A thought on Parshas Tetzave

"...orech he'chatzer meah ba'ama v'rochav chamishim ba'chamishim..." (27:18) "...the length of the Mishkan courtyard was 100 cubits and the width fifty in fifty..." The two parshios of Terumah and Tetzaveh introduce the structure and content of the Mishkan, the mobile shrine in the desert where our nation brought offerings to HaShem. We learn in these parshios about the architecture, the implements and ornaments, and the vestments which were involved in the services and rituals. We know that the Mishkan was a forerunner of the Mikdash which was later constructed in Israel, and for which we still pray today in anticipation of restoring the sacred avodah. As we learned last week, the Gan is of the opinion that having a Mishkan, and ultimately a Mikdash, was all part of "Plan A." Following the revelation at Sinai, the Jews were always intended and destined to congregate at a central place of worship (see earlier 15:17 where the Song at the Sea enunciates this). These holy places would always be part of our religious reality, whether in the desert, in Shiloh, in Nov, in Givon, and finally in Jerusalem. Our sages extrapolate from the details of the Mishkan and its contents to the broader and historically later advent of the Mikdash. Some of our verses here and last week which describe vestments and utensils, for example, are taken as the blueprints for constructing identical items once the Mikdash was established centuries later. This might imply that within the passages which define the Mishkan are allusions to the later emergence of the Mikdash. After all, it is one single "Plan." It would stand to reason that whereas the architecture differed in the Mishkan, in the Shrines of Shiloh, Nov and Givon, and in the Mikdash (the former used animal skins and trees, both living things, whereas the Mikdash was made out of stone, with no organic components, a topic for another discussion iyH), the ritual avodah was essentially the same and required similar altars, arks, tables, utensils and clothing. There was clearly a link between our parsha's topic of Mishkan and the much later topic of Mishkan. Does our parsha hint at this eventual Mikdash? The Gan finds such an allusion. In depicting the dimensions of the Desert Mishkan, the Torah describes its length, its breadth and its height in unequivocal measurements. There is one ambiguous phrase, however, In our verse, upon giving absolute measurements such as "100 cubits length" and "five cubits height", the verse says that its width was "fifty in fifty" (or fifty by fifty) without specifying that this was in cubits. Rashi and others go to significant lengths in helping us compute this numeric coupling of 50 in 50. The Gan offers another thought, citing an explanation which "HaRav Bechor Shor heard directly from his father." (We studied the Bechor Shor three years ago. He was Rabbeinu Yosef of Orleans. His father was Rabbeinu Yitzchak. It is fascinating that in the Bechor Shor's own commentary, there is no reference to this interpretation from his father!). Anyway, this is what the Gan tells us in his name: The courtyard of the great Mikdash in Jerusalem was massive. Its dimensions were a full 500 by 500 cubits. The Mishkan, in contrast, was 100 by 50. Now, what are the square cubits of the Mikdash? 250,000 square cubits. What were the square cubits of the Mishkan? 5000 square cubits. What is the ratio of 5000 to 250,000? The Gan relates that 5000 is one fiftieth of 250,000. This now explains the atypical numeric reference of our verse. By writing that the Mishkan was "fifty in fifty", the Torah is telling us that the Mishkan, which was a small precursor to the Mikdash, had dimensions which were a fiftieth of the Mikdash yet to come! With this perceptive calculation, the father of the Bechor Shor was able to make sense of words which might have seemed both redundant (fifty in fifty) and might have seemed insufficient (by omitting mention of amos or cubits).Instead, the measurement is in really a ratio of the size of the Mishkan relative to the size of the eventual Mikdash. Good Shabbos. D Fox

A Thought on Parshas Teruma

"...v'asu Li mikdash v'Shochanti b'tocham..." (25:8) "...and let them make Me a shrine and I will dwell within them..." Our parsha details the building of the Mishkan and the preparations to be undertaken in order to serve HaShem within it. After a number of architectural instructions, the Torah seems to pause and we read the above verse. This is a well-known, frequently quoted verse. It is absolutely clear: HaShem instructs us on the building of the mishkan, which comes from the word "shochen", which is to dwell in or to dwell near, and our verse then hints at the concept of HaShem's Divine Presence, known as the Shechina (which is from the same root, and means "that which dwells' or "the One Who resides"). When we read that "and I will dwell within them", we infer the notion of Shechina, that sense of HaShem's Presence which symbolically resides or dwells in that Mishkan. Now, many have noticed that the words say "I will dwell within them" rather than "within it." The subject of the verse is the Mishkan yet the focus shifts away from the singular "it" to the plural "them." Many suggest that the intention of the verse is to tell us that once there is a Mishkan, HaShem will have a "presence" among the Jews themselves. According to this, the verse intends that "we shall build a shrine so that HaShem will be among or within us." Now, before commenting about that further, let me introduce another point. When was our parsha given over? When were we instructed to build a Mishkan? Rashi and many early sources hold that the Mishkan was not "Plan A" in the "original scheme." Had we not erred after Sinai with the Golden Calf, we might not have needed a shrine or a place as a central location for Sacredness. Rather, HaShem would have been sensed by all of us as we retained the crown and glory of having been part of that great revelation. With the Egel, tragically, we forfeited our glory. We could no longer take for granted that each one of us or any of us had an intimate communion with the One Above. "Plan B" was to build a three dimensional place of centralized avoda. Through the agency of Mishkan, we could once again have a collective sense, at least, that HaShem was near to His people. However, there is a different opinion about the timing of Parshios Terumah and Tetzaveh. Some hold that Mishkan was always Plan A. We were commanded to prepare that Shrine while Moshe was still atop Sinai preparing to receive the Torah. This is not Rashi's view. This is the view, however, of the Gan. We were commanded about the Mishkan and the avoda as part of the follow-up to getting the Torah, not as a consequence of violating its rules at the Egel. Hence, the Gan does not view our verse as if HaShem is giving us the "consolation prize" of having a sense of Shechina at the collective national level (v'Shachanti b'tocham). That is not the intention of the term "dwelling among them." Rather, the Gan writes that up until Sinai, HaShem and the Torah dwelled apart from the material universe, where the Divine Presence is surrounded by His malachaim alone, the emanations of His Ratzon which are the energy to enact His will on earth and everywhere. With the giving of the Torah in a material form to be present in tangible form on Earth, the lower world now takes on a limited new role: there is a central Mishkan which houses the Torah. It is a miniature "Heaven." The role that the Jewish people now take on is to be the lower "malachim." On earth as on High, HaShem's messengers surround the "abode" of His sensed Presence and they surround the Torah too. There is only this "Plan A", which persisted throughout the existence of the Mishkan and the Bais HaMikdash. Our status, as people, as individuals, was transformed with the giving of the Torah. We now were to regard ourselves as HaShem's messengers. Just as the angels surround the higher representation of the Holy One Above, we who are His messengers below must surround the Torah and the Mikdash, enunciating its Divinity and protecting it. This is the meaning of "and I will dwell among them." HaShem's Divine Presence is sensed within us as long as we maintain our intended image as His malachim on Earth. Good Shabbos. D Fox The Gan was written by 13th century Rabbeinu Aharon ben Yosi haCohen, Baal Tosfos More pirushim presented by Rabbi Dr. Dovid Fox at http://thoughtonparsha.blogspot.com/

A Thought on Parshas Mishpatim

"..v'el atzilei Benei Yisroel lo shalach Yado va'yechzu es Ha'Elokim va'yochlu va'yishtu..." "...and against the great ones of the Children of Israel He did not stretch out His Hand and they gazed at HaShem and ate and drink..." (24:11) This verse is among the more mysterious ones in the Torah, in my mind at least. We have this virtually isolated reference to these " atzilei Benei Yisroel" - "the great Jews" - who seemed to have been eating near the base of the mountain during the time that the Torah was being given. Our verse ominously declares that HaShem did not punish them. As to who they were, what they were doing, why they were doing it and why we might have anticipated that they would be punished by Divine wrath, is not revealed. Something more awaits us within this verse, for which we must comb through our great mefarshim. The Gan offers an interpretation which provides a "spin" on our very understanding of the verse. We know that the event at Sinai - the moment when Shomayim appeared to make contact with Earth - was a point of revelation which the world had never experienced, and one which will never again occur. It was a moment of awe, of terror, of thrill, of ecstasy, of excitement and wonder! Mystic clouds, thundering clashes, flashes of light, Divine declarations which suspended time and altered consciousness - this was the spectacle of Matan Torah. People were reaching for the heavens and at the same time were petrified and faint with an unprecedented shuddering of the spirit. People were afraid of what they were experiencing, and trembling over what they were encountering. The Gan writes that amidst all of this intensity, there were people who, although they felt as if they were speeding upward in the ascendant fervor of the soul, also feared the inevitability of being damaged, or being deeply harmed by the pull of energy at the fibers of their beings. As Manoach cried ( Shoftim 13:22) , mos namus ki Elokim ra'inu - we are bound to die for we have envisioned HaShem! The human response to a rush of holiness can seem as if one is being drawn to the edge of mortality. A profound surge of kedush within the human being can draw the senses beyond the mind's limits. (There is ample description of this in other sources; those who are intrigued by this idea can contact me). The Gan then writes that once the people realized that they had survived this encounter with the Above, and that they were intact and functioning, once they could accept that they had experienced the Divine Presence of the Shechina yet were unharmed and whole, they exulted in joy and simcha. They celebrated that moment of insight, and of learning about their having the capacity to commune with Shomayim and to feel increased sanctity and spirit. They did what each of us would do upon making a seudas hoda'ah, or on celebrating a siyum, or attaining an auspicious goal in our ruchnius growth. They sat down and ate a festive meal in the service of HaShem. Once the body and mind have merged with their higher soul, mortal activities, such as eating and drinking, can become more than base activities. They can be elevated into acts of holiness, which is what we all try to aim for when we pray before eating and bring other elements of sanctity to the table. According to the Gan, our verse is transposed and means "the enlightened people held a feast in proclaiming that the body and mind had synthesized, and not dis-integrated, as they saw that being enveloped with kedusha brings awe but not terror and destruction." Good Shabbos. D Fox The Gan was written by 13th century Rabbeinu Aharon ben Yosi haCohen, Baal Tosfos More pirushim presented by Rabbi Dr. Dovid Fox at http://thoughtonparsha.blogspot.com/

A Thought on Parshas Yisro

"...Va'yidaber Elokim es kol ha'dvarim ha'eleh le'emor...." "...and the Lord spoke all of these words to be said..." (20:1) At the peak of Sinai, the words of the Torah were spoken by HaShem so that all of the Jewish nation could hear them. The opening line here, our verse, introduces the Torah as it was given to us at Sinai. At first glance, one might wonder why this introduction is needed... The Gan offers us a little anecdote. He says that he heard from the Master and Rabbi Avshorer the son of Rabbi Aharon of Vitry that there is a midrashic thought that anyone who answers "Amen ye'hae Shmae rabba me'vorach" with all his might is considered as if he became a partner in HaShem's creation of the universe. He is also regarded as having heard the Ten Commandments straight from HaShem at Sinai." (Amen ye'hae Shmae rabba me'vorach l'olam l'almae ul'maya translates as May His Great Name be eternally blessed). Rabbi Avshorer then mused: if one looks at that phrase, which is the response which we say to Kaddish during davening, we find 7 words and 28 letters. If we look at the first verse of Bereishis - where HaShem creates the universe - we also find 7 words and 28 letters. If we then look at our own verse above, it too has 7 words and 28 letters. This, he suggests, may be how the midrash knew to make this drasha: since we find identical numbers of letters and words in the Genesis and the Decalogue verses, then reciting the Kaddish response with fervor conjures up both of those sacred moments in history. A person's earnest declaration of HaShem's greatness and sovereignty during the Kaddish captures an echo of those epochal events, in the conceptual and quantitative aspects of its words. By calling out our conviction that HaShem's power and greatness are infinite and endless, we hint at His miracles of creation, and we hint at His manifest might of crashing through the firmament in making the Divine word tangible and accessible in the form of our holy Torah. The Gan then cautions that this idea would require that we in fact limit the "ye'hae Shmae" to 28 letters. In most versions of the Kaddish, there are 29 letters. He advocates our deleting a "vav" from the clause "u'l'almae ul'maya" (and forever and ever). He opines that we should instead say "l'almei ul'maya" - forever and ever. Some sources cite the "Shliach Tzibur of Troyes" as having used this nusach. Other Rishonim bring that practice as well. This week's thought from the Gan is not so much a commentary on a verse's meaning, but rather an insight into a deeper layer of latent meaning with which to embrace our own grasp of how we can appreciate a part of our daily davening. Good Shabbos. D Fox The Gan was written by 13th century Rabbeinu Aharon ben Yosi haCohen, Baal Tosfos More pirushim presented by Rabbi Dr. Dovid Fox at http://thoughtonparsha.blogspot.com/