Hamaayan/The Torah Spring Edited by Shlomo Katz Parashat Terumah Volume VII/Number 19 (306) 6 Adar 5753/February 27, 1993 On the Pasuk, "Speak to Bnei Yisrael and they shall take a 'Terumah' (donation) for Me" (25:2), Rashi comments, "'For Me' - for My name." Why, asks R' Eliyahu Lopian, zatzal (1872-1970); noted exponent of Mussar in England and Israel) must the Mitzvah of building the Mishkan be "l'Shmah" - with only the proper intentions - when in general we say, "One should always do Mitzvot, even if they are not l'Shmah, for he will eventually perform them l'Shmah"? The Mishkan was the place where Hashem would "reside" among Bnei Yisrael. To bring Hashem so close to us, we must direct our intentions to Him alone; any foreign thoughts would detract from the beauty of the "home" that we are building. This thought is expressed in Shir haShirim (3:9): "Shlomo made a palace from cedars of Lebanon, its pillars he made of silver, its bottom, gold, its interior was paved with love." It doesn't matter of what the outside is made, so long as the inside is full of love of Hashem. What was the most important part of the Mishkan? Chazal note that while the implements of the Mishkan, beginning with the "Aron haKodesh", are described by the Torah before the Mishkan itself, they were built in the reverse order. Betzalel (the chief artisan) said, "How can I build the implements if I have nowhere to put them?" Why then are they mentioned first? To teach us that the items inside the Mishkan are the whole structure's reason for being, and particularly, that the implement which holds the Torah is the most important. For this reason Ramban writes that donations to the Mishkan were to be made with the Aron haKodesh in mind. (Lev Eliyahu p.200) ************************************ The Midrash says: When Hashem gives, He gives according to His abilities, but when He requests from us, it is only according to our abilities. Hashem asked, for example, that we make Him a "home" of curtains (26:1), but in the future, He will make a home for each Tzadddik out of His clouds of glory. When Hashem wanted light He asked, "Take for Me some pure olive oil" (27:20), but when He gave light, "Hashem went before them....in a pillar of fire" (13:21). R' David Kronglas, zatzal (1910-1973; Mashgiach of Yeshiva Ner Israel in Baltimore) uses this Midrash to explain why Chazal so emphasized the great reward that awaits the tiniest Mitzvah, and conversely, the punishment in store for the seemingly most insignificant sin. We say that Hashem rewards and punishes "measure-for measure" but his can be misleading. A related expression says, "If you show Hashem your finger, He will show you His; show Him your hand, and He will show you His." Our fingers and Hashem's, however, are obviously not comparable. Chazal say, "If one purifies himself a little, Hashem will purify him a lot; if one defiles himself a little, Hashem will defile him a lot." Is that measure-for measure? Yes, because if we give a little of ours, Hashem gives a little of His, but that "little" is ever so much by our standards. (Sichot Chochmah u'Mussar p.6) ************************************ The Gemara says that even though two or more sages may disagree over a Halacha, "These and these are the words of the Living G-d" - each opinion has an application or use in some situation. How, however, can we understand the fact that the sages of the Talmud sometimes disagree about historical events or facts (e.g. the dispute in Shabbat 98a how the walls of the Mishkan were carried)? R' Yitzchak Hutner, zatzal (1904-1980) explains that just as in each period in history we have been without certain items - at some point the Luchot were hidden away, at some point the anointing oil was hidden away, etc - and we recognize that that is Hashem's desire, so, on occasion, knowledge that we used to have is hidden away, and we recognize that, at the moment, it is Hashem's desire that we do without it. If a historian would speculate about how the Mishkan was carried, he would either be right or wrong; not so a "Posek" (Halachic decisor) making the same speculation for purpose of determining a Halacha. If Hashem has chosen to make certain knowledge inaccessible, it must be His attention that the Halacha be decided without that knowledge, and thus, each sage's interpretation is the "Word of the Living G-d." (Pachad Yitzchak Igrot #30-B) ************************************ In explaining the internal structure of Sefer Sh'mot, Ramban writes that the building of the Mishkan was a continuation of the Exodus. Only after Hashem began to "reside" among Bnei Yisrael, did they truly return to the spiritual level of their ancestors before the enslavement in Egypt. Another part of that process of return was receiving the Torah, and indeed, says Ramban, the Mishkan was intended to recapture the closeness that existed between Hashem and Bnei Yisrael at Har Sinai. This being the case, says R' Mordechai Gifter, shlita (Telzer Rosh Yeshiva in Cleveland), it is apparent that the level of Torah study which we have now is not comparable to that of when the Mishkan and Bet haMikdash existed. We can thus understand the Gemara (Sanhedrin 97a) which says, "The world will exist for 6,000 years -- the middle 2,000 years are the era of Torah." Those two millennia actually stretched from the birth of Avraham until 172 years after the Second Temple's destruction, but this is consistent with what we have said above. First, since receiving the Torah and preserving that event through the Mishkan puts us on Avraham's level, it is appropriate that Avraham's life be included in the era of Torah. Also, for 172 years after the Temple's destruction, coinciding with the lives of the "Tannaim" - the authors of the Mishnah, there was still a faint glimmer of the Temple's "light" and the era of Torah still continued. During this period, the Oral Torah remained oral, just as if we were still at Har Sinai and could hear the Torah from Hashem's mouth. Once that link to Har Sinai faded away, however, the Torah could only be preserved if it was written. (Pirkei Mo'ed p.88) ************************************ Chazal criticize the princes of the twelve tribes for their laziness in not being among the first to bring donations to the Mishkan. We also learn, on the other hand, that the princes intentionally waited until the end so that they could make-up any deficiency in the collection for the Mishkan. There is no contradiction here, says R' Gedaliah Schorr, zatzal (1911-1979; Rosh Yeshiva of Torah Vodaath in Brooklyn). The princes thought that they had the best of intentions. Nevertheless, a person must always examine his motives to see whether, deep down, there is the slightest tinge of laziness. (Ohr Gedalyahu) ************************************ R' Zalman Sorotkin, zatzal (1881-1966; the "Lutzker Rav" and author of Ozna'im laTorah) writes: "I once went to Warsaw to speak on behalf of the Lithuanian Yeshivot. A newspaper editor who was present asked me, 'Why is R' Meir Shapiro [zatzal] able to raise so much money for the opulent Yeshiva building which he is constructing, when you cannot even feed the students in the existing Yeshivot?' "I answered him as follows: 'We read in the Torah that donations for the building of the Mishkan were only taken from those who volunteered (Sh'mot 25:2). For the maintenance of the Mishkan (e.g. the bringing of Korbanot), however, all Jews were taxed equally (30:15-16). Why? Because many people were eager to donate to the construction effort, thinking that they might be memorialized by a window or a wall of the Mishkan, but when it came to the maintenance of the Mishkan, i.e. the Korbanot which would be burnt or eaten, there would be no lasting remembrance, and hence, there are no donors. People therefore had to be taxed for the maintenance of the Mishkan. "'This way of thinking is, of course, backwards, for it confuses the means (the building) and the ends (the service of Hashem), but it exists nevertheless. The same is true of building and maintaining a Yeshiva, and I have no doubt that when R' Shapiro's building is finished, those donors will disappear.' "And so it was." (quoted in Yalkut Lekach Tov II p.180) ************************************ The learning schedule for this Shabbat is: Zavim 3:3-4:1 O.C. 559:3-5 Nedarim 12 Yerushalmi - Pe'ah 19 Rambam-Ch/Day: Hilchot Shekalim - Chapter 6 Rambam-3 Ch/Day: Hilchot Avodat Yom Hakipurim - Chs.4-5, Hilchot Meilah - Chapter 1. Sefer Hamitzvot Sh:P49,P118; Su:N113; M:N114; Tu:N114,P55,N115,N116; W:P57,P56,P58; Th:N125,N123,N128,N126,N127,N121,N122; F:N117,N119,N118,P53,P52 ************************************ The hard copy distribution of this weeks Hamaayan is sponsored by: Alan and Paula Goldman in memory of Sam W. Goldman Mr. and Mrs. Richard Weinstein in memory of father, Samuel Weinstein and grandmother, Florence Weinstein ************************************ Donations to Hamaayan are tax deductible