[Index of all Weekly Divrei Torah pages]
Even though this week’s Torah portion is Vayikrah, it is difficult to avoid writing about a topic that actually took place during last week’s double portion, Vayakhel-Pekudei. The subject is the inauguration of the mishkan, or traveling Tabernacle that accompanied the Jews in the desert, and later through much of their early years in the land of Israel. Construction of the mishkan began immediately after Moshe brought down the second tablets on Yom Kippur, and continued until it was completed in the month of Adar (a period of some five months). Then, the final week of Adar was spent in setting up and taking down the mishkan every day for seven days, before finally setting it up for good on the first day of the month of Nissan.
One reason it is difficult to avoid writing about the mishkan this week, even though currently it is parshat Vayikrah, is that the first day of Nissan occurs this week, coinciding with the inauguration of the mishkan. But there is an additional reason – and that is because the newly rebuilt Hurva synagogue, long the largest Jewish landmark in the old city of Jerusalem (and located directly across the square from Jerusalem Connection) was also inaugurated this week. This is not the first time that it was rebuilt after destruction. Construction was first begun in the seventeen hundreds, but not completed until after many trials and tribulations in the mid-eighteen hundreds. The Hurva stood for ninety years, until the Jordanians destroyed it in 1948, as they conquered the old city and drove out the remaining Jews. Its ruins stood as a quiet but holy reminder of its former glory. Six years ago, reconstruction began, and just this week (a few hours ago as I write these words), the re-inauguration took place. Even though there is no comparison between the massive Hurva and the tiny mishkan that was tagged for ultimate holiness, both were inaugurated on the first of Nissan, which occurs this week.
Even though there is no difference of opinion regarding when the mishkan was ultimately set up, there is a difference of opinion about when it started to be used. Reading through the verses of the Torah, it seems apparent that the components of the mishkan were put to use as soon as they were put into place. Starting in Ex. 40:22, we are told, “He placed the table…and arranged the bread upon it...and placed the menorah within the tent of meeting…and kindled the candles…and placed the golden altar…and burnt the incense upon itŔ And finally, after all these activities, Ӆthen he placed the separating curtain at the opening of the tent of meeting” (40:28), and “and he put the altar for sacrifices…and offered upon it the offering and the mincha,” after which, Ӆhe set up the courtyard around it for the mishkan and the altar” (40:29-30). It seems then, that the bread was put on the table as soon as it was set up, the menorah was lit as soon as it was set up, and sacrifices were offered as soon as the altar was established. In any case, Rashi does not say otherwise, so consequently we understand that the verses are to be understood as written; the activities of the mishkan took place as soon as the various vessels were put into place.
Ramban, however, in his commentary on the Torah understands otherwise. He claims that it was not possible to use the mishkan until it was set up in its entirety. That is, none of the activities, such as the bread, the menorah or the sacrifices could actually take place until the entire mishkan, including the boards (which were the outer perimeter) and their coverings, were assembled. Only then could the mishkan enter into its intended purpose, which was avodat HaShem.
In the Talmud, it appears that a similar difference of opinion occurred between Rashi and his grandchildren, the Tosafot. In tractate Zevachim (60B), the text reads, “In two places, holy sacrifices may be eaten…before the Levites set up the mishkan, and after they take it down.” Rashi understands this to mean that before the Levites completely dis-assembled the mishkan, even if the perimeter had been removed, it was permissible to eat the sacrifices. Rashi (Zevachim 61A) also implies that as the mishkan was being assembled, and the altar was set up, it was permissible to offer and eat the sacrifices, even if the outer perimeter had not yet been built. Tosafot, however says that the sacrifices could only be eaten while the outer perimeter of the mishkan stood, since otherwise the requisite holiness of the mishkan was not present, and it was as if the sacrifices are being eaten outside of the mishkan (which is forbidden).
At first glance, this difference of opinion seems to correspond to the disagreement between Rashi and Ramban regarding the original use of the mishkan as it was established. Rashi in the Talmud, as well as in the Torah, seems to hold that as long as certain elements of the mishkan were in place, they could be used in service of G-d. Ramban, however seems to agree with the Tosafot, who hold that only when the mishkan was complete was it possible to use it for sacrifices, etc.
[At first glance, it appears that their argument is over what determines the holiness of the mishkan; according to Rashi, it is the altar, and therefore even if the outer perimeter is missing but the altar is in place, it is permitted to offer and eat the sacrifices. However, Tosafot seems to indicate that only when the outer perimeter is also standing does the mishkan retain its holiness. The implication according to Rashi is that the outer perimeter is only a sign of the boundaries of the mishkan, while according to Tosafot, it is an essential component and ingredient of the mishkan].
However, upon closer examination, we cannot say that the Talmud quoted above serves as the basis for Rashi’s stance regarding the original usage of the mishkan. For, although the Talmud may have permitted usage of the mishkan even when it is not fully assembled (because the outer perimeter had been removed, or not yet set up by the Levites), this was certainly not the optimum approach. Use of the mishkan before it was totally assembled may have been permissible, but that was only when there was no other choice. Certainly, the preferable method would be to wait until the entire mishkan was built, and then perform the sacrifices and other services in the most complete and perfect manner. This was especially true of the first days of the mishkan, when it was assembled, dis-assembled, and finally inaugurated on the first of Nissan. Even if Rashi held that it is permissible to use the mishkan when it is not fully assembled, this should not have taken place when the mishkan was inaugurated – that was the time to fully build and use the mishkan to its full perfection. Therefore, it is appropriate to try to understand Rashi based on a different foundation…
Another possible foundation upon which to understand Rashi is to examine his disagreement with the Ramban regarding the purpose of the seven days of assembling and taking apart the mishkan, before it was inaugurated on the first of Nissan. According to the Ramban, there are two steps to the inauguration of the mishkan. One is derived from the original command (Terumah 26:30), “and establish it up according to the commandment that I showed you on the mountain.” This command applies to the seven days during which the mishkan was assembled and taken apart every day. And a second command (beginning of Pekudei), “On the first month, on the first day, set it upŔ applies to the final day, on which the mishkan was set up permanently. Thus, the command comes to fruition in the process of setting up the mishkan, which takes place over a period of seven days. However, only on the final day is the mishkan assembled “for good,” permanently, so that it becomes possible to inaugurate it and for G-dliness to dwell within it. In other words, according to the Ramban, there was one mitzvah here, taking place over a period of a week and culminating in the inauguration.
Rashi, however looks at the process differently. He does not see a “lead-up” to the inauguration, but rather only a period of “practice,” during which the Jews assembled and then dis-assembled the mishkan in order to be ready for the “big day” – the inauguration in which it would be permanently established. In other words, the seven days of assembly and disassembly were not part of the mitzvah of “Make for me a mishkanŔ but were a matter of practicality; it was impossible to properly assemble the mishkan without first practicing the process. And then, once the Jews perfected the process, the mishkan was set up on the first of Nissan, and the inauguration took place.
It emerges, then, that for the Ramban, the inauguration was a week-long process that culminated with the final establishment of the mishkan on the eighth day. However, according to Rashi, the inauguration was a one-day affair. And therefore, on that one day, two events occurred; one, it was the end of the period of ‘practice’ that occurred during the previous seven days. As the culmination of the command, “Make for me a mishkanŔ sacrifices were offered, and the mishkan was assembled and inaugurated. And two, after the shechina dwelt in the mishkan (as a result of the sacrifices), the regular, every-day avoda of sacrifices began.
And quite possibly, this argument corresponds to their respective approaches regarding the vessels of the mishkan. The Ramban holds that the vessels were not an integral part of the mishkan (or the Temples). They were simply the “tools” and accoutrements that are necessary to facilitate the service of the mishkan. The fact that the Torah relates their function at this point of the narration is simply to tell us for what they will be used later. But, until the mishkan itself was fully built and functional (and inaugurated), it was not possible to perform any of the services that were performed in the mishkan. Only after the entire process was completed was it possible to use the vessels (the table, menorah, altar) of the mishkan, because then they were all ready (inaugurated) for service.
However, according to Rashi, the vessels of the mishkan were an integral part of the mishkan. They possessed the same holiness as did the mishkan itself, so that as they were placed in the mishkan, they were immediately ready for use. That is why Rashi held that the bread was placed on the table as soon as it was in the mishkan, and the menorah was prepared for kindling as soon as it was in place, and the altar was ready for sacrifices when it was in place, even though the outer perimeter was not yet built. Since the vessels possessed their own intrinsic holiness, they could be used even if the mishkan as a whole was not complete. However, they were not used immediately for their normal, everyday functions, because obviously that should only take place after the mishkan was completely built, with its outer perimeter. Rather, according to Rashi, first the inauguration of the mishkan had to occur, with its own set of rules and halachot (separate from those which governed “everyday usage”). And for that purpose it was necessary to describe the vessels and demonstrate how they were to be used immediately during the inauguration (which preceded everyday usage).
But, after all is said and done, why did the inauguration of the mishkan require a different set of rules than what followed; the everyday worship that took place with public sacrifices and private offerings? The answer is that the inauguration brought down a different sort of G-dliness into the world than did the subsequent “every-day” worship.
The command, “Make for Me a mishkan, and I will dwell among themŔ applies to all of the Temples. However, it first came to fruition in the building of the mishkan in the desert. So, even though the ultimate purpose was to build the Temples, and they were more fixed in place (in Jerusalem) than the mishkan (which traveled with the Jews from one locale to the next), nevertheless the fulfillment of the mitzvah came from the power of Moshe and his supervision of the building of the mishkan in the desert. Therefore, we may hypothesize that the inauguration of the mishkan that took place in the desert also had an effect on later generations – including on the holy Temples. That is, the inauguration of the mishkan that took place on the eighth day (Rosh Hodesh Nissan) was also the inauguration of the holy Temples, and all of their associated matters, that would be built generations later.
And regarding those Temples, the Rambam (Hilchot Beit Habechira 6:15) writes, “It is permissible to offer all of the sacrifices even though the Temple is not standing. And we eat from the holy offerings everywhere in the Temple courtyard, even though it is destroyed, and no longer surrounded by walls.” Although the Rambam wrote these words mainly regarding the “place” of the Temples, and not regarding their structures, nevertheless, it is quite possible that the structures themselves were permeated with the same holiness as the place. That is because Moshe’s involvement in the building of the mishkan imparted permanent holiness not only to the mishkan, but to the structures of the Temples as well. As known, all the construction that Moshe supervised and commanded was permanent, and was never destroyed nor fell into enemy hands. So, the initial inauguration of the mishkan was also the inauguration of the holy Temples that followed. And therefore, it was permissible (for the sake of inauguration) to eat from the holy sacrifices and to take part in the inauguration even though the structure was not yet fully completed.
To understand this better, consider that the order in which the mishkan was assembled, according to the verses in the Torah, was the opposite of the order it was commanded. Moshe, as Rashi mentioned in parshat Pekudei, first commanded the vessels to be built, and only afterward did he command the structure of the mishkan. And so occurred as well before the inauguration; the vessels (the table, the menorah, and the altars) were all in place before the conclusion of the building (with the placement of the separation curtain). However, Bezalel (the chief craftsman in charge of construction) told Moshe that “the way of the world is to first construct the building, and only afterward to make the vessels and place them within the building.” Moshe responded that in truth, Bezalel’s way was what he had heard directly from G-d. Moreover, that was the order of construction during the journeys in the desert; first, the structure was assembled, then afterward the vessels were placed within.
So, the question is, why did the vessels take such precedence during the inauguration of the mishkan, that they were ready to be used even before the building of the mishkan was complete? The answer is that the holiness that was accessed during the inauguration of the mishkan was of a different nature than that accessed during “every-day” events. In fact, it was just the opposite. While on a day-to-day basis, the order is “first the structure, and then the vessels,” when inaugurating the mishkan and the Temples, the order was “first the vessels, and then the structure.”
Normally, we want to approach life in a step-by-step fashion, building one success upon another, until we achieve a solid, unshakable foundation. This is the way of the world; first create the structure that shields and protects all that is within it, and then insert the contents. However, there are times when we have to do just the opposite, throwing all caution to the wind, and applying ourselves to a project even before we are sure that it is the proper thing to do. That usually occurs in the beginning of the project, when one person with vision and daring embarks on a path that no-one has tried before. As he throws himself into the project, he develops the tools even before he is sure that he has embarked on the right direction. That is, he puts in the “vessels” even before the structure is completed. But, in so doing, his superior vision and initiative may access a new level of success and pave a path for others, far into the future. Such was the way of the inauguration of the mishkan (and by extension, the Temples). By reversing the order, and emphasizing the vessels even before the structure was completed, the Jews brought down a higher level of holiness that propelled their spiritual exploits far into the future.
The same applies to Jewish education. Although normally (even according to Torah), the proper way is to educate a child step-by-step, building each level of his education upon previously learned principles, and adding details to his education only after instilling the general principles, sometimes it is necessary to reverse the order. Sometimes, it is necessary to skip the principles (the “structure”) and launch directly into the details (the “vessels”), even before the child has learned the necessary approach to absorb the details. This usually takes place at the beginning of a child’s education, when we want him to “dive” into his studies and to understand that even in such situations that he does not yet fully understand, the Torah wants him to behave in certain ways. And once that principle is instilled in him, he is able to continue his education in a normal fashion, from step to step. When from childhood he is imbued with the principle of “first we will do, then we will understand,” it guarantees that he will never leave the path of Torah and mitzvoth his entire life.
From biurim to Hilchot Beit Habechira, page 207, of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, ztz’l