Today's Learning Chullin 10:3--4 O.C. 497:9-11 Sponsored by Erachin 5 The Meth family in honor of Miri's birthday Alan & Paula Goldman in memory of Sam W. Goldman Hamaayan / The Torah Spring Edited by Shlomo Katz Pekudei Vol. XI, No. 23 (506) 6 Adar II 5757, March 15, 1997 This parashah concludes the Torah's description of the mishkan's construction. The parashah opens, "This is the mishkan, the mishkan of testimony . . . ," and the midrash asks on this, "Why is the mishkan mentioned twice here?" The midrash answers that the two mentions of the mishkan allude to the two Temples which were taken by G-d as a mashkon/collateral. In other words, our sins have caused us to be indebted to G-d, and he has taken our Temples from us until we repay the debt through repentance. However, says Rav Yitzchak Arieli z"l (mashgiach of Yeshivat Merkaz Harav; author of Enayim Lamishpat), we may be consoled by the fact that the Bet Hamikdash has only been taken as a pledge; it is not lost to us forever. To the contrary, the future Temple will be more spectacular than its predecessors, as G-d has promised through the prophet Yeshayah (60:17), "In place of bronze, I will bring gold; in place of iron, I will bring silver." So great is the Temple, says Rav Arieli, that in its own destruction it protects the Jewish people from being destroyed. G-d pours out His wrath on sticks and stones, rather than on His people. And, the ruins of the Bet Hamikdash are a symbol for the future rise of the Jewish people, as Rabbi Akiva said, "Just as I see that the prophecies of destruction were fulfilled, so I am sure that the prophecies of redemption will be fulfilled." (Midrash Ariel) ****************** "This is the mishkan, the mishkan of testimony . . ." (38:21) Rashi writes: "Why is the mishkan mentioned twice here? It alludes to the two Temples which were taken by G-d as a mashkon/collateral. What is the 'testimony' referred to? The mishkan testifies that G-d has forgiven the Jewish people for the sin of the golden calf, for He has rested His Shechinah among them." Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky z"l asks, "How can it be that the Temples which were destroyed were merely taken as collateral?" He explains this follows: At the time that the Jews donated their gold and silver to the mishkan, the war to conquer Eretz Yisrael still lay ahead of them. They might have said, 'How can we spend our money on the mishkan when we don't know what our future holds? If we must have a mishkan, let's build it out of bronze or clay!" But they didn't, and from this we see how important the mishkan was to them. When a person loses all of his money, he may raise money by selling his more luxurious possessions. However, a person will not sell the bare necessities which he owns; if he is short of cash, he will pawn those items or take a loan and give them as collateral. Thus, says Rav Kamenetsky, it cannot be that the Temple (the successor to the mishkan) has been "sold" permanently, for our ancestors viewed it as a necessity of life. Rather, G-d can only have taken it as collateral. And, the mishkan testifies that G-d has forgiven the Jewish people for the sin of the golden calf, for what was the cause of that sin? It was the fear of the unknown when the people thought that Moshe had died. Yet, despite the unknowns of the war ahead, the Jewish people showed their trust in Hashem by giving their gold and silver for the mishkan. Accordingly, they were forgiven. (Emet LeYaakov) ****************** Parashat Pekudei In Halachah - This parashah does not contain any of the Torah's 613 mitzvot. (Sefer Hachinuch) - "They hammered out the thin sheets of gold and cut threads to work the weavers craft into the techelet, into the purple, into the scarlet wool and into the linen." (39:3) Rambam writes, "The weaving of gold into the choshen and the ephod (two of the priestly garments) was done as follows: They would take one thread of pure gold and cable it with six threads of techelet. Similarly, they would cable one thread of gold with six of purple, one thread of gold with six of scarlet, and one thread of gold with six of linen. Thus, there were four threads of gold and 28 threads in all. (Hil. Klei Hamikdash 9:5) - "They wrote on it writing . . . 'Sanctified to G-d'." (39:30) Rav Moshe Sternbuch shlita quotes the Ba'alei Tosfot who ask: Why is this verse in plural? How could more than one person have written on the tiny tzitz/the kohen gadol's headband? They answer: Whenever the name of G-d is written, ten men must stand nearby. This applies as well to the writing of tefilin and mezuzot. Rav Sternbuch writes that this is a "chiddush" for which he could find no source. (Ta'am Vada'at) - "Moshe, Aharon and his sons washed their hands and feet from it." (40:31) Rabbi Yosi the son of Chaninah said: "Any kiyor/wash basin which does not have enough water in it to wash four kohanim, is not holy." He learns this from the above verse, which mentions four people. (Zevachim 21b; see Kessef Mishneh, Hil. Bi'at Hamikdash 5:13) The Chaftez Chaim writes: This obligation applies only when the kohanim begin washing. However, if the volume falls below the required level as a result of use, that is permitted. (Likutei Halachot: Zevach Todah) ****************** Rav David Friedman of Karlin z"l born 5588 (1828) - died 4 Adar 5675 (1915) Rav David'l Karliner was one of the leading poskim (halachic authorities) of his time. His opinion was sought on all of the leading questions of the age, including: whether sacrifices could be brought at the place of the Bet Hamikdash in the absence of the Temple structure; whether the land of Eretz Yisrael could be sold to non-Jews to avoid the prohibitions of the shemittah year; whether secular studies should be taught in Russian yeshivot; and whether changes advocated by certain French rabbis could be introduced into the marriage ceremony. Rav Chaim Brisker encouraged Rav David to speak out on the last issue, confident that once Rav David had done so, all those who uphold the Torah would follow his view. Before his marriage in 1846, Rav David was a student of Rav Zalman Rivlin of Shklov. Although Rav David was a child prodigy, he never stopped studying; even when he was in his seventies, he studied 18 hours each day, standing up. Neither did his dedication to learning waiver in the face of a Cossack invasion of Karlin in the early part of World War I. Yet, Rav David attested that he never had time to study the works of the Acharonim (scholars of the late 15th century onwards) because, he claimed humbly, he had not yet understood the Talmud with the commentaries of the Rishonim (11th-15th century scholars). Rav David was offered the chief rabbinates of prestigious cities such as Vilna and Minsk -- both of which had abolished the position of chief rabbi decades before -- but he declined. His preference was for a small town where he could devote his time to learning, except for the occasional halachic question. (At his death, Rav David left thousands of pages of halachic responsa.) Rav David's published works include Yad David on the laws of marriage and divorce, and She'elat David, a collection of a small fraction of his responsa. ****************** Donations to Hamaayan are tax-deductible