[Par-lite] for Parshat Pekudei

Thu Mar 12 03:33:28 EDT 2015

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

     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/20150312/c689e939/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: pkud1.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 37446 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.atlchai.org/pipermail/par-lite/attachments/20150312/c689e939/attachment-0001.pdf>