[Par-lite] for Parshat Pekudei - shiur

Wed Mar 2 16:29:29 EST 2011

**********************************************************
***

     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.]

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.atlchai.org/pipermail/par-lite/attachments/20110302/40c2bfab/attachment-0001.htm 