Parshat Pekudei 5778-'A Sforno to cherish'.

Speaker:
Date:
March 09 2018
Downloads:
0
Views:
69
Comments:
0
 


Parshat Pekudei-‘A Sforno to cherish’-Why the Mishkan was the holiest building we ever had.


אֵ֣לֶּה פְקוּדֵ֤י הַמִּשְׁכָּן֙ מִשְׁכַּ֣ן הָעֵדֻ֔ת אֲשֶׁ֥ר פֻּקַּ֖ד עַל־פִּ֣י מֹשֶׁ֑ה עֲבֹדַת֙ הַלְוִיִּ֔ם בְּיַד֙ אִֽיתָמָ֔ר בֶּֽן־אַהֲרֹ֖ן


 הַכֹּהֵֽן׃Rashi comments                                                                                                                               :


“These are the records of the Tabernacle, the Tabernacle of the Pact, which were drawn up at Moses’ bidding—the work of the Levites under the direction of Ithamar son of Aaron the priest.”


The Sforno(16th century Italian Rabbi) makes a different observation.We will quote his words in full, with the translation from sefaria.org


 


 


אלה פקודי המשכן כל אחד מחלקי המשכן הכתובים למעלה הם אותם הפקודים שנאמר


 עליהם ובשמות תפקדו את כלי משמרת משאם ביד איתמר. וזה כי כל אחד מהם היה ראוי להיות נחשב ולהקרא בשם באשר הוא זה הפרטי, לא בלבד באשר הוא מזה המין, וכל שכן שצדק זה על כל אחד מכלי הקדש אשר במשא בני קהת. ולזה לא נפסדו, כאמרם ז'ל שמא תאמר אבד סברם ובטל סכוין, תלמוד לומר עצי שטים עומדים שעומדים לעד ולעולמי עולמים וגם כן לא נפל דבר להם ביד האויבים, על הפך מה שקרה למקדש שלמה וכליו כמבואר בחרבן בית ראשון על ידי נבוזראדן, שלא נזכר שם דבר מעניני משכן משה רבנו ע'ה:


אלה פקודי המשכן, all the individual components described previously are the ones concerning which the Torah wrote ובשמות תפקדו את כלי משמרת הקדש...ביד איתמר, “you shall list by name the objects that are their porterage tasks.” (Numbers 4,32-33) The meaning of the line is that each and everyone of these items was important enough to be known by its specific name. In other words, one did not refer to it only by the name of the category of utensils it belonged to, such as “fork,” but one had a name for each fork. This method of naming each item individually contributed to their being of permanent significance. The Talmud Yuma 71 goes to the length of stating categorically that if anyone thought that once such a utensil had been “used up,” i.e. had outlived its usefulness it would be permanently consigned to oblivion this is not so. It will even resurface after the resurrection of the people who used it when they were alive. This is derived from Exodus 26,15 עצי שטים עומדים, the word עומדים being taken to mean that they will endure indefinitely. Neither will any of the utensils used in the Tabernacle fall into the hands of our enemies. This is the opposite of what happened to the “permanent” Temple, בית עולמים, built by Solomon. It is significant that in the account of what Nebuchadnezzar captured not a word is mentioned about a single item that used to be part of the Tabernacle in the desert.


2


משכן העדות ספר מעלות זה המשכן שבשבילם היה ראוי להיות נצחי ושלא ליפול ביד אויבים. ראשונה, שהיה משכן העדות, שהיו בו לוחות העדות. ב', אשר פקד על פי משה. ג', שהיתה עבודת הלויים ביד איתמר, כי אמנם משמרת כל חלקי המשכן ביד איתמר היתה. ד', ובצלאל בן אורי בן חור למטה יהודה עשה, שהיו ראשי אומני מלאכת המשכן וכליו, מיוחסים וצדיקים שבדור, ובכן שרתה שכינה במעשי ידיהם ולא נפל ביד אויבים. אבל מקדש שלמה שהיו עובדי המלאכה בו מצור, אף על פי ששרתה בו שכינה נפסדו חלקיו, והוצרך לחזק את בדק הבית ונפל בסוף הכל ביד אויבים. אבל בית שני שלא היה בו גם אחד מכל אלה התנאים לא שרתה בו שכינה ונפל ביד אויבים, כי אמנם בית שני לא היה משכן העדות, שלא היו בו לוחות העדות, ולא פוקד כי אם על פי כורש ולא היו שם בני לוי, כמו שהעיד עזרא באמרו ואבינה בעם ובכהנים, ומבני לוי לא מצאתי שם ומן המתעסקים בבנינו היו צידונים וצורים, כמבואר בספר עזרא:



משכן העדות, the Torah begins to list the many ways in which this Temple (Tabernacle) was superior to those that superseded it. Firstly, it was the משכן העדות, so named because the Tablets of the Testimony were deposited therein. Secondly, אשר פקד על פי משה, it had been put up at the command of Moses; thirdly, עבודת הלוים ביד איתמר, the entire service of the Levites had been entrusted to the illustrious Ittamar, son of Aaron. Fourthly, ובצלאל בן אורי בן חור למטה יהודה עשה, the divinely inspired Betzalel was its principal architect. In view of all the above advantages of this structure none of it fell into enemy hands.
By contrast, the Temple erected by Solomon, most of the work for which was performed by labourers from Tzor, even though the Shechinah came to rest on it, was eventually destroyed, all of it having been lost totally. The inferiority of that structure is evident from the fact that the building itself was in need of regular, almost annual, repairs, as we know from Kings II 22,5 The second Temple was so inferior that it could not even be called משכן העדות, the residence of the Testimony, the Tablets having long since been lost. Neither had it been established by G’d’s command but by a dream that a gentile named King Cyrus dreamed that it was his duty to build a temple to the G’d in heaven. Compare Ezra 8,15. Moreover, there were hardly any Levites that bothered to return to the land of Israel at the time to take part in that return to Zion. In addition to this, consider that among the people building this second Temple, there were also pagans called Tzidonim and Tzurim, as documented in the Book of Ezra.



כל הזהב העיד על קצבת הזהב והכסף והנחשת שנכנסה במלאכת המשכן שהיה דבר מועט מאד בערך אל העושר שהיה כבית ראשון כמבואר בספר מלכים ויותר ממנו העושר שהיה כבנין הורדוס (בסוטה פ' היה נוטל). ועם כל זה יותר התמיד מראה כבוד ה' במשכן של משה ממה שהתמיד במקדש ראשון, ולא נראה כלל במקדש שני. ובזה הורה שלא קצבת העושר וגודל הבנין יהיו סבה להשרות השכינה בישראל, אבל רוצה ה' את יריאיו ומעשיהם לשכנו בתוכם:



כל הזהב, the Torah testifies that the contributions of gold, silver, and copper for the building of the Tabernacle were miniscule in value when compared to the amount of such precious metals which were used in the building of Solomon’s Temple. We read there in Kings I 6, 20-35 and 7, 45-50 about the opulence of that structure. Compared to the restoration of the second Temple in the days of Herod, even Solomon’s Temple could be considered a poor attempt at impressing the world with the Jewish people’s wealth. Notwithstanding all the material wealth invested in both Solomon’s Temple and that of Herod, Moses’ Tabernacle, a collapsible structure, enjoyed far more of G’d’s presence than the Temple Solomon built, not to speak of the second Temple in which the Presence of G’d was never manifest. All of these historical facts teach us that material wealth, even if donated generously, is not a major factor in the success of a Temple dedicated to house the Presence of G’d on earth. G’d’s presence in such a Temple depends on His approval of the lifestyle of the Jews who have built such a Temple for Him.



The Seforno is dealing with the meaning of the word פְקוּדֵ֤י and unlike Rashi who explains this word as referring to the records/accounts of the Mishkan, Sforno explains that פְקוּדֵ֤י refers to the parts of the Mishkan which were specifically named and became special because of this naming (i.e the parts of the outer area of the Mishkan which were given a special status).He continues this theme of the specialness of the Mishkan by explaining its unique qualities.It was commanded through Moshe, which gave it a permanence that it would never be destroyed.It was built by Bezalel which imbued it with great holiness. The workers on the mishkan were all men of caliber(as opposed to Shlomo’s Temple which was built by non Jews from Lebanon).It was also under the control of the Levites. It also housed the 2 tablets which made it especially holy.This explains why the Mishkan was never lost at the time of destruction of the Temples, and we believe it is still in its pristine state and will be revealed to us at the time of the Messianic arrival. The Mishkan also did not exhibit the wealth as seen in both Shlomo’s Temple and later in the Temple of Herod(TB Bava Batra 4a). This proves that it is the mindset of holiness which will give it purpose and longevity and not just the level of donations to erect it in the first place.


A similar concept is found in the explanation of the Abarbanel on the verses at the beginning of ch.6 of Melachim Aleph. He shows that the Mishkan was the holiest of all our Temples and not , as we may think, the Temple of Shlomo.


The outcome of the comment of the Sforno is that our holy buildings are eternal when built with the holiest of intentions, more than with just a ‘large bank account’. This has explained to me why the famous yeshiva building of Chachmei Lublin in Poland still exists and was not destroyed by the Nazis, who destroyed most vestages of Jewish buildings in Poland. The holy enterprise of Rabbi Meir Shapiro was known to all and this gave the building its permanence to this very day.


‘This is a Sforno to cherish’ as Rabbi Bernstein zal explained and its lessons are even more important in our days, when we may have more means to make glorious edifices but when our intentions need to become pure and not self serving. A really major insight and guide for us all.


Shabbat Shalom          Cherry Hill/SCW                      5778/2018


Venue: Stern College Stern College

Parsha:

Description

A major comment of the Sforno explaining why the Mishkan will always remain our holiest edifice.

    More from this:
    Comments
    0 comments
    Leave a Comment
    Title:
    Comment:
    Anonymous: 

    Learning on the Marcos and Adina Katz YUTorah site is sponsored today by Judy & Mark Frankel & family l'ilui nishmos מרדכי בן הרב משה יהודה ע"ה and משה יהודה ז"ל בן מאיר אליהו ויהודית