and there is no need for an arbitrator. The reason for the vav in "and all that I will command" is as follows: the word "and I will speak" serves [as a connector] on account of another [clause] — as if it were written: "and I will speak with you from above the cover, from between the two cherubim" — and the subject of the speech is not stated. The meaning is: I will speak with you to make known My secret and to answer your question; and I will speak all that I will command you to the children of Israel. One may ask why Hashem mentioned the Ark first, for it is written: "the form of the Tabernacle and the form of all its vessels" (above, v. 9). The way of the language is to expound upon the last thing mentioned [by working backward]. Similarly: "I gave to Isaac, Jacob and Esau; and to Esau I gave" (Joshua 24:4) — it begins by elaborating on the last one. Therefore [the text] begins with the vessels of the Tabernacle, starting with the most prestigious, then the table and the menorah, and afterward: "and the Tabernacle you shall make." When Moses assembled all the congregation, he began by telling them first about the Tabernacle and the tent, and afterward the Ark — and one need not instruct Moses. One must ask why the incense altar was not mentioned here. The answer, by way of analogy: the Glory never departs — therefore the Ark [is like] a throne; and there is a menorah and a set table. For this reason [the text] did not mention the incense altar until after the burnt-offering altar, in order to warn: "you shall not offer upon it a burnt offering or a meal offering or a libation" (below, 30:9). Moses mentioned it to the children of Israel after the menorah, and so it was in practice.

ונועדתי לך שם ודברתי אתך, G’d assures Moses that this is the site where He will communicate with him and become as familiar to him as it is possible for G’d to become familiar to man. This is where the Shechinah’s presence will become “stationed,” as already spelled out in the opening verses of our chapter (8-9) with the words ושכנתי בתוכם ככל אשר אני מראה אותך, “I will dwell among them in accordance with the blueprint which I have shown you.” The meaning of the words וכן תעשו at the end of verse 9, is that once the Jewish people or their elite engage in study of the relationship of physics to metaphysics, something known in the parlance of the Talmud as מעשה מרכבה, and they will do so motivated by the acceptable purpose, i.e. to become better servants of the Lord, not only will the Shechinah assist us but the ministering angels will also be of help in furthering such study. (Chagigah 14)

ודברתי אתך מעל הכפרת, “when I speak to you it will be from above the lid;” you may ask that we read in Leviticus that “G-d spoke to Moses from the Tent of Meeting,” not from above the lid of the Ark which was inside the Holy of Holies? We must understand the Torah as follows: whenever Moses was standing outside the Tabernacle, he perceived the voice of G-d as emanating from inside the Tabernacle. When he was being addressed by G-d while he was inside the Tabernacle G-d’s voice emanated from above the lid of the Ark. This is the meaning of (Numbers 7,89) “when Moses had entered the Tent of Meeting he heard the voice speaking to him from above the lid of the Ark.” ואת כל אשר אצוה, “and all that I shall command;” in other words: all that G-d plans to command He will communicate to Moses from there.

And I will meet with you there. For the Holy One, blessed be He, has in His world only the four cubits of halakha (Berakhot 8), and in a place where peace is present, for there they do not learn [Torah] to provoke, and from there the voice would enter the Tent of Meeting, as Rashi explained (Numbers 7:89). This is because the Ark carries all the sanctified vessels, and through it the divine abundance will flow upon them all. And we have already found (Sotah 35a) that the Ark carried its carriers. This is like a hint to those who support Torah scholars — they appear to be the carriers, but they are actually carried by the Torah scholars.

And you shall make a table of acacia wood: two cubits shall be its length, and a cubit its width, and a cubit and a half its height.

קמתו THE HEIGHT THEREOF — i. e. the height of its legs together with the thickness of the table-board.

"And you shall make." There is no doubt that the thickness of the table, together with the height of the legs, is included in the stated measurement.

ועשית שלחן, after the Ark, which symbolised G’d’s throne on earth, as expressed by the words ונועדתי לך שם, “I will designate this for My meeting place with you,” (verse 22) had been completed, G’d commanded the construction of the Table and the Lamp stand, essential furnishings for a guest room, as we know from King II 4,10 where the lady in Shunem, planning to provide private accommodation for the prophet Elisha who was her frequent guest, discusses such details with her husband. According to our sages in Yuma 72 the crown-like border surrounding the surface of the table symbolised the crown of the kingdom of G’d. A king’s task in administering the affairs of state is divided into two aspects. 1) He must dispense justice, or appoint people who see to it that justice is dispensed. 2) He must concern himself with the defense of the realm, again, either personally, or by delegating his authority to loyal experts. This is how the people requesting that Samuel appoint a king for them defined the king’s duties in Samuel I 8,20. Accordingly, the table actually had two “crowns.” (this exegesis differs from that of Rashi who holds that there was only one such “crown.”) One of the “crowns” is for the table as such, the table symbolising the physical nourishment of the people and the general conduct of its affairs, the second symbolises an “enclosure, security fence,” מסגרת, a defensive system against harm to the people from whatever source, signaling that any attacker will not only be repelled but will be crushed.

אמתים ארכו, its length two cubits, etc. When you "cube" the dimensions of the Table, i.e. multiplying the two cubits length by one cubit width and by one and a half cubits height, you will find that you have a total of three cubits, or three times one cubit. This corresponds to the influence on our material world by the mystical dimension of the Celestial Table which represents the three levels of נצח, הוד and יסוד.

ועשית שלחן, “you are to construct a table;” it is no more than elementary courtesy that the king’s servants and members of his household should eat at his table.

ועשית שלחן, “you are to construct a table.” It has already been demonstrated that there was a real need for the Ark seeing that it served to house the Tablets. The kapporet was also essential as it served as the lid for the Ark. The word כפורת is also derived from וכפרת אותה “you shall cover it,” used in connection with waterproofing the boards of the Ark of Noach (Genesis 6,14). The cherubs on top of the kapporet were needed to demonstrate that there are such beings as angels. This leaves the question of what need did the presence of the table actually fill? The question is equally relevant to the presence of the table in the Tabernacle as to its presence in the Temple. According to the plain meaning of the text the table was needed in order that the show-breads which the Torah commanded to be ever-present in the Tabernacle (Temple) could be placed upon it. These show-breads were necessary as the basic minimum to which G’d’s bounty could attach itself. The weekly offerings of these show-breads were consumed by the priests who performed the service in the Tabernacle or Temple during the week in question. A small part of this bread was sufficient for many priests. Our sages in Yuma 39 illustrated this point when they said that if a priest received as little as the size of a bean of that bread this would suffice to still his hunger. This then is the reason that this structure was called “table,” seeing G’d provided His blessing for the bread which was placed upon it. From this table G’d’s blessing for the food of the Jewish people would proliferate to all parts of the country, indeed to all parts of the earth. This blessing was in the nature of a יש מיש , “something based on something else.” It was of the same category as that demonstrated by such prophets as Elijah and Elisha who were able to make a minute amount of flour or oil grow into huge amounts. It was a precondition for these prophets to have something, i.e. a “יש” to work with (compare Kings II 4,2 and Kings I 17,16). Creating something out of nothing is something reserved for G’d Himself and such power has not been given to any prophet. In fact we do not know that a type of יש מאין creative activity ever occurred again after G’d commenced creating His universe in such a fashion. A Midrashic approach: the word שטים in the phrase ועשית שלחן עצי שטים, “you are to construct a table out of shittim wood,” may be understood as an acrostic of the first letters of the words שלום, טובה, ישועה, מחילה; we also find similar acrostics in connection with the Ark and the Altar, i.e. that these furnishings of the Tabernacle contained within them the essence of all the principal blessings man is in need of. In fact, the table (in each man’s house) symbolises the altar, the instrument through which man is able to achieve atonement for his errors. The bread on the table is considered as a surrogate for animal sacrifice on the altar provided man is generous and shares his blessings (food, etc.) with the poor. This is the deeper meaning of what the sages said (Berachot 55) when they commented on Ezekiel 41,22 והמזבח עץ שלוש אמות......וידבר אלי זה השלחן אשר לפני ה', “and the altar, a wooden block, three cubits high,.....and He said to me: ‘this is the table before Hashem.” The remarkable thing in that vision is that it commenced with the altar and concluded with the table. The message to Ezekiel was that as long as the Temple was standing and the altar was functioning, man’s atonement was achieved through the sacrifices offered on the altar. When there is no altar upon which to offer sacrifices, man must achieve his atonement by means of his table. ... It became an accepted practice amongst the pious Jews of France to construct their caskets out of the wood of their tables in order to demonstrate the idea that their table become the means of their atonement just as death is the means to achieve our ultimate atonement. It also was to signify that man does not take with him any of the material things he enjoyed on earth. The only thing he can take with him is the evidence of the charitable deeds he performed while alive. The table was a prime symbol of such charitable deeds. This is also why the sages (Berachot 54) said that he who spends a long time over his meal will have his life extended.” [The idea is that the poor may come to his door while he is still eating and they will be invited to share. Ed.]

“And you shall make a table of acacia wood.” Most commentators agree that the Table corresponds to the crown of kingship, and the table of kings alludes to this. Table of acacia wood [shulchan atzei shitim] — the initials add up to the number 30, because the letter yud is absorbed, or you can also add the vav of And you shall make [ve’asita], and these four words allude to kingship that is acquired through 30 virtues. This encompasses all human success for whoever God has graced with it, because from this high table flows abundance and satisfaction to the entire world. Its being two cubits in length and one cubit in width — complete [measurements] and not broken, because the advantage of the land is in all (Ecclesiastes 5:8), and all the good things of this world have an end and limit in length and width, as it is written Arise, walk through the land in its length and in its width (Genesis 13:17). And above we wrote that this alludes to the quality of the righteous who are happy with their portion and lack nothing for themselves. Whether the Holy One, blessed be He, feeds them much or little from His table, it seems to them that they have everything, as explained above in the portion of Vayishlach in the verse I have everything (Genesis 33:11). Therefore, the cubits of the table were complete in its length and width, but regarding the measure of height it is written and a cubit and a half its height alluding that one should not become haughty or lift their heart up because of their wealth. The broken [half] cubit in height alludes that one should always have a broken heart and not become arrogant because of their great wealth. And he further hinted that one who eats from the table of the Divine, should not fill his belly and desires to the brim, but rather should break his desires and not fulfill all of his material cravings. For the righteous person eats only to satisfy his soul, and dedicates the excess [to God]. For this reason, the language of “breaking” [shevirah] is mentioned in relation to bread, [as in the verses] buy [shivru] us a little food (Genesis 43:2), when I break your staff of bread (Leviticus 26:26). This is beneficial for a person both from a medicinal perspective — that one should not fill his stomach with as much food as it can hold, as this harms digestion, but rather should leave about a third less than fullness, which is the foundation of all human health — and from the perspective of God’s commandments, as there is nothing better for a person than to minimize as much as possible the pleasures of mankind, so that he will not be drawn after them and neglect the study of Torah. For such is the way of Torah: Eat bread with salt (Avot 6:4).

ועשית שלחן, “you are to construct a table;” the reason is that the table is the symbol of wealth, honour, distinction, grandeur. Nachmanides writes that the significance of placing the table in the Tabernacle lies in it being a reminder that all material blessings are channeled to us from its original source, from G’d, ever since He created the world. However, in order for that blessing to continue and to grow, it must have some root that it can draw on. The table represents this root. The matter became evident when the prophet Elisha asked the woman whose creditors were threatening to take her children as slaves in settlement of her deceased husband’s debts, (Kings II 4,1) “what can I do for you?” Seeing that all she had was the remnants of a small jar of oil, he told her: “get yourself some containers from your neighbours first.” After she had done so, Elisha used the existing oil to fill all the containers. The lesson we learn from that story is that even a blessing must have something it can focus on, something of substance in this world. Something similar was demonstrated by the prophet Elijah, Elisha’s mentor in Kings I The table on which the show-breads were stacked, fulfilled the same function on behalf of the entire Jewish people. Our sages illustrated the effectiveness of this heavenly blessing channeled through the show-breads by stating that any priest who ate as little as the size of a bean from these show-breads found that he was completely sated.

And you shall overlay it with pure gold, and make for it a rim of gold all around.

זר זהב A BORDER OF GOLD — a symbol of the royal crown, for the table is an emblem of wealth and greatness, as may be seen from the fact that people speak of one’s “royal table” when they wish to state one is exceedingly wealthy (cf. Yoma 72b).

A CROWN OF GOLD ROUND ABOUT. “This is a symbol of the crown of royalty, for the table represents wealth and prominence, just as the Rabbis say ‘the royal table.’” This is Rashi’s language. And this explanation is indeed the truth, for in this lies the secret of the table [in the Tabernacle]. For since the time that the world came into existence, G-d’s blessing did not create something from nothing; instead, the world follows its natural course, for it is written, and G-d saw every thing that He had made, and behold, it was very good. But when the root of the matter already exists, the blessing descends upon it and increases it, just as Elisha said, tell me; what hast thou in the house? and then the blessing came upon the pot of oil that she already had, and she filled all the vessels from it. And in the case of Elijah it is said, The jar of meal was not spent, neither did the cruse of oil fail. And so also was the case with the showbread on the table; upon it rested the blessing, and from it came abundance to all Israel. That is why the Rabbis have said: “Every priest who received even only as much as the size of a bean [of the showbread] ate it and was satisfied.”

וצפית אותו זהב, “you are to cover its surface with gold.” The surface of the table was to be covered by a sheet of gold both on top and underneath it. This would still leave the wood of its legs visible. This is why the Torah added: ועשית זר זהב סביב, “you are to construct a golden molding around it.” This would cover all the exposed wooden parts of the table.

וציפית אותו זהב טהור, “you shall overlay it with pure gold.” We find here an allusion to the three basic benedictions which comprise our grace after meals which are considered as Biblical in nature. They are the acrostic formed by the respective first letters in the words זן, הארץ, בונה . forming the word זהב. ועשית לו זר זהב, “you are to make for it a golden crown.” In the words זר זהב you can detect an allusion to the dynasty of the Kingdom of David. A Kabbalistic approach: the table with its golden crown is an allusion to the attribute of Justice in the higher emanations. This is why it was positioned in the northern part of the Sanctuary which is also the “left side,” traditionally the side representing negative influences. We have a verse supporting this view in Job 37,22: “by the north wind the golden rays emerge.” The meaning of the statement that he who wishes to amass material gains should turn his attention to the north (Baba Batra 25), is that that is where the attribute גבורה is found. This is the reason that the table had two different colors in the two coverings used to transport it, i.e. red and blue (Numbers 4,7-8), The red corresponded to the attribute of Justice in the higher emanations, whereas the blue was symbolic of the attribute Justice in the lower terrestrial regions (the emanation מלכות) The procedure followed on the table was as follows: first they placed the show-breads on the table directly without anything intervening between the bread and the surface of the table. This is the meaning of the words; ולחם התמיד עליו יהיה, “and the constant bread shall remain on it.” (Numbers 4,7) They would spread a blue-coloured woolen cloth over the breads and all the various appurtenances of the table were placed on top of the blue-coloured woollen cloth and subsequently they would place the re-coloured woollen cloth on top of all this so that a symbol of the attribute of Justice in the higher emanations would be above the symbol of the attribute of Justice in the lowest emanation. The ‘Higher” attribute of Justice makes its impact on the lower attribute of Justice known as the emanation מלכות, the one alluded to by the word זהב formed by the acrostic we mentioned earlier, which hinted at the dynasty of David. [This was the procedure when the Israelites were moving. Ed.] The table thereby established a link between the concepts of מלכות in the celestial and the terrestrial regions respectively. This forms the background to he statement דוד מלך ישראל חי וקיים that “David King of Israel is alive and well.” [Renewal of the moon is reassurance concerning renewal of the active dynasty of David. Ed.] It is common knowledge that the blessing connected with the supply of material welfare is dependent on the goodwill and generosity of the king (govt.) and an example of this is found in the wording of the banquet given by King Ahasverus to his people where the Book of Esther 1,7 speaks of the lavishness being כיד המלך, “in accordance with the king’s generosity.” Our sages (Bamidbar Rabbah 4,14) also say that the table is a symbol of the כתר מלכות in the celestial regions. To sum up: the livelihood for mankind and the world has its origin in those regions. Both the celestial regions and the terrestrial regions receive their requirements from that source as this is the emanation from which טרף לביתה וחוק לנערותיה (Proverbs 31,15) “provisions for her household” are provided. This makes it easier to understand the height of the table, i.e. 10 handbreadths plus what is on top of it [a total of 20 handbreadths when the superstructure of twice six layers of these breads housing the show breads one above the other is included, symbolising both celestial and terrestrial regions. Ed.]

“And you shall overlay it with pure gold.” Rabbeinu Bachya made an allusion from the word “zahav” [gold] to the blessing after meals: “zayin” refers to Birkat HaZan [the blessing for sustenance], “heh” refers to Birkat HaAretz [the blessing for the land], and “bet” refers to Birkat Boneh [the blessing for rebuilding Jerusalem]. And you shall make for it a crown of gold all around. In everything that God provides for one to eat from the high table, one should imagine in their soul as if they are a king with a crown that the virtue of contentment has crowned them with. And thus our Sages said “Do not desire the table of kings, for your table is greater than their table, and your crown is greater than their crown” (Avot 6:5).

And you shall make for it a border of a handbreadth all around, and you shall make a rim of gold for its border all around.

מסגרת — Understand this as the Targum renders it: גדנפא, A RIM. The Sages in Israel are of different opinion as to what this מסגרת signifies. Some say it was on top all the way round the table like the vertical ledge that is on the edges of the table of noble men, whilst others say it was fixed beneath the table from leg to leg on the four sides of the table and that the table-top rested upon that ledge (cf. Menachot 96b and Sukkah 5a). ועשית זר זהב למסגרתו AND THOU SHALT MAKE A GOLDEN BORDER TO THE RIM THEREOF —This is the same border spoken of above (v. 24), and here it explains to you that it was fixed to the rim.

"And you shall make." The frame (misgeret) [is placed] on top, as is customary with tables. "And you shall make a gold rim." [The text] now explains that the rim it mentioned earlier shall go around the frame.

ועשית לו מסגרת טפח, “you are to construct for it a rim one handbreadth wide all around.” ועשית זר זהב למסגרתו, “you are to make a golden rim as an overlay all the way around the rim.” The first ring the Torah speaks of here was made of wood, just as the table itself. Its golden rim would look like a hollow tube cut open lengthwise, so that the wooden rim would fit inside that golden rim, and its outside would be completely invisible. After completing the instructions no onlooker would be able to see any of the table’s wooden parts. We read in Exodus37,11, that Betzalel made both the wooden rim and a golden molding all around it.

And you shall make for it a border. That he should close off desires, so that there should not be an open entrance to them, but rather he should close them off and set boundaries for them. And you shall make a golden crown for its border all around. For one who closes off his desires, behold, he is a free man and a king, as opposed to one who breaks through its fence, who is always poor in his mind. And it uses the term zar [crown/stranger]: if one merits, it becomes a crown [zer] for him; if one does not merit, it becomes strange [zar] and foreign, for he shall leave his wealth to others.

מסגרת, a kind of rim or edge which it is customary to attach to top of tables, to guard against spillage. Others say that it was attached to the underside of the tables reinforcing the legs at each corner.

And you shall make for it four rings of gold, and place the rings on the four corners that are at its four legs.

"And you shall make [them for] the four corners" (arba ha-pe'ot) — east and west, north and south.

על ארבע הפאות אשר לארבע רגליו, “(to be fastened) to the four corners of its legs.” Seeing that the dimensions of the table were about 1,2 meters in length and 60 centimeters in width there was enough room for the carriers of the table to position themselves, two in front next to one another and two behind them near the rear end do carry it comfortably, just as they did with the Holy Ark, [although the Ark fully loaded weighed over 78000 lbs, which accounts for the fact that the Rabbis say that the Ark had to carry its bearers. This calculation is according to Rabbi Eliyahu ki tov, to the best of this Editor’s memory. Ed.]

“And you shall make for it four gold rings.” In order to remember that the successes of this world are like a wheel that circles in the world like this round ring, and through this remembrance, he will provide from his table to the poor. In contrast, he will remember the greatness of the reward in the World to Come, which has no end, like this round ring that has no end. And it says, The rings shall be opposite the border. Because one who restrains his desires and puts a limit to all his efforts, and is content with what God has bestowed upon Him, is the one who remembers that it is a wheel that circles in the world, and is gracious to the poor, and he is the one who awaits the abundant goodness reserved for the righteous in the World to Come, which has no beginning and no end. But one who does not restrain his craving and has no limit to all his efforts, and whose eyes are never satisfied, does not hope for the reward of the World to Come, and never gives of his bread to the poor, as is known from the way of most of our people. And this is also the reason for the rings of the Ark, because through the Torah that is in the Ark, one will merit the circle dance of the righteous in the Garden of Eden, like this round circle that has no end and resembles a ring. For this reason, the rings were round and not square. And here it is written “as houses for the poles.” Even though the rings of the Ark were also houses for the poles, nevertheless this language is not used there, only for the Table, because with the Table comes the hint that bring the poor and homeless into the house, and these are houses for the poles [referring] to the poor who are called poles [badim], because “bad bevad” is an expression of solitude, and so every poor person dwells alone and everyone distances themselves from him, as it is said, How much more do his companions distance themselves from him (Proverbs 19:7). And a sign for this is that the letters of levadim [for the poles] can be rearranged to spell “bedalim” [those separated]. And just as these poles are the bearers of the Table, so too the poor are the bearers of the table of the wealthy, for in their merit God will set a table for him, and his table will be filled with fatness (Job 36:16) in the merit of his sustaining the poor.

Opposite the border shall the rings be, as holders for the poles, to carry the table.

לעמת המסגרת תהיין הטבעת OVER AGAINST THE RIM SHALL THE RINGS BE — inserted in the legs over against the extremities of the border. לבתים לבדים FOR PLACES FOR THE STAVES — These rings shall be receptacles in which to put the staves. לבתים means for the purpose of being (to serve as) receptacles for the staves, as the Targum has it: places for the staves.

"Opposite" (leummat). [The text] specifies the location where the rings are to be placed.

לבתים לבדים, as housings for the staves. Whereas I have explained in connection with the rings of the ark that Betzalel had to cast four rings and attach them firmly to the ark, whereas he would insert a second set of rings inside the first ones to support the staves, the Torah here alters its instructions. Here there was no need to make a second set of rings. The rings mentioned here were the ones into which the staves were inserted directly.

לעומת המסגרת תהיינה, “they (the rings) were attached to the rim at the of the table as holders for the staves, i.e. on the outer edges of the table.

לעומת המסגרת, these were attached at the underside of the table but not to the border (מסגרת).

And you shall make the poles of acacia wood and overlay them with gold, and with them the table shall be carried.

ונשא בם — The word ונשא is a passive (Niphal) form; the meaning is: THAT THE TABLE MAY BE BORNE BY THEM.

"And the table shall be carried by them" (venissa vam et ha-shulchan). [This is] in the nif'al [passive] construction, like "the striker shall be acquitted" (above, 21:19), for the dagesh absorbs the pe [the first letter] of the root.

And you shall make its dishes and its spoons, and its tubes and its covers with which the bread is covered; of pure gold you shall make them.

ועשית קערתיו וכפתיו AND THOU SHALT MAKE THE DISHES THEREOF AND THE SPOONS THEREOF — קערתיו are the forms (moulds) that were made to fit the shape of the bread (Menachot 97a). The bread was shaped like a case broken open as regards two of its sides (two opposite sides of which have been removed; these are what we would call the front and the back). It had a bottom underneath, but no top, and this bottom was turned up on both ends to form, as it were, walls. On this account it was called לחם הפנים, “bread with faces” — because it had faces (surfaces) looking in both directions towards the sides of the House (the Sanctuary). The bread was placed lengthwise across the breadth of the table with its sides standing up exactly in a line with the edge of the table. There were made for it a golden mould and an iron mould: in the iron one it was baked, and when it was taken out from the oven it was put on the golden one until the next day, the Sabbath, when it was arranged on the table (the mould then being removed). This golden mould is here called קערה (Menachot 94a; cf. also Berliner’s Rashi 2nd ed. p. 426). וכפתיו AND ITS SPOONS — ladles (or rather, cups with flat bottoms) in which the incense was put. There were two such vessels for the two handfuls of incense which was put upon the piles in which the loaves were arranged, as it is said, (Leviticus 24:7) “And thou shalt put pure frankincense upon each pile”. וקשתיו — These had the form of halves of hollow canes which are split along their length (Menachot 96a). Articles similar to these were made of gold and three of them were set in a row above each loaf so that another loaf (that above it) should rest on top of the “canes”; thus they (these canes) separated one loaf from another so that air could enter between and they would not become mouldy (Menachot 97a). In the Arabic language anything hollow is called קסוא (and this corresponds to the root of this word, which therefore denotes something hollow). מנקיותיו — It is translated in the Targum by ומכילתיה “and the trestles (supports) thereof” (cf. Menachot 96a). According to him these were attachments to the table like a kind of golden pegs (pillars) standing on the floor and reaching in height far above the table up to the height of the pile of bread. They were notched in five places, one above the other, and the ends of the canes which were between one loaf and another were supported on these notches so that the weight of the upper loaves should not press heavily upon the lower ones in which event these would be broken. The word מכילתיה used by Onkelos as a rendering of מנקיותיו denotes “bearers;” it is of the same root as the verb in (Jeremiah 6:11) “I am weary to bear (הכיל) it.” But as for the term מנקיות (which is a Piel of נקה and would denote “cleansers”) I do not know how it is applicable to these attachments the purpose of which was not to keep the bread clean but merely to serve as supports for the canes. But there are some of the Jewish ...

AND THOU SHALT MAKE ‘KE’AROTHAV VEKHAPOTHAV UKSOTHAV UMENAKIYOTHAV.’ Rashi explained: “Ke’arothav are the forms [the moulds that were made to fit the shape of the bread]; vekhapothav are spoons in which the incense was put; uksothav are rods in the shape of halves of hollow canes [which were put between one loaf and another so that they would not become mouldy]; umenakiyothav are the trestles which were notched in [five places] to support the canes.” These vessels [that Rashi referred to] are indeed mentioned in the Gemara. And the Rabbi further said: “The word mechilathei [which Onkelos used for the Hebrew menakiyothav] means ‘bearers,’ similar to the expressions: and I weary myself ‘kalkeil’ (to bear it); I am weary ‘hachil’ (bearing it). Now the Sages of Israel have differed on this. For some say that ksothav are the trestles, and menakiyothav are the hollow canes. But Onkelos who translated menakiyothav by [the Aramaic] mechilathei was of the same opinion as he who says that menakiyoth are the trestles [supporting pillars attached to the table].” These are Rashi’s words. But I do not find them to be correct, for the word mechilathei [of Onkelos] in the Aramaic language is but a term meaning measures, such as ephahs and the like. Thus Onkelos rendered, eiphath tzedek — mechilon dikshot (a true measure); Thou shalt not have in thy house ‘eiphah v’eiphah’ — thou shalt not have mechilta umechilta (diverse measures). In a similar sense it is found whenever mentioned in the Talmud and in the Sages’ words: kayal meikal (he was measuring); bimchilta d’kayil inish ba mitkil (with the measure that one measures others, with that he is measured). Similarly, I am weary ‘hachil’ means “I am weary of being a holding measure” [of G-d’s fury], and it is associated with these expressions: alpayim bath yachil (it held two thousand baths); v’chol bashalish aphar ha’aretz (and He comprehended the dust of the earth in a measure); too little ‘meihachil’ (to receive) the burnt offering. Similarly, I am weary ‘hachil’ is in my opinion not an expression of “bearing” but is instead a form of that very same meaning of “holding,” thus saying, “I am weary of holding” [G-d’s fury], similar in usage to these expressions: the land is not able ‘l’hachil’ (to hold) all his words; the spirit of a man ‘y’chalkeil’ his infirmity, meaning that he will be able to hold the pain within himself and not become weary [and broken in spirit] because of it. Behold, heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot ‘y’chalkelucha’ — they cannot hold and contain the greatness of Your exaltedness, for there is no limit and measure to You — how much less this house that I have built! 'Y’chalkeil' his words rightfully means that he is not a fool who spendeth all his spirit, but holds his words within himself when necessary, and uses them as necessary. 'Vay’chalkeil Yoseiph' means that Joseph gave them as much food as they could hold; he gave neither too much nor too little, but bread according to the ...

"And you shall make." What our Sages said [about these vessels] is well known. The phrase "with which [he] pours libations" (asher yussak bahen) refers back to "its ladles" (kashot), not to the immediately preceding "its bowls" (umenakyotav). Similarly: "Moses and Aaron among His priests, and Samuel among those who call upon His name" (Psalms 99:6), yet it is written: "He would speak to them in the pillar of cloud" (ibid. v. 7) — which refers to Moses and Aaron, not Samuel. The proof [that yussak goes with kashot] is that in the account of the making [it says]: "the ladles with which libations are poured" (below, 37:16), and also: "and the ladles of libation" (Numbers 4:7). The word nesekh [libation] has many senses: "they shall pour no libation to her" (Hosea 9:4), "the idol — a craftsman pours it" (Isaiah 40:19), "I have installed My king" (Psalms 2:6). Rav Nathan, the author of the Arukh, said that the kashot are shaped like reeds (kanim), for that is what they are called in Arabic — but his informant knew no Arabic, for the man spoke in an odd manner, since reeds are called qasab [with a tzadi and also with a beit] in Arabic. There is also a discrepancy in Chronicles, which [in the parallel list] substitutes basins for the bowls (ke'arot), and censers (kipurim) for the ladles (kappot), while mentioning the ladles (kashot) as they are, and instead of the bowls (menakyot) writes forks (mizlagot) — all gold, for the use of the table. Perhaps David commanded that other vessels be made for the tables that Solomon would build.

קערותיו וכפותיו, these vessels were popularly used at Royal banquets, etc.

ועשית קערותיו, “you are to make its bowls, etc.;” in which to knead the dough for the showbreads which would be displayed on it (the table). כפותיו, “its ladles,” within which to place the frankincense, between the two rows of the showbreads. וקשותיו, “and its jars;” in which the water for preparing the dough for the showbreads would be kept. קשוה is a vessel as we know from the Talmud in Sanhedrin folio 81 where the stealing of it is described as so serious a sin that if the thief is caught and killed on the spot by someone incensed at this sin, this is considered as an acceptable punishment, and the person administering it is not considered as having committed murder. ומנקיותיו, “and its cleansing tools, bowlshaped used to clean out the oven as well as the surface of the table.”According to Rashi these were multiple shelflike structures on each of which one of the showbreads would be placed in a manner that allowed fresh air to circulate around each and thus prevent it from becoming moldy, as they were on display from one Sabbath to the next. They would also protect these thin breads from break into crumbs due to their weight if each had rested on the one beneath it. All this is discussed in the Talmud in minute detail. (Menachot, folio 94) Our author quotes all these details. As the Torah did not, and alas in our time we do not possess a Temple, I have decided to omit translating this and refer the interested reader to the Talmud. אשר יוסך בהן, “wherewith to pour them (the libations).”

ועשית קערותיו, “you shall construct its dishes, etc.” The forms in which the show breads were baked and displayed are called by the Torah קערה. Rashi explains the word to mean “its forms.” The form was made like the forms in which bread is baked, sort of a box broken in half from both directions. It had upright elevated sides. The surface of the bread was visible from three sides; this is why these loaves were called “show-breads,” as each loaf actually had three surfaces, “u” shaped.” There were two forms, one of iron and one of gold. The breads were baked in the iron form. When they came out of the oven they were placed in the golden forms and placed on the table where they remained until the following Sabbath. וכפותיו, “and its spoons.” the frankincense was placed inside these “spoons.” There were two of them each holding a kometz, fistful, of frankincense. One spoon of it was placed on each of the shelf-like arrangement holding the show-breads. וקשותיו, “and its shelving tubes.” These were hollow tubes cut in half to allow for air to circulate between the forms with the breads. ומנקיותיו, “and its pillars;” these were upright standing golden posts extending well above the height of the actual table and forming the anchors for the hollowed shelving tubes supporting the forms on which the show-breads were positioned. There are different opinions between the commentators as to the most appropriate translation of the word, especially in view of the apparent meaning of the word having to do with “cleanliness.” Probably, and in accordance with Onkelos, the meaning is “pillars of support.”

“And you shall make its dishes, etc., and its purifying vessels.” He concludes all the vessels of the table with the purifying vessels to teach that one should earn his livelihood in purity, not through theft, and similarly give from his table to the poor in a dignified manner, not in a way that causes shame. And it is written, And you shall place on the table showbread before Me always because from heaven the Holy One, blessed be He, will give him his bread with a shining countenance, and his bread will not be lacking, as it says before Me always. For the bread that a person requests properly is given to him with a shining countenance and forever, as we explained in Parshat Vayechi on the verse in the morning he will devour prey (Genesis 49:27). And there were 12 loaves, six loaves in each row, corresponding to the 12 constellations, of which six function during the day and six at night, for through them abundance comes to the world from the First Cause, blessed be He. And everything that a person asks for properly is given to him with a shining countenance through the constellations that function during the day, and what he asks for improperly is given to him with a darkened countenance through the constellations that function at night. Similarly, regarding Aaron’s bread that he merited from the high table, the chest, which has 12 ribs — six on the right and six on the left — it is appropriate to attribute the right to a shining countenance and the left to a darkened countenance. And this is what it means by showbread before Me always — just as the bread turns its face toward Me, so do I toward it, whether with a shining countenance or a darkened one. All these are my words by way of allusion, since I have seen that most commentators who approach to explain the plain meaning of the verses, and whose way is not to speak of matters of allusion, nevertheless in this portion have made allusions, each according to his understanding. Therefore, my heart has emboldened me to also make allusions, saying, “Perhaps the blind in the camp of the Hebrews will hear and take instruction.”

ועשית קערותיו, “you will make its dishes, etc.” Onkelos translates that which Rashi describes as קערות, the forms in which the show-breads were baked (iron forms, and subsequently displayed), golden forms, as being the מנקיות. In a dispute on the subject, in the משנה, (compare Tossaphot 96,b commencing with the words לא היה) Onkelos decides in favour of the view of the sage who considers the מנקיות as being sort of branch-like semi-open tubes, מכילתא, in Aramaic. The reason advanced by the author for his view is that these מנקיות supported the weight of the forms in which the show-breads were displayed on the table, especially the highest layer of the show-breads. The source, linguistically speaking, is the phrase הכיל,נלאתי in Jeremiah 6,11, which means: “I am exhausted and cannot contain it anymore.” Nachmanides, not assuming that the word may have an Aramaic origin, quotes numerous verses in Scripture where the word means: “supporting something.” He explains that what Onkelos means is that these are the forms in which the show-breads had been baked, and, due to their thinness, they could not be allowed to lie there without being enclosed as during the seven days that each bread stayed on the table from one Sabbath to the next, they would have broken up into small pieces without such support. The Talmud speaks of three kinds of forms, one of which was exactly matching the dimensions of the bread, i.e. the dough that was baked in them; these were the ones called here מנקיות. In Aramaic they are called מכילתא, as they had to be true to the measurements of the dough. Incidentally, Onkelos translates the words איפת צדק, “a true measure,” as מכילין דקשוט. (Leviticus 19,36) This was a form, presumably made of wood or clay, in which the dough was placed prior to being transferred for baking into a similar form made of iron. Finally, there was a form made of gold, to which the breads were transferred after having cooled off, and they were placed on display on the two parallel racks above the table. The measurements of these latter forms did not have to be so meticulously tight fitting. The main purpose of the latter forms was to act as containers. The קשוות is a term which includes the various other small utensils including the shelving tubes. Perhaps they were named thus as they were meant to prevent the breaking up of these breads, and the letter ש in this word is used in lieu of the letter צ. We find a similar substitution of the letter ש for the letter צ in Psalms 65,9 וייראו יושבי מאותותיך, “the dwellers at the far corners of the earth were awed by Your signs (miracles).” The word מנקיות describes a certain measuring cup, or something similar; they are called thus to symbolize that they are accurate, not deceptive, i.e. איפה צדק “true measure.” (Lev. 19,36) The owners will be perceived as free from sin, נקי, as they do not use these devices to enrich themselves by deceiving their customers. I find it difficult to understand, if that were the meaning, why the מנקיות should not have been mentioned first.

קערתיו. a form similar to the one in which bread is baked. וכפותיו, for the two spoonfuls of frankincense as mentioned in Leviticus 24,2 ונתתה על המערכת לבונה זכה, ”with each row you shall place pure frankincense, etc.” קשותיו ומנקיותיו, the details of these tools are all spelled out in Menachot 94 seeing that the 12 show-breads were arranged in two stacks of six each, with adequate ventilation between each form containing these breads. Here these utensils are referred to as subordinate, part of the table, whereas in Numbers 4,7 the same utensils are described as subordinate to the libation, i.e. קשות הנסך. The reason is that these utensils were designed to provide cover, the root of נסך there being סכך as in the covering used for the Sukkah. These utensils covered and separated one layer of reads from the other. אשר יסך, by means of these utensils the libations were to be offered.

And you shall place the bread of the Presence upon the table before Me at all times.

לחם הפנים SHEW-BREAD (lit., bread of faces) — It was so called because it had “faces” (פנים) as I have explained (v. 29). The number of loaves and the way they were set in piles are fully explained in the Sidrah אמר אל הכהנים (Leviticus 24:5—9).

LECHEM PANIM’ (SHOWBREAD). “It is called lechem panim [which literally means ‘bread of faces’] because it had ‘faces’ [surfaces] looking in both directions towards the sides of the House [Tabernacle or Sanctuary]. The loaf was set lengthwise across the breadth of the table with its sides standing up exactly in a line with the edge of the table.” This is the language of Rashi. This conforms with the language of the Mishnah: “Ben Zoma says: lechem panim — [it is so called] because it is to have surfaces” [looking in both directions]. But all this is in accordance with the opinion of the Sage who says: “How did they make the showbread? Like a case broken open.” But according to the Sage who says that it was shaped “like a rocking boat,” then it could not have been [called lechem panim because of the parallel surfaces looking in both directions, as it had none]! And Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra wrote that it is called lechem panim because it is before Me always. By way of the Truth, [the mystic lore of the Cabala], when you will understand the word l’phanai (before Me) you will understand its name [i.e., why it is called “the bread of panim”] and its secret, for because of that [the table] was placed on the north side [of the Tabernacle], seeing that the blessing of the Eternal maketh rich, similar to what is said, in every place where I cause My name to be mentioned I will come unto thee and bless thee. I have already alluded to this. Where shall be found the wisdom embodied in the candelabrum, its cups and knops and flowers, seeing that it is so hidden from the eyes of all living! But as to the reason for its being of beaten work, with the six branches coming out of the seventh, and upon them the lamp of G-d and all [six lamps] to give light over against it — all this you can understand from our words that we have written in another place. This is the intent of the saying of the Sages that Moses found difficulty with the candelabrum.

"And you shall set." According to the plain meaning, it is called "bread of the Presence" (lehem ha-panim) because of the explanation that follows it. What the earlier sages said is true — that the bowls (ke'arot) served as a mold [for the loaves].

לחם פנים, breads to be on display, (showbread(s).) They were called thus as the table was always displaying them. In the Talmud quoted, folio 96, the word פנים is understood as partitions. Another explanation, these are called לחם פנים because they are always before me.

לחם פנים לפני תמיד, “show-breads before Me, always.” According to the plain meaning of the text the word פנים, literally, “face,” is used as three sides of these breads faced the onlooker. They were positioned in such a way that they “faced” three different directions inside the Tabernacle. According to the Midrash the reason for the word פנים is that they were one handbreadth thick, and our sages said (Sukkah 5) that the word פנים is not used for something thinner than one handbreadth. We refer to Leviticus 16,2 אל פני הכפורת, “facing the kapporet,” and we had explained in connection with the Ark that the thickness of the kapporet was 1 handbreadth. We have another verse in Genesis 27,30 מאת פני יצחק אביו, “from the face of his father Yitzchak.” The face of a human being is never thinner than a handbreadth. A Kabbalistic approach: the reason these breads were given the adjective פנים was because the Torah added לפני תמיד, “before Me, always, i.e. “facing Me always.” We have already explained the mystical dimension of the meaning of the word פנים in connection with Exodus 20,3 on the words לא יהיה לך......על פני.

לחם פנים, “show-bread.” Rashi explains the name פנים, faces, to mean that these breads had two ”faces,” i.e. that the manner in which they were displayed enabled people from opposite sides of the Tabernacle to see them clearly. He accepts the view of the sage who describes the manner in which they were displayed as resembling a box that has split open. According to the view that these breads, when in their forms, resembled the shape of a ship, this cannot be the meaning of the word פנים. Ibn Ezra explains simply that the breads were called thus as the Torah itself describes G’d as viewing them as constantly in His presence, i.e. enjoying His attention,לפני תמיד.

לחם פנים, according to the plain meaning of the text the word פנים means that the quality of the bread was such that it was fit to be served, to be displayed for approval to ministers and kings. In other words: “beautiful, first rate bread.” Compare Leviticus 24,5 “take choice flour and bake of it twelve loaves, etc.” Other verses in which gifts are associated with the expression פנים are found in Genesis 43,34 וישא משאת מאת פניו אליהם, “He served portions to them from his (Joseph’s, the viceroy) table.” Clearly a reference to the choicest which was served in the palace. In Samuel I,1,5 similar language is used to describe Elkanah giving his childless wife Channah the choice portion of the meal, apparently from the bowl placed before her husband. The master of the house is always given the best and choicest. Seeing that we are told that G’d had sealed her womb, but that her husband loved her best in spite of this, it is clear that he did what he could to pamper her as compensation for her grieving that she had not been able to provide her husband with children.

And you shall make a menorah of pure gold; of hammered work shall the menorah be made — its shaft and its branches, its cups, its knobs, and its blossoms shall be of one piece with it.

מקשה תיעשה המנורה OF BEATEN WORK SHALL THE CANDELABRUM BE MADE — i. e. one should not make it of separate pieces nor shall one make its branches or its lamps as separate limb — a kind of work called souder in old French, Engl, to solder, but is was to be made in its entirety of a single mass of gold. He (who made it) beat it with the hammer and cut away with the implements of his craft thus making the branches spread out in this direction and in that (cf. Sifrei Bamidbar 61:1). מקשה — This word is translated in the Targum by נגיד, an expression for “drawing out;” he renders it thus because the parts of the candle-stick were drawn from the lump in this direction and in that by the blow of the hammer. The term מקשה denotes knocking with the hammer — batediz in old French — as the verb in (Daniel 5:6) “and his knees knocked (נקשן) one against another”. תיעשה המנורה [OF BEATEN WORK] SHALL THE CANDELABRUM BE MADE — The passive form used here in contradistinction to the active forms of עשה used throughout this section in connection with the making of the vessels indicates that it shall be made of itself (automatically). Because Moses was puzzled by it (the work of the candlestick), the Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “Cast the talent of gold into fire and it will be made of itself.” For this reason it does not say here תַּעֲשֶׂה “thou shalt make” (Midrash Tanchuma, Beha'alotcha 3) ירכה — the foot (the base) below, which was made in form of a box, three legs coming out from it underneath. וקנה — ITS SHAFT — its middle branch that rose from the central point of the base vertically upwards. On it was the middle lamp, made in the form of a cup into which to pour the oil and to put the wick. גביעיה — They were like that kind of goblets which are made of glass and which are long and slender; in old French they are termed maderins (cf. Rashi on Genesis 44:2). These, however, were made of gold and came out as projections from each branch to the number which Scripture enjoins for them. They were on it for embellishment only. כפתריה ITS KNOBS — These were like apples, globular, projecting all round the middle branch (shaft), such as are made for candlesticks of princely houses (lit., which stand before the princes), and which are called pommeaux in old French, apple-shaped ornaments. Their number is stated in this section — how many knobs projected from it (the middle branch) and how much was left plain between one knob and the other. ופרחיה AND ITS FLOWERS — Figures were made on it in the shape of flowers. ממנה יהיו SHALL BE OF THE SAME — All shall be of beaten work coming out of this block-shaped piece: one must not make them separately and then join them on the branches.

"And you shall make." I have seen manuscripts that were checked by the scholars of Tiberias, who swore — fifteen of their elders [attesting] that they examined every word and every vowel-point, every full and every defective spelling, three times — and [they affirmed that] a yod is written in the word te'aseh ["shall be made"]. I did not find it so in manuscripts from Spain, France, or across the sea. The ancients expounded that the extra yod alludes to the ten menorot that Solomon would make. In sum: if there is a yod there, it is an unusual form; the midrashic interpretation is that [the menorah] was made of itself. The meaning is that all who saw it marveled at how any person could make it — for it is written: "And he made the menorah; so he made the menorah" (Numbers 8:4). Compare: "On a griddle with oil it shall be made [te'aseh] — mixed thoroughly — shall you bring it" (Leviticus 6:14), [showing the passive without implying miraculous origin]. And hammered [work] here is like what is written concerning the cherubim. "Its shaft and its branches" (yerekhah ve-kanah) — this is the body of the menorah.

ועשית מנורת זהב טהור. This commandment follows the establishment of “2 crowns,” the crown of Torah as represented by the Ark, and the crown of Royalty as represented by the Table. The Torah arranged the subject of the Menorah as something that it totally integrated, i.e. just as the Menorah was to be constructed of a single chunk of gold, not as a composite structure, so the seven lights were also to be arranged in such a way that the light from the lamps would converge in one above the light burning on top of the central shaft. This is the meaning of the words והאיר על עבר פניה, (verse 36) this means that the lights both on the right of the center shaft and those on the left should be arranged so that the respective flames would focus in the direction of the middle. Inasmuch as the lights symbolised spiritual “enlighten-ment,” the lesson is that in all our efforts at obtaining such enlightenment, and during all the digressions that the pursuit of such disciplines necessarily entails, we must never lose sight of the direction in which we are striving and keep this central idea of such enlightenment resulting in us becoming better servants of the Lord, constantly in front of our mental eye. The reason that there were lights on both the right side of the center shaft as well as on the left side, is that pursuit of enlightenment expresses itself both in gaining of theoretical knowledge, ethical imperatives, but no less so in the practical application of such lessons learned. Both must be placed in the service of the נר המערבי, the light from the center shaft, the one which faces the Shechinah directly. Only the focusing on our spiritual goal ensures that the six lights on the various arms will continue to burn without hindrance. The thought we just tried to portray is expressed in Numbers 8,2-4 בהעלותך את הנרות אל מול פני המנוה יאירו שבעת הנרות “when you kindle the lamps, toward the face of the Menorah shall the seven lamps cast light.” This is the symbolism contained in the words וזה מעשה המנורה מקשה, (Numbers 8,4) i.e. in spite of what appears to be a multiplicity of lights emanating from this Menorah, their function is singular, one of unification, just as the Menorah from which they emanate was cast out of a single chunk of gold, something unified.

תיעשה המנורה, the Lampstand shall be made. Why did the Torah need to write these words at all? Was it not enough to write: "you shall construct a Lampstand made of gold?" Our sages in Menachot 28 comment that the word תיעשה allows for the fact that if necessary the Lampstand could be constructed of other metals. The passive form of תיעשה rather than תעשה, "you shall make," is justified then, seeing that in Moses' time there was no need to take advantage of the permission to construct the Lampstand of inferior materials.

ועשית מנורת זהב טהור, “you are to construct a candlestick of pure gold;” the function of this candlestick was to provide light for what was on the table. This is why the Torah reports in Exodus 40,24 that Moses positioned the menorah opposite the table. מקשה תיעשה, “it shall be made of hammered work.” According to Rashi the reason why the word תיעשה here is spelled with an extra letter י in the middle, was in response to difficulties Moses had in understanding how Betzalel would be able to comply with the detailed instructions concerning the candlestick. What puzzled him most of all was that as opposed to all the other furnishings he had not been given a measurement for the height of this candlestick. גביעיה, its cups; all these adornments were to be an integral part of the center shaft, so that if any oil spilled from the top it could be absorbed by the decorations each of which was shaped in, the shape of a receptacle. If the highest one of these became full, the excess could be absorbed by the next lower one, etc.

ועשית מנורת זהב טהור, “you are to construct a golden lampstand.” According to the plain meaning of the text the purpose of the Menorah in both the Tabernacle and the Temple was to establish the lofty meaning of the Temple in the minds of people and their souls. They should forever display reverence for what the Temple stood for, just as the Torah wrote (Leviticus 19,30) ומקדשי תיראו, “and you shall be in awe of My Sanctuaries.” This is why the lampstand had to be positioned outside the dividing curtain and not beyond it like the Ark. This is why the Torah emphasizes this with the words מחוץ לפרוכת העדות באהל מועד יערוך אותו, “outside the dividing curtain within the Tent of Testimony he shall position it, etc.” It should be possible to be viewed by everyone who entered the Tabernacle and who left it. Furthermore, it should also teach that the Shechinah which was beyond the dividing curtain did not need to be supplied with light from us (humans). This is also why (refers to the need to make us awe-struck) it was constructed out of gold, the most precious of all the metals. The number of lamps on it were seven in order to correspond to the middle ground between a daily and a monthly cycle. It is known that the soul itself benefits when lights are lit and it derives pleasure and joy from its light. Once the soul is in a joyous state its joy spreads seeing the soul itself is perceived as if it were hewn out of the light of man’s intelligence. This relationship between light and intelligence is the reason why the soul is drawn after light which is of its own kind although basically the “light” of our intelligence is essentially physical in nature, whereas the light represented by the soul is of a spiritual nature. This is why Solomon was able to compare a lamp (physical light) to the soul (spiritual light) when he said (Proverbs 20,27) “the soul is the light of the Lord.” A Midrashic approach (Tanchuma Behaalotcha 5): The Menorah with its seven lamps corresponded to the seven fixed stars which orbit the whole globe; the meaning of these words is that these seven fixed stars are perceived as separate light bodies in the skies exerting their respective influences on the creatures in the terrestrial world and providing guidance for our world both by day and by night. The seven lamps on the Menorah were burning around the clock by day and by night just as the seven fixed stars supply their light by day and by night without interruption. The middle lamp represented the sun which is constant in its light and the center of the seven fixed stars. A rational approach: The Menorah with its seven lamps is an allusion to the Torah which is generally known as אור, light. This is confirmed by the verse in Proverbs 20,27 we quoted earlier. Torah comprises seven different kinds (disciplines) of wisdoms (compare an analysis by Ibn Ezra). This is why the Menorah had seven lamps. The six arms which extended from the center shaft represented the six different directions in our three-dimensional terrestrial globe. They were to be a reminder that all parts and all extremities of this globe are dependent on the Torah which was given to the Jewish people on the sixth of Sivan and for the sake of which the earth continues to exist. This is what Jeremiah had in mind when he said (Jeremiah 33,25) “if it were not for My covenant (with the Jewish people through the Torah) which is the basis of day and night, etc.” שלשה גביעים משוקדים בקנה האחד, “three “cups” engraved like almonds on the one arm.” On each arm there were 3 such “cups.” This gives us a total of 18 “cups” for the six arms. The centre shaft of the Menorah had 4 “cups.” This means there were a total of 22 “cups.” This number corresponds to the letters in the Hebrew alphabet. These 22 letters are symbolic of 22 parts of the universe: wind, water, fire, the seven fixed stars, and the 12 signs of the zodiac. These letters in the Hebrew alphabet also are symbolized by the 22 parts of the human body: head, heart, kidneys, seven orifices of the body; 12 organs (compare Sefer Yetzirah). We note that the Menorah and its arms had 3 different “decorations;” there were “knobs,” “cups” and “flowers.” The “knob” was like a round apple which protruded from the centre shaft in every direction. The “knob” symbolized the world of the angels who are basking in the radiation of the Shechinah’s brilliance in uninterrupted delight. The roundness of the “apple” symbolized the idea that something was never ending, everlasting. Our sages in Taanit 31 alluded to this delight when they said: “in the future G’d is going to make a ‘circle’ for the righteous and His glory will be amongst them.” The word used by the sages is מחול, something round which has no beginning and no end. This is the reason spiritual delights are always described in such terms to remind us that they are something enduring, something permanent. The “cup” is a vessel which is a receptacle, it irrigates and provides water. This corresponds to the world of the planets and the atmosphere which at one and the same time receive beneficial input from the world of the angels and in turn distribute it beneficially to the inhabitants of the lower, terrestrial part of the universe. The “flower” symbolizes our terrestrial part of the universe on which all the outstanding people of earth spend their lives. They are characterized as flowers, plants, etc. The overall idea gained from the appearance of the Menorah is that the 22 letters of the Torah (alphabet) enable man to achieve this greatness in all three parts of the universe.

“And you shall make a menorah of pure gold.” Rashi explains that Moses found it difficult to understand [how to make the menorah], so the Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “Cast a talent of gold into the fire, and it will be made by itself.” Therefore it says the menorah shall be made [passive form] and not “you shall make” [active form]. And finally it states from one talent of gold he shall make it, without specifying who shall make it, but rather [implying that] the talent itself shall make it, meaning it will form by itself. This difficulty [in understanding] was because it had to be made from a single piece, therefore divine assistance was needed for this task, and it appeared as if it was made by itself, for “a person does not worry nor feel distress when his Master assists him.” And as a hint it seems to me, that these three adjacent sections — the Ark, the Table, and the Menorah — encompass all of a person’s successes in this world and in the World to Come. The Ark is mentioned first because it guides a person to achieve their perfection, for “how shall a young man purify his path,” and obtain a good name and distinction among people, and the elixir of life in this world and the World to Come, if not through this Torah, which has “length of days in its right hand” for the world that is entirely long [eternal], and “wealth and honor in its left hand” in this world. Now, in the section about the Ark, only the essence of the action that a person should do is mentioned, but no reward or compensation is mentioned there. For this reason, you will find in the section about the Ark all the letters of the alphabet except for the letter Gimmel, which hints that one should not study Torah for the sake of receiving compensation [gemul], but rather “the Torah of truth shall be in His mouth” without expecting any reward, as it is written (Avot 1:3), “Do not be like servants who serve the master in order to receive a reward, etc.” Therefore, there is no Gimmel there, for our Sages said (Avot 4:2), “The reward of a mitzvah is the mitzvah itself,” and thus the action itself is its reward [gemulo], and one is not permitted to anticipate another reward, and it is as if the Gimmel were written there, for the action of the mitzvah is its reward. Nevertheless, even though one should not expect any other reward, honor will ultimately come, and the Holy One, blessed be He, does not withhold the reward of any creature in this world and in the World to Come. Therefore, immediately after the making of the Ark, He mentioned the two rewards in their proper order. The first reward is hinted at in the commandment of the table and all its vessels, for from it emerges abundance to the entire world, and everyone benefits from the “high table” [God’s table]. And you should know that the altar is also called the “high table,” as we find in the Gemara in several places regarding the sacrifices of the altar: Your table should not be full while your Master’s table is empty (Chagigah 7). This resolves what we find in Ezekiel’s prophecy where he begins with altar, as it says (41:22), The altar was of wood, and concludes with table, saying, This is the table that is before the Lord. This is because the altar is the table of the Omnipresent. In the tractate Berachot (55a), they interpreted this regarding a person’s own table, from which one feeds the poor, and it atones like the altar. What we have written is close to the literal meaning: that the altar is the high table, and the golden table [of the showbread] is the table for all inhabitants of the world, for everyone eats by virtue of the showbread that is given to the priests as charity, as it is written (Leviticus 24:9), And it shall belong to Aaron and to his sons, etc. Perhaps this is why [the showbread] was divided into six loaves per arrangement, because the Sages said (Baba Batra 9b) that one who gives a coin to a poor person is blessed with six blessings. After the work of the table, He mentions the work of the Menorah, because in the merit of the Menorah, one will merit spiritual reward in the World to Come. Therefore, they said (Tanchuma Beha’alotecha 3) that the Menorah was made by itself, and likewise regarding its lighting they said (Shabbat 21a) that one must light it until the flame rises by itself. Is this not a significant matter? Indeed, it is reasonable to understand that its merit causes the elevation of God’s lamp, the soul of man (Proverbs 20:27). Therefore, the Holy One, Blessed be He, said to Israel: “I command you regarding these lights, saying to you: My lamp is in your hands, and your lamp is in My hands” (Devarim Rabbah 4:4). If you guard My lamp that is in your hands by continuously lighting the pure Menorah, I will also guard God’s lamp, the soul of man that is in My hands, and the soul’s elevation will occur by itself, just like the rising of these lights. We have already found many reasons why the Torah concealed the promise of spiritual reward in the World to Come, and in Parshat Bechukotai we will mention, God willing, all the reasons agreed upon by the Torah scholars. There, I will present the reason given by Rabbeinu Bachya the Elder and Ibn Ezra, with which Ramban agreed, saying that all the promises in the Torah are above nature, for it is not natural that rain would fall when the commandments are performed and that rain would be withheld from the earth when the will of the Blessed Holy One is not done. However, the fact that the soul rises to its source of origin is a natural thing for the soul, and this is not a miraculous process unless sins prevent it from rising. Hence it will rise on its own, just as the elements of wind and fire naturally rise upward if there is nothing blocking them. Similarly, the spirit of humans naturally rises upward on its own if sins do not impede it. Therefore, the menorah features these two aspects: the menorah was made “on its own” and the flame rises “on its own,” indicating that through the merit of this commandment, they will merit having their soul rise on its own. Thus it is said, And he placed the menorah opposite the table (Exodus 40:24), because the righteous merit two tables. The table was placed in the north and the menorah in the south, because “gold comes from the north,” which includes worldly successes, while “length of days [referring to the eternal world] is at its right hand,” which is why the menorah was on the right. David linked these concepts when he said, You prepare a table before me in the presence of my enemies (Psalms 23:5). Afterward he said, You anoint my head with oil, corresponding to the oil of the menorah, because oil rises above all liquids, thus it is fitting to associate it with the human spirit that rises first. And proof for this, that this verse speaks about the reward of the World to Come, is that our Rabbis of blessed memory said in the tractate Yoma (76): My cup runneth over [cosi revaya]“ — this teaches that King David’s cup in the future world will hold 221 log [a measure of volume], which is the numerical value of revaya [רויה]. And what is this teaching us? Certainly, it means that the essence of his reward is for the world that is entirely long [eternal]. Therefore, they derived proof from the number 221, which corresponds to the letters of ”arukh“ [ארך] [meaning ”long“]. We too will bring proof of this from the details of the Menorah’s construction, which had seven branches. As is concluded in Leviticus Rabbah (30:2): You will make known to me the path of life; in Your presence is fullness of joy; at Your right hand are pleasures forevermore (Psalms 16:11). Do not read sova [fullness] but ”sheva“ [seven] — these are the seven groups of righteous people whose faces resemble the sun, the moon, the sky, the stars, lightning, roses, and the pure Menorah, etc. He mentioned seven different types of light, varying in their levels, corresponding to the seven branches of the Menorah, because all the righteous receive light from the radiance of His blessed Presence, just like these seven branches of the Menorah, all of which faced toward the central shaft of the Menorah. This is because the six branches to the right and left faced toward the central lamp, and the central lamp was positioned facing the Holy of Holies, where the Divine Presence dwelt. Thus, all the branches faced toward the radiance of His blessed Presence, which is called the face of the Menorah, for in the light of His blessed countenance, light is bestowed upon all seven groups, as it is written (Psalms 44:4): [For it was not by their sword that they inherited the land, neither did their arm save them,] but Your right hand and Your arm and the light of Your presence [panekha, which is literally face or countenance]… — a reference to the Menorah which was on the right. Similarly, in the verse fullness of joy in Your presence, it says pleasures at Your right hand forever — a reference to the Menorah which was on the right, and it calls the Holy One, blessed be He, he light of Your presence. And here it says fullness of joy in Your presence — this teaches that the Holy One, blessed be He, is called the face of the Menorah. Therefore it says, the seven lamps shall give light toward the face of the Menorah, and it does not say ”six lamps,“ because it alludes to the Holy One, blessed be He, who is called the face of the Menorah — both in the literal Menorah, which appears to face the place of the Divine Presence, and according to the allusion that these seven groups face toward the light of His blessed countenance. And this is a correct and precious allusion. And perhaps for this reason Moses had difficulty with the making of the menorah, because the spiritual reward in the World to Come is difficult for human intellect to imagine, since No eye has seen it, God, except You — until the Holy One, blessed be He, showed him with His finger, as it is said And this is the workmanship of the menorah. Because in the image of this particular menorah, He showed him a sign of the final reward, similar to the workmanship of the menorah whose flames are fiery flames of God, rising on its own, as has been explained. And on the menorah are goblets, knobs, and flowers. The goblets, that is, cups of abundance, which they interpreted as referring to spiritual reward. And for the knob [kaftor], Rabbeinu Bachya explained that the round knob alludes to the pleasure of the Divine Presence’s radiance, which has no end, like this round knob that has no end. And the flowers [perachim], named for the righteous shall flourish [yifrach] like a palm tree. And its height of 18 handbreadths hints at eternal life. And the wise will hear and increase learning, for the matter is clear and correct that the Table and the menorah include the two [types of] success. And from the mention of opposite the Table, we can interpret that all “oppositeness” has to do with opposition. And it is known that whoever increases his consumption in this world from the high table [of God], they deduct from his merits for the World to Come, as found in the Gemara (Bava Metzia 114b): “Who is consuming his world, etc.” And similarly regarding the matter of “the golden table leg, etc.” (Ta’anit 25a). And if so, the Table is opposite the menorah, because whoever succeeds in this world more than necessary will be diminished in the World to Come. Therefore, all the righteous rejected the successes of this world and did not ask for anything from it except what was necessary, and with this they received their portion in the great goodness stored up for the righteous in the World to Come.

'ועשית מנורת וגו, to illuminate the breads on the table as is mentioned in 26,35 where the position of this Menorah is specifically described as being opposite the table. מקשה, he took a chunk of gold and peeled from its side arms, cup-shaped ornaments, flowers, etc., all with aid of a hammer. ירכה, the wide base (legs) in touch with the floor, upon which the entire lamp stand was erected. וקנה, a reference to the central shaft from which three subsidiary arms would branch out in either direction. גביעיה כפתוריה ופרחיה ממנה יהיו, all of these would emanate from the center shaft. Wherever there was a knob, two relatively thin arms would branch out, one to the right and one to the left. All this is spelled out in verse 35.

תיעשה המנורה, “the lampstand shall be made;” the word: תיעשה is spelled here with the letter י, the only time in the Bible it is spelled in this manner, in order to serve as a reminder that Solomon placed ten such lampstands into the Temple that he built. וירכה, “its base;” this is a reference to the base of the menorah;” its total height was eighteen handbreadths, of which the base with its three legs took up three handbreadths. We have a hint of its height in Numbers 8,4 where the subject of the menorah is introduced with the word: וזה, “and this was;” the numerical value of the letters in that word is 18.

And six branches going out from its sides: three branches of the menorah from one side, and three branches of the menorah from the other side.

יצאים מצדיה [AND SIX BRANCHES] SHALL GO OUT OF ITS SIDE — on each side slantwise extending on high up to the level of the candlestick proper, i. e. of the middle branch. They came out from the middle branch, one above the other — the lowest being the longest, that above it being shorter than it, and the upper one even shorter than that, for the height of their tops was to be the same as the height of the middle branch — the seventh, the central one, from which the other six branches came out.

"And six." The meaning of branches (kanim): round, long, hollow.

Three cups fashioned on one branch, a knob and a blossom; and three cups fashioned on one branch, a knob and a blossom — so for the six branches going out from the menorah.

משקדים — Understand this as the Targum has it, מְצָיְרִין, chased. They were “modelled” in the way that is done on gold and silver vessels, a kind of work called in old French nieller. שלשה גבעים THREE GOBLETS, projecting from each branch, כפתור ופרח AND A KNOB AND A FLOWER was also on each branch.

"Three cups" (shloshah gevi'im). The Gaon said that meshukadim ["almond-shaped"] resembles almonds [in form]. The correct view is that [the root] is from the expression "watching (lishkod) at my gates" (Proverbs 8:34).

כן לששת הקנים היוצאים מן המנורה, “likewise for the six branches that protrude forth from the Menorah.” Seeing that thus far only two of these “arms” have been mentioned, the Torah had to add the word “כן,” “likewise, similarly, i.e. that the same pattern applied to all the six arms. In the verse following, (35) where all six “arms” have been mentioned specifically, there was no need for the extra word כן. This was necessary only where I could have thought that a different six “arms” were referred to. We did need to be told that the knobs, almond shaped decorations, and blossom shaped decorations, were all to be integral on each of these “arms.”

שלושה גביעים, hollow, similar to a cup. These made it appear as if the center shaft was full of holes. משוקדים, almond-shaped, protruding in the outer walls of these cup-shaped ornaments. [The author describes jewelry in his time that was constructed in a similar fashion, something this editor is not too familiar with. Ed.] כפתור ופרח, these knobs and flowers alternated with one another at halfway up the arms of the lamp stand.

And on the menorah itself, four cups fashioned, its knobs and its blossoms.

ובמנרה ארבעה גבעים AND IN THE CANDELABRUM SHALL BE FOUR CUPS — i. e, on the body of the candlestick (on the vertical branch), were four goblets, viz., one jutting out from beneath the branches and three above the points from which emerged the branches that went out from its sides. משקדים כפתריה ופרחיה GOBLETS MODELLED, WITH THEIR KNOBS AND THEIR FLOWERS (or it may be translated also: GOBLETS, MODELLED WITH THEIR KNOBS AND FLOWERS — The word משקדים being separated from the preceding by an אתנחתא seems to belong to the next words, to כפתוריה ופרחיה, but the fact that in the preceding verse it had been used of the goblets only suggests the reading גביעים משקדים. This is one of the five verses in Scripture the syntactical construction of which is undecided: it is not clear whether one should read גביעים משקדים or משקדים כפתריה ופרחיה (Yoma 52b).

And a knob under two branches of it, and a knob under two branches of it, and a knob under two branches of it — for the six branches going out from the menorah.

וכפתר תחת שני הקנים AND THERE SHALL BE A KNOB UNDER TWO BRANCHES — The branches were drawn out from the two sides of the knob to this direction and to that. Thus we are taught in the Baraitha dealing with the construction of the Tabernacle (ch. 10): The full height of the candlestick was eighteen handbreadths, the legs and the flower taking up three handbreadths. — This is the flower mentioned in connection with the base, as it says, (Numbers 8:4) “unto the base thereof, unto the flower thereof”. — Then there was a space of two handbreadths that was plain; then one handbreadth in which was one of the four goblets (mentioned Exodus 25:34) and a knob and a flower of those two knobs and those two flowers that are mentioned together with the candlestick proper — for it states, (v. 34) “[And on the candelabrum (i. e. on the shaft) there shall be four cups] made like unto almonds with their knobs and their flowers,” which teaches us that there were on the middle branch two knobs and two flowers (the plural כפתריה ופרחיה without stating the number suggesting “two” of each kind; besides the three knobs from which the branches emerged and of which it is said, (Exodus 25:35) “And there shall be a knob under the two branches etc.” — Then there were the following: two handbreadths that were plain; a handbreadth made up of a knob from which two branches emerged on each side, extending upward to the level of the candlestick proper; one handbreadth plain; one handbreadth made up of a knob with two branches emerging from it; one handbreadth plain, and a handbreadth made up of a knob from which two branches emerged and rose to the level of the candlestick proper; two handbreadths plain. Thus there remained three handbreadths in which were three goblets (three of the four mentioned in v. 34) and one knob and one flower (of the two mentioned Exodus 25:34-35). Consequently the goblets were twenty-two — eighteen on the six branches, there being three on each, and four on the candlestick proper, making altogether twenty-two; — and there were eleven knobs, — six on the six branches, one on each, and three on the candlestick proper from which the branches emerged, and two more knobs on the candlestick proper, — for it says, “made like unto almonds with its knobs”, and the minimum number implied by the plural כפתורים, is two. One of these was below near the base and the other in the upper three handbreadths together with the three goblets. Furthermore it had nine flowers, six on the six branches, — as it says, (Exodus 25:33) “with a knob and a flower on the one branch” — and three on the candlestick proper, viz., two as is implied in what is said “made like unto almonds with its knobs and its flowers” — and the minimum number to be understood by the plural פרחים is two, and one that is mentioned in the section בהעלתך, (Numbers 8:4) “unto the base thereof and the flower thereof.” If you will study the above quoted Boraitha minutely you will find them (the different par...

וכפתור תחת שני הקנים, a knob and a flower in the center shaft beneath each set of arms branching out from it. לששת הקנים, three times. (seeing two arms extended from the center shaft at the same height each time) The words וכפתור did not need to be repeated three times in our verse as the count had already been made in verse 33.

Their knobs and their branches shall be of one piece with it — all of it one piece of hammered work of pure gold.

כפתריהם וקנותם ממנו יהיו, Their knops and their branches shall be of one piece with it. We are taught in Menachot 28 that both the seven branches of the Lampstand and the seven lamps were essential. [if even one of these items were to be missing the Lampstand could not fulfil its function. Ed.] The Talmud bases this rule on the use of the word יהיו in connection with this directive. This appears difficult as the word יהיו appears only after the mention of the branches, and not in connection with the lamps. The word יהיו appears altogether only twice in connection with the Lampstand, once in our verse and once previously in verse 31 where the making of the Lampstand is commanded. If the Talmud were correct, why does the Torah not mention the word יהיו when describing the construction of the lamps in verse 37? The fact that verse 31 does not speak about the lamps at all surely suggests that only the items mentioned prior to the word יהיו are essential? Even though the Mishnah does not mention anything but the Lampstand itself and its branches, Tossaphot already added that this ruling also applies to the cups, knops, and flowers mentioned in verse 31, but that the reason the Mishnah does not mention those items is that they would not apply when the Lampstand is not made of gold. Maimonides writes in the same vein in chapter three of his Hilchot Beyt Ha-Bechirah. The fact remains that the word יהיו does not appear in connection with the lamps themselves. There is an argument in Menachot 98 as to whether the lamps were an integral part of the Lampstand or whether they were removable. According to the view that the lamps were removable and were separate utensils, whence do we know they were considered essential seeing the word יהיו is not mentioned in connection with them? Even according to the view that the lamps were integral to the Lampstand, surely the sage holding that view concedes that they were not cast in one piece with the rest of the Lampstand, and our problem remains? The problem discussed by our sages in the Talmud appears to center around the question whether the Lampstand consumed the whole talent of gold mentioned in verse 39, or whether the various other utensils were all cast out of the same talent of gold mentioned in verse 39. When the Torah singled out the knops, the flowers and the cups as being מקשה, i.e. cast as a single piece with the Lampstand, no mention is made of the lamps. Seeing that the Torah went to some length to describe the details of the construction of the Lampstand, it is rather evident that any utensils not mentioned were not an integral part of the Lampstand. Besides, when one considers that the Torah emphasises concerning the items mentioned in verse 31 that they were to be ממנה, an integral part of the Lampstand, surely the rules implied by the word יהיו apply to all of them, as mentioned by Tossaphot! Perhaps we can say that seeing that the Torah took pains to reveal the function of the seven shafts of the...

And you shall make its seven lamps, and kindle its lamps so that they give light toward the front of it.

את נרתיה ITS LAMPS — a kind of small bowls into which the oil and the wicks were put. והאיר על עבר פניה AND MAKE THEM GIVE LIGHT OVER AGAINST IT — Make the mouths of those six lamps which are on the top of the branches that come out from its sides so that they are turned towards the middle branch, in order that when you kindle the lamps they shall cast their light over against its (the candlestick’s) front-side, i. e. their light should be directed in the direction of the front of the central branch which forms the candlestick proper.

והאיר על עבר פניה, (verse 36) this means that the lights both on the right of the center shaft and those on the left should be arranged so that the respective flames would focus in the direction of the middle. Inasmuch as the lights symbolised spiritual “enlighten-ment,” the lesson is that in all our efforts at obtaining such enlightenment, and during all the digressions that the pursuit of such disciplines necessarily entails, we must never lose sight of the direction in which we are striving and keep this central idea of such enlightenment resulting in us becoming better servants of the Lord, constantly in front of our mental eye. The reason that there were lights on both the right side of the center shaft as well as on the left side, is that pursuit of enlightenment expresses itself both in gaining of theoretical knowledge, ethical imperatives, but no less so in the practical application of such lessons learned. Both must be placed in the service of the נר המערבי, the light from the center shaft, the one which faces the Shechinah directly. Only the focusing on our spiritual goal ensures that the six lights on the various arms will continue to burn without hindrance. The thought we just tried to portray is expressed in Numbers 8,2-4 בהעלותך את הנרות אל מול פני המנוה יאירו שבעת הנרות “when you kindle the lamps, toward the face of the Menorah shall the seven lamps cast light.” This is the symbolism contained in the words וזה מעשה המנורה מקשה, (Numbers 8,4) i.e. in spite of what appears to be a multiplicity of lights emanating from this Menorah, their function is singular, one of unification, just as the Menorah from which they emanate was cast out of a single chunk of gold, something unified.

ועשית את נרותיה, “and you are to make its lamps etc.;” the reason why the word: ועשית is repeated here is that these lamps were separate vessels, not part of the shaft and its six arms. Proof of this is provided by the wording: כפתוריהם וקנותם ממנה היו, “its knobs and shaft (only) were all of the same chunk (of gold).” In addition, the Torah uses a separate verse in 37,23 to tell us that Betzalel made these seven lamps. This proves that they were separate vessels. נרותיה שבעה, “its lamps seven.” This was to symbolise the seven days of the week, as well as the seven zodiac constellations that provide illumination in the universe; the Sun, Venus, Mercury, Moon, Saturn, Jupiter, and Mars. והעלה, “he shall light;” [the priest, as no one else was allowed in there. Ed.] את נרותיה, “its lamps.” Seven lamps on the seven arms of the candlestick. והאיר, “it will illuminate,” על ער פניה, “on its front side;” it will give light so that all its shafts/arms will be visible. [The wicks were so arranged that they were directed at the center shaft. Ed.] והאיר, “it will illuminate,”

נרותיה, a reference to the little bowls in which both the oil and the wick would be placed. The priest would point the direction of each flame towards the center shaft so that they would illuminate also each other. [the word פניה refers to the table standing across from the Menorah which would be indirectly illuminated by these seven lights.] This same point is repeated in Numbers 8,2 making sure we understand that the lights of the Menorah illuminated the breads on the table opposite it. (2) HE, the kohen, SHALL MOUNT. (3) THE LAMPS. Seven on the seven stems. (4) SO AS TO GIVE LIGHT ON ITS FRONT SIDE. He should light the wicks toward the side facing [in the direction across from] the lampstand, which is the side of the table, which is opposite it, as it is written (Exod. 26:35), "and the lampstand opposite the table," and it is likewise written (Num. 8:2), "Towards opposite [JPS: at the front of] the lampstand shall the seven lamps give light."

והאיר, ”it will illuminate, etc.” the meaning of the verse is that the lights from the menorah will illuminate the showbreads on the Table opposite it. This is spelled out in detail in Exodus 49,24. The plain meaning of the verses dealing with this is that the broadside of the lampstand faced from east to west so that it could easily provide light for the Table standing opposite it. According to the view of the scholar claiming that the position of the menorah had been in a north-south direction, we would have to assume that the lamp burning on top of the center shaft was pointing westward, whereas all the other six lamps were facing towards the center shaft. This is not very convincing, as clearly the purpose of the lamps was primarily to illuminate the showbreads on the Table. Alternately, we would have to accept Rashi’s explanation that the six lamps were facing in the direction of the lamp in the center in order to emphasize the light of that particular lamp.

And its snuffers and its fire pans shall be of pure gold.

ומלקחיה — These were tongs made for taking the wicks out from the oil, to put them in position and to draw them into the mouths. Because people took things with them they were called מלקחים, (from לקח, “to take”). The word צבתהא by which Onkelos renders it is the same as the more familiar term צבת, “a pair of tongs”; tenailles in old French ומחתתיה AND ITS SNUFF-DISHES — These were like small bowls into which the High Priest raked the ashes every morning when he cleansed out the lamps from the ashes of the wicks that had burned all night and had become extinguished. The word מחתה is fougère (feuchière) in old French, as in, (Isaiah 30:14) “to rake (לחתות) fire from the hearth.”

"Pure" — meaning refined, with no dross.

ומלקחיה, ומחתותיה זהב טהור; both its tongs and its snuffdishes to be of pure gold. The Torah had to mention the words "pure gold" here as everybody agrees that these utensils were not cast from the previously mentioned talent of gold.

ומלקחיה ומחתותיה, “Its tongs and its fire pans,” it is well known that עצה ומחשבה, deliberation (counsel) and thought, are “tongs” with which to extract Torah-knowledge. This is what is meant by Proverbs 1,5: ונבון תחבולות יקנה, “and a man of understanding will attain wise counsel.” מחשבה, “thought,” originates in the heart. The Torah here compares the heart to a fire pan as just as the fire pan is a vessel from which one takes the fire to light the lamps so the heart is the instrument of the intelligence which a person employs in studying Torah. The lampstand's weight was a talent of gold (verse 39) neither less nor more. The reason the weight had to be precise was to remind us that one is not free to add or to detract from Torah in any manner. This is the meaning of Psalms 19,8 that תורת ה' תמימה, that “G’d’s Torah is perfect.” It was constructed out of a single chunk of gold to teach the unity of the Torah as is written (Exodus 12,49) תורה אחת, “a single Torah.” It was placed in the southern half of the Tabernacle as most wisdom is found in the south (Baba Batra 25). The land of Israel is known as ארץ הדרום, “the land of the south,” as it is situated climate-wise in the choicest locations of the earth’s seven climatic belts (compare author’s comment on Exodus 1,2-3). It is protected from extremes of heat and cold thus enabling people in it to think more clearly. This is the meaning of Bereshit Rabbah 16,3 that “the gold of that place is good” (Genesis 2,12). The Rabbis there comment that there is no ethical moral teaching (Torah) comparable to that of our Torah just as there is no wisdom comparable to the wisdom found in the land of Israel. Furthermore, the sages in Baba Batra 155 also taught that the very air one breathes in the land of Israel is causing one to become wiser. It is worth reflecting on the fact that the table and the Menorah respectively were placed opposite each other (south and north) as the two spiritual “winds” represented by these two directions complement each other. This is why the Torah wrote (26,35) “you are to place the table outside the dividing curtain and the lampstand opposite it.” The reason for this is that in order for wisdom to endure its owner has to have the physical wherewithal, i.e. food and drink, etc. The table in the north is a symbol of material wealth as we have pointed out previously. A kabbalistic approach: The Menorah alludes to all levels of emanations, excellence, superiority. The fact that it was made of a single chunk of gold symbolises the concept of perfect unity. The six “arms” protruding from the centre shaft in both directions symbolise the six proliferations from the centre line of the diagram of the emanations, ספירות. The lamp which burned on top of these arms symbolised בינה, insight, an emanation above the lower six and supplied with direct input from the essence of G’d. It is the lamp (light) which is described by Solomon as (the origin of) man’s soul (Proverbs 20,27). It was placed in the south opposite the emanation wisdom. This is the mystical dimension of the statement in Baba Batra 25 that “he who wishes to become rich should turn south.” The oil is also known as יצהר, corresponding to the crown, which is another word for the מאור הגדול, “the great luminary.” This is the mystical dimension of the significance of the oil used for anointing the High Priests and the kings (of the Davidic dynasty). When doing the anointing the figure of the letter כ was painted on the heads of the recipients (in oil), to symbolise the shape of the letter כ for כתר in that ceremony. Some hold that the pattern described during this anointing was the letters כ'י which would symbolise that the recipient was endowed with the emanations from “head to toe.” [According to Horiot 12 there were different patterns of oil traced on the heads of the priests and the Kings respectively. Ed.] The word מנורת (in the possessive clause in verse 31) with the tone-sign tipcha underneath, an unusual use of the possessive clause at the beginning of the whole subject, may be understood to mean here that the whole concept of the Menorah is secondary (possessive clause) to our light. The possessive clause makes no sense unless there is at least another Menorah (or independent source of light) to which it can be compared. The “other” Menorah is the light provided by us humans studying the Torah. The possessive clause inherent in the word מנורת instead of מנורה does not only apply to the word זהב טהור, “pure gold,” of which the Menorah is to be constructed, Had this been the Torah’s intention there should be a connecting makkaf between the words מנורה and זהב. We find, for instance, that also the prophet Zecharyah mentions the Menorah in the possessive clause at the very first occasion when it is mentioned (compare Zecharyah 4,2 ראיתי והנה מנורת זהב כלה), and even though it is mentioned in the possessive clause the tone-signs there clearly indicate that the words מנורת זהב do not belong together but that the word מנורת is to be read as belonging to what was written before, i.e. ראיתי, and not to the words זהב כלה “all made of gold.” The reason for this is that the author wanted to emphasise that the material aspect of the fact that the Menorah in the vision was made of gold was of very subordinate significance. The possessive clause was used only to draw attention to the fact that there was another luminary which served as the inspiration for this physical luminary, the golden Menorah. The possessive clause was to alert the reader to some hidden Menorah which is in some relationship to the one mentioned in this verse. The deliberate separation of the word “gold” and “Menorat” is designed to show how different the “other,” unmentioned Menorah is from the one mentioned in the verse.

ומחתותיה, “and its pans.” Rashi explains that these “pans,” were meant to accommodate the wicks after they had burnt out. Other commentators claim that these “pans” were small receptacles in which the oil for each of the lamps was placed. This seems unlikely, as it would pose the question what does the word נרותיה in verse 37 mean?

ומלקחיה, the tongs needed to handle the wicks in order to insert them in the lamps. ומחתותיה, the ash-pans in which the leftover, possibly still glowing, remnants of the wicks and any unburned oil would be removed when cleaning out the lamps each morning.

Of a talent of pure gold shall it be made, along with all these vessels.

ככר זהב טהור OF A TALENT OF PURE GOLD [SHALL HE MAKE IT WITH ALL THESE VESSELS] — i. e. that its weight together with (את) all its vessels shall he exactly one talent, neither more nor less (cf. Menachot 88b). A common (not holy) kikkar (one used for weighing ordinary articles) was sixty manehs, that used for sacred purposes double as much, hundred and twenty manehs; a maneh was equal to a litra (the Roman libra, a pound) by which silver is weighed, according to the standard weight of Cologne. This is hundred denars which is the equivalent of twenty-five Sela’im, one Sela being four denars (cf. Bekhorot 5a).

OF A TALENT OF PURE GOLD SHALL HE MAKE IT WITH ALL THESE VESSELS. This means “that its weight together with all its vessels shall be exactly one talent, neither less nor more.” This is Rashi’s language. And such indeed is the simple meaning of Scripture. But if that be so, there is here a point which is greatly to be wondered about, namely that Scripture should not specify at all how much of the talent of gold should go into the candelabrum itself! For in that case half of the talent or even more could then go into the making of the tongs and the snuffdishes which are vessels separate from the candelabrum, while the candelabrum itself could be made of less than half the talent, or perhaps the candelabrum would be made of the entire talent less one maneh [a sacred talent consisted of one hundred and twenty manoth] and all these vessels would be made of the one maneh! Moreover, what reason is there that the total weight of the candelabrum with its many separate vessels should be given as one talent, and why was it not explained how many tongs and snuffdishes should be made from it?But the opinion of our Rabbis is not as the Rabbi [Rashi] stated it, for thus did the Sages teach in Tractate Menachoth: “The candelabrum and its seven lamps came from the talent, but not its tongs and snuffdishes. And if you ask how will I then explain, [Of a talent of pure gold shall he make it,] with all these vessels? Then I reply that this includes the lamps. These are the words of Rabbi Yehudah. Rabbi Nechemyah says: the candelabrum [alone] came from the talent but not its lamps, tongs, and snuffdishes. And if you ask how will I then explain the expression, with all these vessels? I answer that it teaches that they all be made of gold [aside of the talent mentioned].” There in Tractate Menachoth the Rabbis have further said, that according to Rabbi Yehudah [who says that the lamps came from the talent], the lamps were also of beaten work together with the candelabrum; yet Scripture calls them these ‘vessels,’ because they are receptacles for the oil, known by a name of their own, since in all other candelabrums they are separate from them [although here they were hammered out of the same talent of gold from which the whole candelabrum was made]. And according to Rabbi Nechemyah [who says that the lamps did not come from the talent, the Rabbis] have said there that the lamps were not of beaten work together with the candelabrum. Thus according to Rabbi Yehudah included in the weight of the talent — with that which was of beaten work with it — is only the candelabrum itself but none of the separate vessels thereof. And according to Rabbi Nechemyah the Rabbis have said there: “And if you ask how will I then explain the expression, with all these vessels? I answer, it teaches that they all be made of gold, this being necessary to be stated because of the mouth of the lamps.”According to the simple meaning of Scripture the verse states: “Of a talent of pure gold shall...

ככר זהב טהור, a talent of pure gold. We have a Baraitha in Menachot 88 which states: The words: "he shall make the Lampstand out of one talent of pure gold," teach that the Lampstand including its lamps are to be made out of the same talent of gold. How did I arrive at the conclusion that the lamps themselves are included in the amount of one talent of gold mentioned? It says in our verse: "all these utensils." This might have led me to believe that the snuffdishes and tongs were also to be made out of the same talent. To prevent me from thinking this, the Torah uses the restrictive clause אותה, "it (alone)." Let us take a look at the true meaning of the various exclusions and inclusions in the Torah's text. What is it that we have not yet been told concerning the commandment of the Lampstand so that our verse became necessary at all? Apparently, but for our verse I would not have any idea of the amount of gold needed to carry out G'd's instructions to construct the Lampstand. Ergo, our verse provided this information, i.e. the amount of gold required was one talent of pure gold. Having received this information we became doubtful whether the one talent of gold was enough to include the making of the lamps themselves or not. Such doubt did not include the snuffdishes or tongs, seeing the Torah employed the words "pure gold" when speaking of their construction. Had they been part of the talent of gold mentioned by the Torah, the Torah would not have had to stipulate that they too were to be made of "pure gold," seeing the Lampstand itself was made of pure gold. On the other hand, we cannot argue that the Torah's not mentioning "pure gold" in connection with the lamps proves that they must have been made as part of the talent of gold mentioned. It is entirely possible that seeing that the lamps would be in constant use and the Torah had not mentioned what materials they were to be made of is proof that it did not matter to G'd of what materials the lamps would be made. The Torah had to add the words את כל הכלים "all the utensils," in order that we should know that G'd was very much concerned with what material the lamps were to be made. They were to be part of the talent of gold mentioned earlier. I have no doubt, however, that the snuffdishes and tongs were not part of that talent of gold, otherwise the Torah did not need to stress the words "pure gold" in connection with their construction. Therefore, I am not likely to make a mistake when I read the words "all these utensils." After all this, what does remain difficult is the word אותה, "it," which clearly intends to exclude something else. Is this word intended to exclude the snuffdishes and tongs? If so, why was a further word needed to do this? It would appear that a further careful examination of the text reveals that the very fact that the Torah mentions the talent of gold only after having already instructed Moses to construct the knops, cups, and flowers, that they must surely be inclu...

ככר זהב, “one talent of gold.“ (3000 holy shekels in weight, i.e. 6000 shekels, according to the weight of ordinary profane shekels.)

ככר זהב יעשה אותה את כל הכלים האלה, “he is to make it out of a talent of gold with all these vessels.” The Menorah with its lamps comprised a total of one talent (weight). The other subsidiary vessels such as the tongs, etc., were not included in the weight given here by the Torah (Menachot 88). The verse is to be read as follows: “he shall make it out of one talent of gold together with its integral parts, i.e. the arms protruding from its centre shaft; all of these vessels are to be made of pure gold.” This is also the way the Torah reports the execution of these instructions in 37,24: “of a talent of pure gold he made it and all its utensils.” The words: “and all its utensils” refer to the fact that they were of pure gold, not to the fact that they were part of the talent of gold mentioned. The weight measurement “one talent” refers only to the lampstand and the lamps. This is what the Talmud taught in Menachot 88. The Talmud there says expressly that the words must be read in such a way that the extra words את כל כליה, mean that all its utensils were to be made of gold, whereas only the Menorah itself and its lamps were to be part of the talent of pure gold mentioned. Rabbeinu Chananel, in connection with the symbolic/moral meaning of these various furnishings of the Tabernacle writes that the Ark was an allusion to the truly righteous and learned individual whose interior matches his exterior and vice versa. This is the meaning of the Ark being covered with gold both on the inside and on the outside. Just as the bottom of the Ark had an area of two and one half cubits by one and a half cubits giving us a total of 4 square cubits minus one quarter cubit square, so the righteous person should remain constantly aware that the four elements which make up his physicality should not become the sum total of his existence but should be augmented liberally with physical matters such as the performance of good deeds for others, etc. Just as the walls of the Ark when combined were twelve cubits (when measuring the combined total of the outside dimensions 1.5x2.5 1,5+2.5 +1,5+2.5) seeing the long walls measured a total of 7.5 cubits and the shorter walls forming the sides measured 4,5 cubits, so the righteous person is expected to fulfill all the 12 conditions mentioned in Psalm 15,1 as the qualifications for dwelling in G’d’s holy precincts (the entire Psalm is devoted to listing these 12 requirements). If one wishes to attain a loftier level of relative perfection than that of a “mere” righteous individual, the next step up is becoming a נביא a prophet, or at least acquiring the spiritual level expected of a prophet. This is symbolised by the kapporet above the Ark. The fact that the entire kapporet was made of pure gold, that it was not only overlaid with gold, indicates that it symbolises something even purer than the Ark itself. We know that a prophet is considered as כלו צדק, “totally righteous” from Proverbs 8,8 “all the words of my mouth are with righteousness.” The cherubs above the kapporet are an allusion to the angels, beings on an even higher spiritual level than the prophets. They were spreading their wings heavenward in an allusion to their striving to be near the Shechinah which is higher than the angels seeing the angels are the throne, ever ready to welcome the attribute of כבוד, occupant of that throne. This is the meaning of the words in verse 20 אל הכפורת יהיו פני הכרובים, “the faces of the cherubs will be turned toward the kapporet.” They had to look downwards towards the lid and were forbidden to gaze at the Shechinah. Above everything is G’d Himself as is written in Samuel II 6,2: אשר נקרא שם שם ה' צבאות יושב הכרובים עליו, ”to which the Name was attached, the name of the Lord of Hosts Enthroned on the cherubs.” Solomon also constructed the cherubs in the Temple out of wood as is written (Kings I 6,23) “he made in the sanctuary two cherubs out of olive wood.” The table represented the kings of Israel who entertain the scholars of Israel at their table. This is what David told his son Solomon on his death-bed: “Barzilai‘s sons shall be amongst the people who are regular guests at your table” (Kings I 2,7). We also have a verse in Kings I 5,2 describing the lavishness of King Solomon’s table and the quantities of food consumed on a daily basis. The Torah, in describing the table in the Tabernacle as overlaid with gold, illustrates that the function of Royalty was primarily to make a great impression on the outside world. After Samuel had told Saul that he would be replaced as king by someone more worthy, Saul still begged the prophet to honour him at least in public as he wanted to maintain the appearance of power although he knew this was no longer his position (compare Samuel I 15,30). The reason that the length of the table was two cubits was in order to symbolise two requirements of every king. 1) He must be competent in meting out justice; 2) he must be competent in waging war. This is what the people had told the prophet Samuel when they asked him to appoint a king for them (Samuel I 8,20). They said: “that we may be like all the other nations; let our king rule over us and go out at our head and fight our battles.” The size and height of the walls which amount to nine cubits symbolise the nine commandments specifically addressed to a Jewish King. They are: 1) “he shall not keep many horses,” or 2) “send people back to Egypt to add to his horses;” 3) “he shall not have too many wives.” 4) “He shall not become haughty,” and 5) “he must not turn away from G’d’s commandments to right or to the left.” 6) “he shall write for himself 2 copies of the Torah.” 7) “He shall read in the Torah every day of his life.” 8) “He shall not amass too much silver and gold.” 9) “He shall not turn away from the commandments.” (Deut. 17,8-20.) The purpose of the border around the table was to prevent the show-breads sliding off it for whatever reason. It was intended to protect the show-breads just as the priests and the Levites are supposed to be on guard against the kings deviating from the path of the Torah. We have an example of this in Chronicles II 24,2: “Yoash (the King) did what was right in the eyes of the Lord as long as Yehoyadah the High Priest was alive.” In connection with King Uzziah we read in Chronicles II 26,5: “he applied himself to the worship of G’d during the time of Zechariah, instructor of the visions of G’d.” All the details that the Torah writes about in connection with all the vessels of the Tabernacle have similar moral allusions. The Ark represents the righteous people. The table corresponds to the kings of Israel. The Menorah corresponds to the scholars of Israel. The golden altar corresponds to the priests, whereas the copper altar corresponds to the people of Israel at large. Thus far Rabbeinu Chananel.

ככר זהב טהור, “one talent of pure gold.” Rashi explains that the Torah means that the menorah including all its auxiliary vessels, should weigh neither more nor less than one talent of gold. Nachmanides comments that when looked at from the plain meaning of the text, the פשט, Rashi is certainly correct. However, if it is so, this poses the question how much the chunk of gold known as the menorah was to weigh by itself? Why would the Torah not have given us this detail concerning the by far largest part of this major piece of furniture in the Sanctuary? The Torah might at least have revealed how much the total of all the auxiliaries weighed, and we would have been able to calculate how much the menorah itself weighed? By not revealing this detail we might even assume that the various auxiliaries together weighed more than the menorah itself! When perusing the discussion about all this in the Talmud, Menachot 85, it appears that Rashi departed from the views expressed there. Apparently, the words ואת כל כליה, “and all its auxiliary vessels,” in our verse, do not refer to vessels constructed separately, not part of the chunk of gold, but refer to the basic auxiliaries such as the lamps which were also part of the single cast chunk of gold which constituted the menorah. If, in spite of the fact that they were an integral part of the menorah, the Torah describes these lamps as נרותיה ואת כל, clearly implying that they were subordinate to the menorah itself, the reason is that all other candelabras that we are familiar with, always have these lamps attached as a detachable auxiliary to the candlestick itself. They deserve a name in their own right precisely because as a rule they are separate attachments. According to the plain meaning of the text the meaning of the line ככר זהב טהור יעשה אותה ואת כל כליה, is that even all the auxiliary vessels of the menorah were made of pure gold. Seeing that it was quite unusual for vessels constantly in touch with fire to have been made of gold, the Torah, in describing the weight of the gold used for the single cast menorah describes the weight as pertaining to אותה, “it,” before including the auxiliary vessels, that, while made of gold, were not part of that talent of pure gold described previously. Ibn Ezra writes that the reason why the Torah mentions the weight of the menorah, whereas no such weights were given for the Holy Ark, for instance, or for the Table, for that matter, is that it was the only one of the furnishings in the Sanctuary which consisted of pure gold only, both the Ark and the Table were only overlaid with gold. Moreover, the Torah was interested in informing us in an oblique manner that the maximum size of such a menorah that could be fashioned out of a single talent of pure gold was well known, so that the Torah did not need to spell out the height of the menorah, though the sages did tell us the measurements i.e. eighteen tefachim. There was also no need to describe the size of the crown-like borders around the Table and the Holy Ark, as they were thin and were directly attached to the Table and Ark, respectively. Although, according to our sages the thickness of the lid for the Ark, the כפורת, was one tefach, there was still no need to mention the size or weight, as it too corresponded precisely to the measurements of the Ark which the Torah has provided. Seeing, that the basic size of the menorah was not spelled out, the Torah, giving us the weight of it, enabled the sages to calculate its size on that basis. The height of the menorah was such that it had to provide illumination for the surface of the Table when the show-breads would be placed there and would be exchanged on the following week. As to the reason why Rashi quoted the Midrash according to which the word תיעשה in the passive mode means that the menorah emerged from the crucible on its own, i.e. without having been cast by Betzalel in a specific mould, you may interpret this as not conflicting with the view expressed in the Midrash that G’d showed Moses a precise image of what the menorah would look like, but that Moses still had difficulty envisioning the construction of the menorah even after G’d had shown him the vision referred to.

See and make them according to their pattern that you are shown on the mountain.

וראה ועשה AND SEE AND MAKE — See here, in the mountain, the pattern which I shew thee. This teaches you that Moses was puzzled about the workmanship of the Menorah until the Holy One, blessed be He, showed him the pattern of it in a candlestick of fire (Menachot 29a). אשר אתה מראה WHICH WAS SHOWN THEE — Translate as the Targum does: דאת מתחזי בטורא which thou hast been shown on the mountain. If it were punctuated with Patach (מַרְאֶה) it would mean which you show to others,” now, however, that it is punctuated with חטף קמץ (our קמץ חטוף, short Kametz) it signifies, “which thou hast been shown” — i. e. which others show thee [for the punctuation distinguishes between the words denoting “one who does something” and “one who has something done to him” (i. e. between the active participle מַרְאֶה and the passive participle מָרְאֶה).]

"And see." For making the menorah requires wisdom and inner vision — to see with the eye of the mind how to fashion all the vessels from a single talent. The word mar'eh ["form" / "pattern"] is unusual and not [formed] like the word mushllakh (2 Samuel 20:21) [a passive participle], for the verb ra'ah [to see] has no passive form except nir'ah ["is seen"] — it is this way because the one who sees is not the agent but the receiver of an image; one learned in philosophy will understand this. Before I speak of the Tabernacle — which also had curtains of cherubim — I will give you a fundamental principle upon which you may rely. Said Abraham the author: All that exists is of two kinds. The first is body — that which has length, width, and depth, and thus six faces: from length come front and back, from width come right and left, from height come above and below. The second kind of existence is non-corporeal — such as the holy angels of Hashem and the human soul. These two modes of being were created by God alone, and no created being has the power to bring into existence a substance that is a body or a non-corporeal entity, nor the power to annihilate it so that it ceases to exist. There is also something that depends on existence and leans upon it and cannot subsist independently — and that is form; and form too is of two kinds. The first kind is permanent and does not change, like the form of holy [angels] and the faculties of the soul, and also in bodies, like the heat of fire and the moisture of water. The second kind consists of accidents — they are not permanent, but rather change, shift, depart, and perish. Things of this second kind a person can produce. Therefore the Glorious Name cannot possess a likeness or image — neither permanent nor perishable — for Hashem created the substance of every thing; and every form — whether permanent or accidental — [depends on substance]. I will give you one illustration: the darkening of the moon when the earth's shadow comes between it and the sun at the head or tail of the lunar node. I will give you another illustration: we know that the power of the soul extends throughout the entire body, yet there are places in the human body that contain more of the nerves issuing from the brain and therefore feel more than other parts — such as the eyes and ears, whereas the bones and the liver do not feel. Yet the heart receives the soul's power more than any other organ, and therefore many organs serve it. So too with the Glorious Name: we know that His glory fills the entire world, but there are places where the power of Hashem is more visible than in other places — and this is due to two things: first, according to the natural constitution of the recipient; and second, according to the higher power that rests upon the head of the recipient. For these reasons a particular place was chosen for the Temple. If Hashem grants you wisdom of heart, you will understand the mystery of the Ark and the cover and the cherubim that spread their wings — and beyond the curtain, the menorah and the incense altar and the table — and beyond the door of the Tabernacle, the burnt-offering altar and all its vessels, and the washbasin and its stand. These things are the glory of God, and for this reason I have given you this hint. For there are in our generation people who are wise in their own eyes who may mock my words. And one who knows the secret of his own soul and the constitution of his body can come to know the matters of the supernal world — for man is a microcosm, and he was the last of creation on earth. A token of this: the great begins it and the small concludes it. The Gaon mentioned that there are eighteen things in the Tabernacle — which is the intermediate world — and their counterparts in the supernal world, and likewise in the microcosm. The principle is: every cherub was made to receive supernal power, and also in order that the reflective person should learn. There is no need to elaborate further.

.וראה ועשה בתבניתם, “note well, and follow their patterns,” (as have been shown to you while on the Mountain.)

וראה ועשה בתבניתם , “See and construct according to their pattern, etc.” It would seem that the preposition כ would have been more appropriate here than the preposition ב seeing that this is the preposition always used when two matters are being compared as being similar in some respects though not in all respects. Seeing that what Moses had been shown was only a mental image and he had not seen a physical pattern or miniature, it would therefore appear to have been appropriate for the Torah to write כתבניתם. Why then did the Torah write בתבניתם as if the construction of the Tabernacle and everything connected with it corresponded in detail to all he had been shown on the Mountain? This argument is also reflected in our sages quoting Moses as saying to G’d: “from where am I going to take all the red fire, white fire, green fire, and black fire which You have shown me as the pattern?” (Bamidbar Rabbah 12,10) It is important to understand the difference between the preposition ב and the preposition כ in Hebrew. The best way to illustrate this is to look at the words בצלמנו כדמותנו, “in our image and in our likeness.” Why do we have two different prepositions in that verse in Genesis 1,26? The answer is that the word צלם refers to a “form” which is a strictly abstract term, describing something in the mind, something spiritual in nature. The word applies to disembodied creatures, creatures whose essence is spiritual. The word דמות on the other hand, refers to the corresponding idea in the physical world, describing creatures with bodies. When G’d created man He said that in some essential respects man would be like the disembodied beings in the heavens, like the angels. In other, less essential respects he would be different seeing that he would have a body. This difference is indicated by the use of two different prepositions when referring to צלם and דמות respectively. Seeing that man’s likeness to the angels was primary, the “face,” the preposition ב reflected this when the Torah writes בצלמנו. Seeing that what Moses saw and what was constructed corresponded in essence to what he had been shown, the Torah was correct in writing בתבניתם.

מראה, a past participle of the verb when it is used transitively, i.e. describing an action performed by a third party. אשר אתה מראה בהר, G’d had literally shown Moses a visual likeness of the Tabernacle while he had been on Mount Sinai. This must be contrasted with such expressions as Genesis 12,7 לה' הנראה אליו, where the image Avraham received was one which originated within him rather than externally.