 |
|
|
Surf A Little Torah PARASHAT TERUMA by Rav David Silverberg
"Mi-shenikhnas Adar marbim be-simcha" - When Adar arrives, we increase our joy. This may be among the most widely-known halakhot related to Purim, one which many of us have been singing since kindergarten. Allow me, however, to ask a somewhat shocking question: is this really the halakha? What? Of course this is the halakha - we must rejoice when Adar arrives! Surprisingly, neither the Rambam nor the Shulchan Arukh (including the Rema) codify this law, which originates in the Gemara (Masekhet Ta'anit 29b). This halakha is cited as authoritative law only by later poskim, perhaps most notably the Chofetz Chaim, in his Mishna Berura (686:8). Several authorities before the Chafetz Chayim - including Rav Yaakov Emden (She'eilat Yabetz 88) and the Eliyahu Rabba - also assume this principle to be binding. Significantly, however, one prominent 18th-century authority maintained that normative halakha does not follow this view that we must begin rejoicing with the onset of Adar. The Chatam Sofer (O.C. 160) views this law's absence from the Rambam and the Shulchan Arukh as an indication that they did not view it as authoritative. What more, both the Rambam and the Shulchan Arukh do include in their respective codes the summertime inverse of this halakha: "When Av arrives, we decrease our joy" (see Shulchan Arukh, O.C. 551:1). In fact, the law regarding Adar appears in the Gemara as a statement by Rav that reads as follows: "Just as when Av arrives we decrease our joy, so, too, when Adar arrives we increase our joy." This formulation would suggest that the two provisions are mutually dependent. Yet, the Rambam and Shulchan Arukh specifically codify one while omitting the other! Apparently, concludes the Chatam Sofer, the halakha regarding Av is binding, while that relating to Adar is not. (His explanation as to the basis for this differentiation lies beyond the scope of our discussion.) In any event, it seems that common practice has adopted the Mishna Berura's position, that we must indeed increase our joy beginning from today, the first day of Adar. The "Nimukei Orach Chayim" attributes this halakha's absence from the aforementioned codes to its subjective nature. As opposed to the mitigated joy of Av, which halakha has defined in very specific terms, the required joy in Adar must be expressed by each person according to his personal tastes; everyone must find the means of expressing this joy that best suits him. Whereas the Rambam and Shulchan Arukh present only specific guidelines and avoid generalities, they omitted this halakha. This omission does not, claims the Nimukei Orach Chayim, undermine its authoritativeness. ***** The Midrash Ha-gadol relates that the "nesi'im," the twelve tribal leaders of Benei Yisrael, approached Moshe and suggested that only they supply the materials for the building of the mishkan. Rather than appealing to the nation at large for donations, this privilege should be reserved for the aristocracy. Moshe responded that God specifically called for the participation of the entire nation in this campaign, as the second verse of Parashat Teruma says: "you shall accept gifts for Me from every person whose heart so moves him" (25:2). The leaders' request and Moshe's response represent an important principle regarding the Torah's attitude towards "sanctity." Namely, the mishkan - the sacred quality of Am Yisrael, emanates from the entirety of the nation. Each individual plays a critical, indispensable role; no one can leave spirituality to others. The entire nation must take part in the construction of the mishkan, in the formation of a higher moral and religious standard that is our collective duty. Although we certainly need leaders to guide, teach, instruct and set an example, they serve primarily to help the rest of us fulfill our responsibilities. At first glance, the tribal leaders posed a valid argument: should not a structure such as the mishkan, the source of God's revelation in the world and His representative abode, the holiest site on earth and the point to where all prayers will be directed, be reserved for the nation's elite? Should all of Benei Yisrael earn an equal share in the establishment of the representation of the residence of the "Shekhina"? To this Moshe responds, "from every person whose heart so moves him." The Torah does not address itself to one segment of the population or the other. It applies equally to each and every member of Am Yisrael, to everyone "whose heart moves him," who is driven by the sincere desire to accept upon himself the yoke of Torah and enhance his relationship with the Almighty. ***** Parashat Teruma begins with the instructions regarding the fashioning of the items to be placed inside the mishkan (Tabernacle): the aron (ark), shulkhan (show-bread table) and menorah. (The golden altar, which is likewise placed inside the mishkan, is introduced later, in Parashat Tetzaveh. For an explanation, see Rabbi Leibtag's shiur on Parashat Tetzaveh in the "Tanach Study Center" - www.tsc.org.) The Torah then describes the structure of the Tabernacle itself, following which it presents the layout of the accessories inside the mishkan. This section concludes with the following verse: "Place the table outside the curtain, and the menorah by the south wall of the Tabernacle opposite the table, which is to be placed by the north wall" (26:35). The final words of this verse seem a bit redundant. Once we learn that the menorah is placed on the south wall opposite the table, we do not need an advanced architectural degree to figure out that the table sits on the northern wall! Why must the Torah emphasize the directional location of the show-bread table? One answer suggested resorts to the system of symbolism often employed by Midrashim and "darshanim" to uncover the meaning behind the structural details in the mishkan. It is commonly understood that the menorah represents the Torah, whose light must guide us as we perform our religious service, while the table, which contains the show-bread, symbolizes "parnasa" - livelihood and sustenance. Now the aforementioned verse makes it clear that the builders of the mishkan must bring the table into the mishkan before the menora. On the symbolic level, then, we learn that one's first concern must relate to the securhing of a livelihood for himself and his family. This is echoed by the well-known mishna in Pirkei Avot, "If there is no flour, there is no Torah." Without the basic means of survival, no spiritual achievement is possible. After establishing a source of livelihood, however, one must bring into his mishkan the menorah - the Torah by which he must lead his life. As the aforementioned mishna continues, "If there is no Torah, there is no flour." Such an arrangement may, however, give rise to the mistaken notion that this sequence establishes an objective and absolute hierarchy of priorities: sustenance is more important than spirituality. To negate such a impression, the Torah emphasizes the table's subordination to the menorah: the shulkhan is located on the north. Meaning, although one must first ensure a livelihood before engaging in Torah study, as the latter cannot occur without the former, nevertheless the significance of the "table" is measured only by the extent to which it serves the "menorah." We must always consider the table's location in the mishkan only in terms of its position with respect to the menorah. The table comes first, but it cannot be last: livelihood must be followed with Torah. So must we construct our own, personal "Tabernacles." Our "tables" must indeed contain sufficient "show-bread" to sustain ourselves and our families. But the importance of these "tables" lies solely in their position vis-א-vis our "menorahs," to what extent our earnings help facilitate further growth in Torah knowledge and observan. ***** Among the most popular customs related to Purim (that are not strictly required by halakha) is dressing up in costumes. Whereas "minhag Yisrael Torah" - the accepted practices among the Jewish people are considered "Torah," we must understand the underlying reason behind this custom and its connection to the theme of Purim. One common explanation relates to the general theme of "appearance versus reality" that in a certain sense comprises the central religious message of this festival. One who reads the Megilla without a spiritually attentive mindset, as one would read a novel or history book, would not automatically associate the story with any religious meaning. After all, the book tells of a nation that was to have been destroyed but was ultimately spared by a rather humorous and bizarre coincidence. Not to mention the fact that God's Name appears nowhere in the Megilla, and nowhere therein do we find any reference to His having orchestrated the sequence of events. The agnostic could easily argue (incorrectly, of course, for a believing Jew) for God's total absence from this incident, as Ester rose to royalty well before Haman ever decided to harm the Jewish people. Needless to say, herein lies perhaps the fundamental message of Purim: God often - or generally - works behind the scenes. What appears as happenstance, as a meaningless story of a drunkard king who executes his queen due to a fallout at an orgy, in fact evolved directly from God's master plan for the salvation of the Jewish people. Behind the mask of history and mundane events there is an all-powerful God who keeps a careful, watchful eye over the world at large and His people in particular. We commemorate this discrepancy between the apparent and the actual by hiding our faces behind masks on Purim day. Another explanation offered for this custom points to the specific evolution of the Jews over the course of the Megilla as its source. Chazal attribute the decree of destruction during Mordekhai's time to the Jews having become assimilated in Shushan and lax in mitzva observance. Their repentance after the issuance of the decree, however, revealed the inner spiritual strength that was simply hidden behind a veil of religious indifference and neglect. All throughout, Benei Yisrael's hearts remained steadfastly devoted to God and His Torah. This internal resolve was faded by the external temptations of the affluent, gluttonous culture of the society around them. In this sense, then, Purim teaches us of the remarkable power latent within the heart and soul of each and every member of Kelal Yisrael. Behind the mask of secularism and religious apathy there lies a strong desire for closeness with the Creator, a powerful drive to adhere to God's Word. In commemoration, we hind our true selves behind some alien mask, showing that what we see in other people does not always accurately reflect their true interior. ***** Parashat Teruma introduces the mitzva of building a "Mikdash," a Temple, an obligation listed by the Rambam as others as one of the 613 commandments (see Rambam, beginning of Hilkhot Bet Habechira). Over the next few days we will address the following question: does this mitzva apply nowadays? In other words, should political issues somehow be resolved such that Am Yisrael enjoys true, unrestrained sovereignty over the Temple Mount, would the mitzva of building the Temple apply? Our basic premise is that each of the 613 remains eternally binding upon the Jewish people unless an inherent stipulation for its application or practical circumstances warrant otherwise. Therefore, we shall assume that this mitzva of building the Mikdash remains in force unless negated by either a condition latent within the legal rubric of the obligation or impracticality. We will therefore explore different possible factors that would perhaps render this mitzva either functionally or fundamentally obsolete nowadays, even should the political obstacles be removed. The issue we will examine today relates to whether or not Benei Yisrael themselves bear the responsibility of building the third Temple. Based on the Midrash Tanchuma, Rashi in Masekhet Rosh Hashana 30a and Masekhet Sukka 40a claims that the third Temple will descend from the heavens in the form of a fiery edifice; the Jewish people will take no active role in its construction. A similar impression emerges from the "nachem" prayer recited during the mincha service on Tisha B'Av: "For You, God, have ignited it [the Temple] with fire, and with fire You will, in the future, build it." Apparently, then, the obligation of building the Mikdash applied only to the first two Temples; regarding the third, we are obligated only to render ourselves worthy of its reconstruction, but not to actually participate therein. One may, however, wish to refute this argument by reinterpreting the concept of God's construction of the Mikdash. First and foremost, the Arukh La-ner in Masekhet Sukka explains the descent of the heavenly Temple as allegorical for God's infusion of His Shekhina into the man-made Temple. Meaning, Benei Yisrael will themselves construct the third Bet Ha-mikdash, just as we built the first two. Our efforts will thereafter be graced by the metaphoric residence of God's Shechina, symbolized in Midrashic terms by the heavenly Temple of fire. (See Rav J. David Bleich's thorough treatment of this topic in Hamaayan, Tishrei 5730.) Along similar lines only with a different twist, Rav Yechiel Michel Tuketchinsky claims that the heavenly Mikdash represents divine assistance in the building. Our initiative in the building of the third Temple will be rewarded by God's intervention on our behalf to ensure the success of our endeavor. Interestingly, his explanation of this Midrash actually transforms it into a counter-proof: only after Benei Yisrael's initiative in the building process will we earn God's help. We will iy"H look more at this issue tomorrow. ***** As the weekly Torah reading shifts its focus onto the construction of the mishkan, we began yesterday discussing the possible contemporary application of the commandment to build a Mikdash. We encountered a couple of sources indicating that God Himself will build the third Temple, rather than man, which would apparently imply that this mitzva does not apply to the construction of the third Mikdash. Yesterday we saw two ways of negating this proof, and today we present a third. Rav Shabtai Rappaport associates God's role in the construction of the third and final Temple with prophecy. Based on an earlier source, Rav Shabtai maintains that the third Temple will and must be built by Benei Yisrael themselves. However, this construction will necessitate somewhat speculative assumptions regarding the dimensions and precise location of the structure and its accessories. The Almighty will therefore send us a "fiery Temple from the heavens," meaning, through prophecy He will settle all disputes in this regard. Whereas until now we have dealt with the refutations of possible proofs for God's exclusive role in building the third Mikdash, we will now raise a possible proof to the contrary. The prophet Yechezkel devotes a good deal of space in his sefer to outlining the dimensions of the third and final Mikdash. Rashi, in his commentary to Yechezkel 43:11, writes that God conveyed these prophecies specifically to inform the nation as to how to build the third Temple when the time arrives. Apparently, the Jews must themselves initiate the construction, rather than waiting for God to send one down from the skies. Rav Shlomo Yosef Zevin, however, rejects this proof by introducing an important distinction regarding the construction of the final Temple. The Gemara (Sanhedrin 98a) describes two scenarios for the unfolding of the final redemption: should Benei Yisrael earn redemption, it could arrive at any moment; otherwise, there is a final point at which it will unfold even should the Jewish people remain undeserving therefor. Rav Zevin cites the "Barukh Ta'am" who extends this distinction to the construction of the Temple: in the firscenario, in which Am Yisrael earns redemption, the Almighty will provide a ready-to-use Temple straight from the heavens. If, however, we are unworthy and the redemption unfolds by virtue of its time having arrived nonetheless, then we will have to roll up our sleeves and build the Temple ourselves. Thus, argues Rav Zevin, the prophet presents us with the architectural plans of the final Mikdash for the unfortunate case of Benei Yisrael having to build the Temple themselves. Ideally, however, God will exempt us from this responsibility. If this is correct, then we are left with a rather complex answer to our original question: does the mitzva of building a Mikdash apply nowadays? According to Rav Zevin, it all depends on our worthiness: if we are deserving, the mitzva does not apply; otherwise it does. Tomorrow we will look at other factors that may render this mitzva practically inapplicable in modern times. ***** Today we will continue our discussion as to whether or not the obligation to build a Mikdash would apply nowadays should the practical, political obstacles be somehow overcome. The last two S.A.L.T's explored the possibility that God will Himself build the third Mikdash, rendering this mitzva no longer applicable. Today we will look at two other possible reasons why this obligation might not bind us today. Several halakhic authorities view prophecy as a prerequisite for the building of the Temple. Therefore, until such time as the return of prophecy can be confirmed, we have no obligation to launch the Temple construction campaign. This position, however, divides into two groups. Some require prophecy for pragmatic reasons, while others view it as fundamentally essential for the application of this mitzva. The first group includes the Minchat Chinukh, who makes a general statement that various issues require prophetic resolution before the construction of the Mikdash can get underway. Rav Kook (in his approbation to the work, Yaskil Avdi and in Mishpat Kohen 94) points to the specific question of the precise location on the Temple Mount where the Mikdash must stand. Until we receive direct clarification from a prophet, argues Rav Kook, we cannot decide this issue by ourselves. By contrast, the Chatam Sofer (Shut Chatam Sofer Y.D. 236) sees prophecy as an essential prerequisite to the building of the Temple. He bases his position on a verse towards the beginning of Parashat Teruma: "Exactly how I show you - the pattern of the Tabernacle and the pattern of all its furnishings - so shall you make it." Rashi interprets the verse's final clause, "so shall you make it" as extending its application to all generations. The question, of course, arises, what provision in the verse does this modify? What does the verse require concerning the construction of the Tabernacle that the final clause applies to later eras? The Chatam Sofer explains that the final clause modifies the verse's opening clause: "Exactly how I show you." Meaning, just as the Mishkan was built according to God's explicit, prophetic directives to Moshe, so must the building of all future Temples follow prophetic instruction. The building of the Mikdash thus cannot take place without the presence of prophets delivering God's word relevant thereto. Yet another prerequisite for the building of the Mikdash emerges from the Sefer Ha-chinukh. The Chinukh writes that this mitzva applies only when the majority of the Jewish people live in Eretz Yisrael. Thus, until Jewish demographics dictate otherwise, the time for building the Temple has yet to arrive. It should be noted, however, that many later authorities have rejected this position of the Chinukh with a clear proof to the contrary: the building of the Second Temple. As we know from the book of Ezra, only a small minority of the Jewish exile return from Babylon to rebuild the Temple. It would seem, therefore, that the presence of the majority of the Jewish people on their land is not required for the mitzva of building the Mikdash to apply. In conclusion, while the issue of the application of this mitzva nowadays is far from clear, the practical impossibility of doing so is. We must, therefore, immediately concern ourselves with the meticulous observance of those mitzvot that unquestionably do apply, in order that we merit peace, stability, and true sovereignty in Eretz Yisrael, so that we may see the rebuilding of the Temple and complete ingathering of the exiles.
This shiur is provided courtesy of the Virtual Beit Midrash, the premier source of online courses on Torah and Judaism - 14 different courses on all levels, for all backgrounds. Make Jewish learning partof your week on a regular basis - enroll in the (c) YeshivHar EtzioAll rights reserved to Yeshivat Har Etzion Yeshivat Har Et
This shiur is provided courtesy of the Virtual Beit Midrash, the premier source of online courses on Torah and Judaism 14 different courses on all levels, for all backgrounds. MakeJewish learning partof your week on a regular basis - enroll in the (c) YeshivHar EtzioAll rights reserved to Yeshivat Har Etzion Yeshivat Har Et | ||||||||||||||||||||