Parshat Terumah 5778-who has the obligation to build the mishkan/Temple?

On the beginning of this week’s parsha, there is a well-known question:

ב  דַּבֵּר אֶל-בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, וְיִקְחוּ-לִי תְּרוּמָה:  מֵאֵת כָּל-אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר יִדְּבֶנּוּ לִבּוֹ, תִּקְחוּ אֶת-תְּרוּמָתִי.

2 'Speak unto the children of Israel, that they take for Me an offering; of every man whose heart maketh him willing ye shall take My offering

The mitzvah of giving the offering is expressed as an act of ‘taking’ and not giving. Why is this strange turn of phrase used here?

The well known answer is given by a number of mefarshim , that every act of giving to God is really an act of receiving. The proof comes from the Talmudic discussion of the ‘adam chashuv’-‘an important man’, who is betrothing a woman in marriage. When she gives him(instead of him giving her) an item of worth, by the fact that he receives it from, her he has, in fact, given her something as well, that is, the pleasure of receiving her gift (such as giving a gift to the Queen of England).In the same way, when we give something to God by donation to the mishkan, we are in fact receiving the pleasure from God in that He receives our donation. This act of giving does become an act of ‘taking’ and this explains the use of the term וְיִקְחוּ-לִי in the parsha. A similar observation is made on the words וְנָתְנוּ אִישׁ כֹּפֶר נַפְשׁוֹ where the word וְנָתְנוּ is a palindrome-read the same both forwards and backwards. This also implies that every act of giving can be seen as an act of receiving, by reading the word in reverse, to show that giving to God is really receiving from God at the same time.

A completely different approach to the original question is found in the writings of the Griz Halevi(R’ Velvel Soloveichik.d.1958 in Israel).He examines the obligation to build the mishkan and wants to understand upon whom this mitzvah devolves. R’Velvel says that both the Gemara and Rishonim establish that the mishkan building and all the appurtenances must come from communal funds. Even if a single individual sanctified an article for use in the mishkan it cannot be used, as it lacks the quality of being communal. He must present it to the community to become communal property and only then can it be used in the Temple. Therefore we now understand the command of: וְיִקְחוּ-לִי תְּרוּמָה: as this instruction is directed to the representatives of the community, to take the offerings from all the individuals and turn the offerings into communal property which can then be used in the mishkan. This idea can be seen clearly at the beginning of parshat Vayakhel:  קְחוּ מֵאִתְּכֶם תְּרוּמָה which is the command to the representatives of the community to take the donations and make them communal property to then be used in the mishkan.

R’Velvel adds a further comment. The instruction for the community representatives to take the donations is written in the imperative: וְיִקְחוּ-לִי תְּרוּמָהmeaning that ‘you have the command to take these items’ as an imperative. For the individual the term used is:

 מֵאֵת כָּל-אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר יִדְּבֶנּוּ לִבּוֹ  meaning that if you want to give ,you can do so but this is all voluntary. However for the community this becomes an imperative: you must take the money so as to be able to build the mishkan as a communal building. The Rambam (end of Mitzva #10 in sefer Hamitzvot) makes it very clear that there is no duty on the individual to build a Temple, it is not one of his/her personal obligations. The half shekel which was collected from each person was for the upkeep of the Temple and became a personal obligation(see below) whereas building the mishkan is a communal obligation.

During the 1920’s there was an emergency meeting of the heads of the yeshivot in E.Europe to discuss the terrible financial plight of these institutions. At this time R’Meir Shapiro zal (d.1934.Poland) was collecting an enormous sum for the new Chachmei Lublin yeshiva. At the meeting R’Zalman Sorotzkin zal(author of Oznaim Latorah;d.1965 in Israel) was asked by a journalist why the money from R’Shapiro’s project was not being used for the yeshivot to stop them collapsing. Why put all the money into the new yeshiva building? R.Sorotzkin answered by highlighting the building campaign of the mishkan. It says that more than enough was donated. Why tell us this information? He answers by saying that to build buildings there will always be donors (to put the plaque on the wall etc).However to find upkeep for the yeshivot is much more challenging and even R’ Meir Shapiro will find the upkeep of the new yeshiva much more difficult to find. This is also reflected in the law(see Rashi ch.25 v,3 explaining the 3 types of half shekel donation) that the half shekel for buying sacrifices was obligatory whereas the half shekel that went to the building of the mishkan was voluntary. ‘To build a building there will always be donors but to provide the sacrifices on a daily basis is made into an obligation, otherwise it will be difficult to find volunteers to donate the daily upkeep of the mishkan.’

It is told of Joseph Tennebaum(Canadian builder) who was a major donor to the yeshivot in Israel in the 70’s and 80’s, that he gave the money with one proviso, that his name appear on the building. However this was not, as we suggested before (which is still to be praised even if done ‘shelo lishma’). He was hoping that one day a grandchild, who may not be religious, would be in Jerusalem and see the family name on the yeshiva building, he would be curious and enter the building and may become connected to Judaism from this simple gesture.

There are all types of givers and the communal projects, especially in building new communities cannot be underestimated. However our challenge is to go beyond the communal activity and become the supporter who makes sure that the yeshiva/synagogue continues to run on a day to day basis. This combination of donation types would then truly reflect the original project of building  the mishkan (and eventually the Temple), for which the Jewish people became so energized and inspired . My we see this happen again speedily in our days.

Rabbi Ian Shaffer        Cherry Hill NJ/SCW  5758