[Par-lite] Parshat Pekudei
Menachem Leibtag
tsc at bezeqint.net
Wed Mar 5 23:17:43 EST 2008
********************************************************
*****
THE TANACH STUDY CENTER [http://www.tanach.org]
In Memory of Rabbi Abraham Leibtag
Shiurim in Chumash & Navi by Menachem Leibtag
********************************************************
*****
PARSHAT PEKUDEI
Sefer Shmot ends triumphantly, with the Torah's
detail of
how the shechina returns to dwell upon the Mishkan.
Nonetheless, this conclusion seems to include a 'sour
note',
for it also informs us that Moshe Rabeinu was not able
to
enter the Mishkan! [See 40:34-35.]
Did something go wrong? Was Moshe unworthy?
To answer this question, this week's shiur examines
a
textual parallel that will not only highlight the
thematic
connection between the Mishkan and Har Sinai, but it
will also
help us understand the relationship between the books of
Shmot, Vayikra, and Bamidbar.
INTRODUCTION
A rather obvious parallel exists between the
concluding
five psukim of Sefer Shmot and Torah's description of
how
God's glory had descended upon Har Sinai, when Moshe
ascended
the mountain for the first forty days (see Shmot
24:12-18).
As Ramban explains (in his opening commentary to
Shmot
25:1), this parallel lends irrefutable support to our
understanding that a primary goal of the Mishkan was to
perpetuate the special relationship between God and His
people
that had reached its apex at Ma'amad Har Sinai.
However, when
comparing these two sets of psukim, there also appears
to be
some rather significant differences. Therefore, we
begin our
study by examining this parallel.
THE PARALLEL
The final chapter of Parshat Pekudei describes how
the
Mishkan is assembled for the very first time on the
first day
of Nissan (in the second year /see 40:1-33). Then, upon
the
completion of its assembly, the Torah informs us of what
happened:
"Then the anan (cloud) covered the ohel mo'ed, and
kvod
Hashem (God's glory) filled the Mishkan" (see 40:34).
Let's compare this pasuk with a very similar
description
of Moshe Rabeinu's ascent to Har Sinai (as described at
the
end of Parshat Mishpatim):
"And Moshe ascended the mountain and an anan covered
the
mountain, and kvod Hashem dwelled upon Har Sinai..."
(24:15-16).
[It is highly recommended that you compare these two
sets
of psukim in their original Hebrew.]
This obvious parallel highlights how the 'ohel
mo'ed' has
replaced 'the mountain' and, correspondingly, 'the
Mishkan'
has replaced 'Har Sinai.'
In essence, the Mishkan will now serve a similar
purpose
as Har Sinai, as both serve as a medium whereby Bnei
Yisrael
can 'encounter' the shechina.
Furthermore, as we discussed in our shiur on
Parshat
Tetzaveh, in both instances a completely 'direct'
encounter,
although desirable, is impossible. Therefore, Bnei
Yisrael
must be shielded from God's Presence by the 'anan'.
However, the next pasuk in each of these two
sources
seems to 'ruin' the completeness of this parallel. In
contast
to Har Sinai, where Moshe actually enters the anan, as
we are
told:
"And kvod Hashem dwelled on Har Sinai and the cloud
covered
it for six days, and God called to Moshe on the
seventh
day... and Moshe came inside the anan and ascended the
mountain" (24:16-18).
In Parshat Pekudei, we find that he cannot enter:
"And Moshe was unable to enter the ohel mo'ed, because
the
anan was dwelling upon it..."(40:35).
Certainly, had Sefer Shmot concluded with God
'calling'
upon Moshe to enter the Mishkan, just as He had 'called'
upon
him to enter the anan at Har Sinai, this parallel would
have
been complete; Yet, for some reason, Moshe cannot enter
the
Mishkan!
Has Moshe been demoted?
JUST TURN THE PAGE!
Even though there may be a temptation to search for
a
reason for Moshe's 'demotion' (possibly due to the
events of
"chet ha'gel"), the truth is that there is no
'demotion'. To
understand why, we simply need to 'turn the page', i.e.
to
read the opening pasuk of sefer Vayikra, where we find
the
precise pasuk that was 'missing' at the end of Sefer
Shmot:
"And [God] called out to Moshe, and God spoke to him
from
the ohel mo'ed saying..." (Vayikra 1:1).
In other words, God did call upon Moshe to enter
the
'anan' that covered the Mishkan (just as He had called
him at
Har Sinai) - and indeed - the parallel to Har Sinai is
complete!
[See commentaries of Ramban, Rashbam, & Ibn Ezra on
Shmot
40:35 and on Vayikra 1:1; as they explain these psukim
in a
similar manner!]
The following table illustrates how the opening
pasuk of
Sefer Vayikra actually belongs at the conclusion of
Sefer
Shmot:
HAR SINAI (24:15-18) MISHKAN (Shmot &
Vayikra)
================= =======================
the anan covers the har the anan covers the
Mishkan
kvod Hashem dwells upon it kvod Hashem fills Mishkan
Moshe must wait until called Moshe cannot enter (Shmot
40:35)
God calls Moshe ("vayikra el...") God calls Moshe
(Vayikra 1:1)
Moshe enters the anan & Moshe enters the Mishkan &
God speaks to Moshe God speaks to Moshe
Even though our parallel is complete, we now have a
new
problem, i.e. if the first pasuk of Vayikra actually
belongs
at the end of Sefer Shmot, why does the Torah begin a
new
sefer in the middle of a story?
To answer this question, we must carefully study
the
remaining psukim at the conclusion of Sefer Shmot.
A DOUBLE FINALE
Our understanding of Vayikra 1:1 as the logical
continuation of Shmot 40:34-35 works only if these
psukim had
indeed been the final psukim of the book. However,
Shmot
40:35 is not the end of Sefer Shmot! Rather, there
remain
three more psukim (i.e. 40:36-38), which appear to
'interrupt'
this logical progression. Let's read them:
"And when the anan lifted from the Mishkan, Bnei
Yisrael
would travel. If it would not lift, they would not
travel... For the anan was upon the Mishkan during
the day
and fire would appear in it by night, before the eyes
of
Bnei Yisrael throughout all their travels" (see
40:36-38).
Even though all five psukim (40:34-38) relate to
the
topic of the anan that covered the Mishkan, these last
three
psukim discuss a topic which is quite different than the
first
two. While the first two psukim discussed Moshe
entering the
Mishkan, the last three discuss the effect of this anan
on
Bnei Yisrael's journey through the desert.
In fact, when you read these five psukim, the
transition
from 40:35 to 40:36 is rather disjoint. And when you
consider
the logical flow from 30:35 to Vayikra 1:1 (as we
discussed
above), then these final psukim seem to form an
'interruption'.
Furthermore, these final three psukim not only
interrupt the
natural flow of topic, they also appear to belong
somewhere
else!
You may recall from Sefer Bamidbar that we find a
very
similar set of psukim in Parshat Beha'alotcha, when
theTorah
describes how Bnei Yisrael were supposed to travel in
the
desert:
"On the day that the Mishkan was set up, the anan
covered
the Mishkan... and in the evening it appeared as
fire... And
when the anan lifted from the ohel [mo'ed], then Bnei
Yisrael would travel, and at the place where the anan
rested
Bnei Yisrael would set up their camp... " (See
Bamidbar
9:15-23, compare with Shmot 40:17 & 40:34-38.)
Clearly, the opening pasuk (9:15) points us directly
to
Shmot chapter 40 - i.e. the assembly of the Mishkan and
the
'anan' etc. The psukim that follow describe how Bnei
Yisrael
were to travel, with almost the identical words that we
find
at the conclusion of Sefer Shmot. Note as well how the
next
chapter in Sefer Bamidbar (i.e. 10:1-36) narrates Bnei
Yisrael's actual departure from Har Sinai.
Thus, the three final psukim of sefer Shmot clearly
'belong'
in Sefer Bamidbar, as one of the primary themes of that
book
is Bnei Yisrael's journey through the desert as they
depart
Har Sinai.
Now, we must explain why they are recorded
'prematurely'
at the conclusion of Sefer Shmot.
TWO POINTERS
Note how our analysis thus far has shown that the
final
five psukim of sefer Shmot divide into two distinct
topics,
each of which points us to a different book of the
Bible:
(A) 40:34-35 describes the anan dwelling upon the
Mishkan,
and continues directly into Sefer Vayikra;
(B) 40:36-38 describes how Bnei Yisrael journey
through the
desert in accordance with this anan, and continues
directly
into Sefer Bamidbar.
A very interesting structure emerges from this
analysis.
Sefer Shmot concludes with two 'pointers': one to sefer
Vayikra (A) and one to sefer Bamidbar (B)!
This 'double pointer' may be significant as it
highlights
the return to God's original plan after the Exodus,
despite
the events of "chet ha'egel".
Recall the 'double purpose' of Yetziat Mitzraim, as
discussed in our shiur on Parshat Shmot (re: God's
hitgalut at
the 'burning bush'):
(A) - For Bnei Yisrael to receive the Torah at Har
Sinai
and
(B) - to travel to (& conquer) the Promised Land.
As the events of chet ha-egel constituted a breach
in the
covenant between God and His People at Har Sinai, God
consequently threatened to break His end of the deal,
consequently taking His shechina away from the people
(see
Shmot 33:1-7). Had it not been for Moshe Rabeinu's
intervention (see 33:12-17), Bnei Yisrael would not have
received the remaining mitzvot [A], nor would they have
been
worthy of God's direct assistance in conquering the Land
[B]
(see 33:1-7 and our shiur on Parshat Ki Tisa).
Now that Bnei Yisrael have built the Mishkan and
God's
shechina has indeed returned, God once again commits
Himself,
as it were, to both elements of His original plan:
(A) In Sefer Vayikra, Bnei Yisrael continue to receive
the
special mitzvot that will reflect their special level
of
kedusha;
(B) In Sefer Bamidbar, Bnei Yisrael begin their travel
towards the Promised Land, accompanied by God's
shechina.
The shechina's 'dwelling' upon the Mishkan thus
yields a
dual effect, reflected in the distinct themes of Vayikra
and
Bamidbar:
(A) First and foremost, it affects the Mishkan
itself, as
explained and elaborated upon at length in sefer
Vayikra.
The Shechina's dwelling upon the Mishkan allows man to
approach God and offer korbanot (Vayikra / Tzav);
forbids
one's entry into the Mishkan when one is 'tamei'
(Shmini,
Tazri'a, Metzora); demands a special kapara
(atonement)
ritual every Yom Kippur and forbids the offering of
korbanot
outside the Mishkan (Acharei-Mot). Finally, this
'kedusha'
emanates into all three realms of existence: 'kedushat
adam'
(Kedoshim), 'kedushat zman' (Emor) and 'kedushat
makom'
(Behar).
[Iy"h, we'll discuss all this in our shiurim on
Vayikra.]
(B) Secondly, it affects the 'machaneh' - the camp of
Israel, as reflected in sefer Bamidbar. The presence
of the
Shechina raises the entire camp of Israel to a higher
level,
as God travels, as it were, with them. The camp is
arranged
in a formation that surrounds the Mishkan (as
described in
parshiot Bamidbar and Naso), and Bnei Yisrael travel
through
the desert following the anan over the Mishkan
(Beha'alotcha). Had Bnei Yisrael not sinned, Sefer
Bamidbar
would have concluded with the story of their conquest
of the
Land (Matot, Mas'ei). Instead, it explains why that
generation didn't enter the land (Shlach, Korach), as
well
as the events of the fortieth year (Balak, Pinchas).
In this manner, the triumphant conclusion of Sefer
Shmot
thematically points us in two directions: one - to the
laws of
Sefer Vayikra, and two - to Bnei Yisrael's journey in
Sefer
Bamidbar.
ONE DAY IN THREE BOOKS
This interpretation can also help us appreciate why
the
events that transpired on the first of Nissan, the day
when
the Mishkan was first erected, are detailed in three
different
books instead of just one.
(1) In Sefer Shmot (40:1-35), we find the commandment
to
assemble the Mishkan on the first of Nissan, and the
details
of how it was assembled on that day.
These details are found in Sefer Shmot, for they
conclude
the topic of building the Mishkan, as discussed in
Parshiot
Teruma, Tetzaveh & Vayakhel. Furthermore, Shmot
concludes
by describing how the shechina returned to the Mishkan
on
that day, signaling the its return despite the events
of
chet ha-egel, as discussed in Parshat Ki Tisa.
(2) In Sefer Vayikra we find the details of the
special
korbanot offered on yom ha-shmini, and the tragic
event
which occurred on that day - the death of Nadav and
Avihu.
[See 9:1 thru 10:7.] According to most commentators,
that
day coincides with the first of Nissan.
As those events, as well as those special korbanot
offered on that day, directly relate to many of the
mitzvot
found in Sefer Vayikra, the narrative of those events
is
recorded intentionally and specifically in Sefer
Vayikra.
(3) In Sefer Bamidbar (7:1-89), we find the story of
the
special gift brought by the nesi'im [the tribal
leaders] to
the Mishkan on the day of its dedication - six wagons
and
twelve oxen (see 7:1-4). As these wagons were used by
the
Levites to transport the Mishkan during their travel
through
the desert to the Land of Israel, this account appears
in
Sefer Bamidbar - the book that describes how Bnei
Yisrael
traveled thru the desert.
Hence, although all of these events took place on
the
same day - the first of Nissan, the Torah prefers to
record
them in three different books, corresponding to the
theme of
each sefer.
We will iy"h return to this theme in our study of
both
sefer Vayikra and sefer Bamidbar.
Till then,
shabbat shalom
menachem
=================
FOR FURTHER IYUN
A. Note the importance of the date of the first of
Nissan in
Shmot chapter 40. Relate God's selection and
designation of
this date to Parshat ha-chodesh / Shmot 12:1-20. Relate
this
as well to the importance of this date in Divrei
Ha-yamim II
29:1-17.
B. Relate the main points of the above shiur to Shmot
29:45-
46, specifically relating to the question if the purpose
of
Yetziat Mitzraim was to worship God in the desert or to
inherit the Promised Land / see also Shmot 3:6-12.
[Relate
your answer as well to the main point of our shiur on
Parshat
Tetzaveh.]
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.21.4/1313 -
Release Date: 3/5/2008 9:50 AM
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: pkud1.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 37446 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.atlchai.org/pipermail/par-lite/attachments/20080305/01416239/attachment-0001.pdf
More information about the Par-lite
mailing list