English translation — תצוה א

1.

Regarding the drawing of the ephod¹,

is Rashi's method in his commentary on the Torah generally in accordance with the opinion of the Rambam in his book the Yad,

that "the ephod, its width is like the width of a person's back from shoulder to shoulder.

And its length is from opposite the elbows of the hands behind him until the feet"².

Nevertheless, there is however a "slight difference"³

between the words of Rashi and the words of the Rambam in this.

In the measure of its width: Rashi says "like the measure of the width of a person's back <b>and more</b>"⁴

("And the apron was folded before the kohen on his loins and a bit of his belly from here and from here"⁵),

The Rambam says "its width is like the width of a person's back from shoulder to shoulder",

which implies — not more.

In the measure of its length: Rashi says&lt;sup&gt;4&lt;/sup&gt;

"And he girds it

Opposite his heart &lt;b&gt;below his elbows&lt;/b&gt;&lt;sup&gt;6&lt;/sup&gt;..

(and)

And it reaches until &lt;b&gt;his heels&lt;/b&gt;"&lt;sup&gt;7&lt;/sup&gt;,

The Rambam says "And its length &lt;b&gt;opposite &lt;/b&gt;the elbows of the hands behind him

(and it reaches only)

Until &lt;b&gt;the feet&lt;/b&gt;".

And one could say,

that these three changes are connected with a general difference between Rashi and Rambam regarding the nature of the ephod.

And as follows.

B.

And with an introduction to this explanation in the words of Rashi regarding the making of the ephod⁸.

Rashi begins his commentary: "And the ephod — I have not heard nor found in a baraita⁹

the explanation of its form.

And my heart tells me that it is a girdle for him from behind, its width like the width of a man's back, like a kind of apron called 'forcint' that the noblewomen gird when riding on horses, so is its making, etc.",

and he continues with the details.

one must understand: we see indeed,

as above,

that except for a “slight difference” in the form of the ephod according to the opinion of the Rambam as opposed to the opinion of Rashi.

And from this that the Rambam does not say on this “it seems to me” and the like

(as is his way where he states a halachah and the like regarding which he has no source&lt;sup&gt;10&lt;/sup&gt;),

it is understood,

that he &lt;b&gt;does &lt;/b&gt;have a source for this form and measurement —

but Rashi says “my heart tells me”,

What does it mean that he innovates it from his own mind,

without a source?

Moreover — according to the commentators of the Rambam¹¹

its source is from the <b>plain meaning</b> of the verses — his <b>way and foundation</b> of his commentary of Rashi on the Torah!

(in his version of the Baraisa of the Work of the Mishkan,

or the like)

which was not available to Rashi].

Moreover: Rashi himself continues in his commentary and brings proofs from verses to compel several details of "the explanation of its form": <b>it is said</b>¹²

And David was girded with a linen ephod <b>we learned</b> that the ephod is a girdle and it is impossible to say that it has only a girdle alone, for <b>it is said</b>¹³

And he put upon him the ephod and afterwards he girded him with the woven band of the ephod...

And it is impossible to say that it is called ephod because of the two shoulder pieces that are on it, for <b>it is said</b>¹⁴

The two shoulder pieces of the ephod <b>we learned</b> that the ephod is a separate name and the shoulder pieces are a separate name and the band is a separate name" and more.

And according to this,

that his source in several fundamental matters is from <b>verses</b>,

it is not smooth¹⁵

that he says about this "and my heart tells me"?

3.

will one understand it with the introduction of the question in the verses — what <b>other</b>

commentators¹⁶

(also)

from the plain meaning of the verse protect, but Rashi: in the verse⁸

he lists "And these are the garments which they shall make: breastplate and ephod and robe and checkered tunic, turban and sash."

the question arises,

why are not also the other priestly garments "tzitz"

(and "michnasayim"¹⁷)?

This is indeed a question in the plain meaning of Scripture,

and one does not find apparently that Rashi should safeguard it¹⁷?

And one may say,

that this is answered according to Rashi on "Choshen" which Rashi translates "an ornament opposite the heart."

The explanation of this:

The definition of the priestly garments

(of the High Priest)

is as the verse says "And you shall make <b>holy garments</b> for Aaron your brother <b>for glory and for beauty</b>"¹⁸.

One can learn it in two ways: a)

They are primarily “<b>garments of</b> holiness”,

but these are garments that were made in a beautiful and handsome manner,

in a special way,

of “gold, blue

and purple, etc. and fine linen”¹⁹,

and also in their measurement and design,

in the manner of royal garments,

so that they are “for honor and glory”.

b)

Primarily they are items that bring “honor and glory” — “ornaments”,

but the ornaments were made <b>in the form of</b> garments; “garments of ..

Aaron your brother”.

And according to this, it can be said,

that there is also a difference in the order

(importance)

of the garments — in which of them is more the "holy garments — for honor and glory":

If one were to accept like the first way,

that primarily they are "garments"

(only the garments are in a manner of "for honor and glory")

then the "tzitz" — which is entirely a kind of ornament²⁰,

although it too is among the eight <b>garments</b> — is not in the same category as the rest of the priestly garments of the High Priest²¹

If one learns, however, that primarily they are "ornaments" as above in the second manner,

then it turns out,

that also the tzitz is in the same category²²,

and on the contrary,

the tzitz

is a primary element in this category,

because²³

in it the concept of "ornament" is more than in all the other priestly garments.

4.

Based on this, one can say,

that this is one of the reasons for Rashi⁸

on "Choshen — an ornament opposite the heart,"

because thereby it is explained why the Torah does not count here the Tzitz,

even though the Torah says here Choshen:

The Choshen,

although it is an "ornament,"

is however "opposite the heart"²⁴,

which is a place where people put on garments,

therefore it is included simply in "And these <b>garments</b>"²⁵,

but not so the Tzitz,

whose place is

(a)

(And you shall place it)

upon a blue cord, and it shall be upon the turban etc."²⁶,

(b)

"And it shall be upon the <b>forehead</b> of Aharon"²⁷

— which is not a place of garments,

therefore the verse here does not include it.

And continuing from this, Rashi stands on "and the ephod",

And with an introduction: Rashi already earlier in parshas Terumah²⁸

brought that "the choshen and ephod are explained in V'atah Tetzaveh and they are types of ornaments."

What is thus understood from the <b>plain meaning</b> of the verses in our parshah,

that both the choshen and the ephod,

are not ordinary garments that people wear²⁹,

they are ornaments for beauty and splendor — for honor and glory.

On this Rashi innovates in our parshah "And my heart tells me that it is girded behind him, its width like the width of a man's back, like an apron called 'forcinet' that noblewomen gird when riding on horses, so was its making etc.":

Although Rashi brings proofs from verses as above,

they are however proofs only to demonstrate

(as Rashi's language)

"that the ephod is separate and the shoulder-pieces are separate and the breastplate is separate",

that "the ephod is a separate ornament"³⁰

One does not know, however, from all these proofs what kind of ornament the ephod is,

and from the plain meaning of the verses, that the choshen and ephod always come together and are connected to each other,

one could learn that this is

(still)

an ornament corresponding to a specific place on the body³¹,

just as the choshen is "an ornament corresponding to the heart";

On this Rashi says "and my heart tells me³²

that it is girded behind him like an apron ..

that noblewomen gird when riding on horses",

this is an ornament not

(but)

corresponding to a specific place on the body,

but an ornament

(for beauty and adornment)

that serves as an actual garment³³,

"<b>like an apron</b>"

— because according to Rashi — <b>in the plain sense</b> of the verse when the Torah says "And you shall make <b>holy garments</b> for Aharon your brother for honor and glory ..

And these are the <b>garments</b> which they shall make"

(and then omits the tzitz),

one must learn,

that these are

(primarily)

"garments" — clothing,

only the garments are in a manner and form that is for honor and glory,

<b>similar</b> to ornaments.

And therefore,

regarding each garment of the priestly garments — Rashi chooses and emphasizes in his language to teach that each one of them is <b>a garment</b>.

And likewise regarding the choshen — which he calls an "ornament",

Rashi explains as above,

that nevertheless it has a connection to the category of garments³⁴

— "an ornament <b>opposite the heart</b>".

5.

Based on this, it is also understood why Rashi needs to add "who gird themselves as riders on horses."

For at first glance: what does it contribute to the explanation of the ephod — since he already says "like a kind of apron" and the "la'az" "called porcin't,"

one already understands from this what it is³⁵.

But with this, Rashi clarifies the definition and the reason of the garment:

a)

"that gird &lt;b&gt;the princesses&lt;/b&gt;" — this is a special garment of greatness

(not a garment that ordinary people wear)

and consequently this is a garment which is "for honor and for glory",

and in continuation to the "Choshen" a garment of royalty³⁶.

b)

"when riding on horses" — that then princesses wear more &lt;b&gt;garments&lt;/b&gt;

(as extra modesty)

— and they turned to jewelry,

which

(mainly)

their time is at the time and in order to show the nations and the ministers³⁷

etc.

Thus it is understood regarding the High Priest,

that this is not just another ornament that he puts on,

but an ornament that is in the category of a garment and this is also an extra modesty for the High Priest

"And do not ascend by steps onto My altar, that your nakedness not be uncovered upon it,"

that because of the holiness of the stones of the altar, one was not allowed to go up by steps, although all the priests wore trousers.

Thus it is understood regarding the High Priest, that because of his extra holiness, there needed to be extra modesty for him]³⁹.

6.

According to the Rambam, however, the four golden garments of the High Priest are essentially

(not so

In the category of "garments,"

but)

in the category of "ornaments"⁴⁰,

and as is clear from the verses,

that the tzitz, choshen, ephod, and me'il are not ordinary garments.

Therefore,

when the Rambam⁴¹

explains the manner of making the garments of the Kohen Gadol,

he begins with the tzitz,

because the essence of the garments of the Kohen Gadol as "honor and glory" is in that they are designated as ornaments — and this was first and foremost

(as above, end of section 3)⁴²

in the tzitz⁴³.

And likewise the Rambam teaches regarding the ephod,

as is understood from the content of the verses,

that it is in a category of a special ornament,

in the manner of and in continuation of the choshen, which was a special <b>ornament</b>⁴⁴

Here the Rambam cannot say "it seems to me" and the like,

this is understood from the plain meaning of the verses.

7.

Based on the above, the difference between Rashi and the Rambam regarding the attribute of "and the ephod apron" is also understood:

According to Rashi,

since this is

a garment and because of the extra modesty of the High Priest,

Rashi learns that it

(a)

begins from below his elbows downward,

not above that,

where modesty is not relevant

(extra from behind him).

(b)

It "reaches to his heels,"

for modesty,

(c)

It is "the measure of the width of a person's back &lt;b&gt;and more&lt;/b&gt;",

"The apron was folded before the priest on his loins and a little of his belly here and there",

which brings out that it is more than a "garment" also for the priest.

According to the Rambam in the Book of the Hand,

that this is

(primarily)

(primarily)

an "ornament",

there is no reason &lt;b&gt;to innovate &lt;/b&gt;the above details

(and in particular — in the plain sense of Scripture),

that it was "to his heels" and larger than a person's back,

rather he says "its width like the width of a person's back from shoulder to shoulder and its length from opposite the elbows behind him to the feet"&lt;sup&gt;45&lt;/sup&gt;.

And that which the Rambam teaches that "and its length opposite the elbows of the hands" not below his elbows

(as according to Rashi),

because according to the Rambam the ephod and choshen are not any

(entirely)

two separate ornaments,

rather they together constitute one complete ornament;

just as this is in the use of the choshen and ephod,

that that which one asks the Urim and Tumim and the kohen answers

With the holy spirit,

is this not only in the Choshen but also in the Ephod,

and like the language of the Rambam⁴⁶

"The level of the High Priest who speaks through the Ephod and the Choshen with the holy spirit",

Likewise it is in the category of the ornament in them,

that they both together constitute one complete ornament⁴⁷.

And therefore the Rambam holds that the ephod must begin not below the elbows,

after the choshen ends

(as according to Rashi),

but "opposite the elbows,"

in the place⁴⁸

where the choshen is located.

And it is precise in the language of the Rambam⁴⁹,

and in his emphasizing the connection of the ephod and the choshen "so that when one wears the ephod with the choshen, the choshen will be on his heart evenly and the ephod behind him, and the belt of the ephod tied on his heart under the choshen,"

this is one ornament and complete garment that is assembled from the choshen which is in front of him "on his heart,"

and from the "ephod" which is "behind him"⁵⁰.

8.

Based on the above, it is possible to explain several details of laws in the Rambam:

In the order of the wearing of the garments, the Rambam says⁵¹

: The High Priest, after girding himself with the belt, wears the robe, and over the robe the ephod

And the breastplate and the girding in the setting of the ephod on the robe under the breastplate.

From the language of the Rambam it is implied,

that the girding in the setting of the ephod was done after the donning of the breastplate.

In the verses there is here a change: In the statement in our parshah⁵²

stands the order of the vestments "And the ephod and the breastplate

(and then)

and you shall gird him with the belt of the ephod",

in P. Tzav⁵³,

in the actual order of the vestments,

it says "And he put on him the ephod and girded him with the belt of the ephod and bound it to him with it",

and only then it says "And he placed on him the breastplate".

The Ramban⁵⁴ poses

: And he preceded here "and girded him with the belt of the ephod" before he placed on him the breastplate.

For Moses knew in the manner of dressing that always the garments immediately after the wearing of the garment he would gird him with the belt made for it,

the sash immediately after the tunic,

and the belt immediately after the ephod and it is not proper that the wearing of the ephod be with interruptions,

but there it says "And the ephod and the breastplate and you shall gird him with the belt of the ephod",

because it abbreviated there regarding the matter of the breastplate etc.

From the Rambam, however, it is understood,

as above,

that the girding with the belt of the ephod was after the donning of the breastplate⁵⁵.

And according to the above, one can say⁵⁶,

that the Ramban follows the method of Rashi,

that the breastplate and ephod are two separate categories in the garments of the High Priest.

And therefore the Ramban holds,

that first one binds the ephod and girds him with it by the belt of the ephod,

as a completion of the donning of the ephod,

and afterwards "and he placed upon it the breastplate."

But not according to the Rambam,

although the Choshen and Ephod are two garments in the count of the eight priestly garments,

they are nevertheless together <b>one</b> category of clothing — an ornament⁵⁷

— and the Rambam according to his earlier system⁵⁸,

that the Choshen and Ephod must be attached to each other,

"And the Choshen shall not be loosened from the Ephod,

and whoever loosens the Choshen from the Ephod and disconnects their connection in a destructive manner is liable to lashes",

this is not only during the service,

as others hold⁵⁹,

but even not during the service,

because this is a law in the body of the garment itself,

that the Choshen and Ephod must be attached to each other,

and not separated —

The Rambam holds that this is one garment "And upon the Me'il

(one puts on)

the Ephod and the Choshen"

(one garment),

and afterwards "and he girds with the belt of the Ephod",

which this is the completion not only of the donning of the Ephod but also of the donning of the Choshen.

9.

From Rashi's commentary one extracts a wonderful lesson in the service of G-d:

It is known⁶⁰

the teaching of the Baal Shem Tov that every

thing that a Jew sees or hears is a lesson in the service of man to his Maker.

And it is understood simply: since "everything that the Holy One, blessed be He, created in His world, He did not create a single thing in vain"⁶¹,

and that which the Most High led that <b>the </b>Jew should see <b>the </b>event in the world,

it is understood that this is not in vain, heaven forbid,

but for a purpose,

that the purpose of the creation of man is indeed that which "I was created to serve my Creator"⁶².

Rashi teaches here that this matter pertains not only to a High Priest,

or even only to an elder in years,

but this one must learn and <b>inculcate </b>

(also)

in a child of five years for Scripture:

It is known the story that teachers tell children in cheder when learning Rashi regarding the ephod "like a kind of apron ..

that noblewomen gird themselves when riding on horses",

although most of the students

(and in particular — those five years old for Mikra)

have never seen it

that once Rashi, walking in the street, saw a noblewoman riding on a horse dressed in an apron,

and Rashi was very distressed by this,

why they showed him such a thing from Above.

Afterwards,

writing his commentary on the Torah in Maaseh HaEfod,

his mind was settled —

(he learned from this a lesson in his service of his Creator

(through the commentary on the Torah)

— an explanation in Maaseh HaEfod

is also a reason why)

they showed it to him in order to understand better Maaseh HaEfod — from this he derived,

that it is not

(merely)

an ornament

(as it appears superficially from the content of the verses)

but it is in the category of a garment,

and as above at length.

And this also Rashi teaches with a ben chamesh lamikra,

that every thing that a Jew hears or sees

(for example — seeing maidservants riding on horses)

is this only for the sake of his study of Torah and fulfillment of the commandments.

Yud.

And based on this, one must explain

(in the inwardness of the matters)

the precise wording of Rashi "And my heart tells me ..

And further my heart tells me" — not like the wording of Rashi

(several times in his commentary and also in this verse)

"And I say" and the like:

The above-mentioned matter that Rashi saw is certainly not similar to all matters in the world that a Jew sees or hears permissible things,

permission,

that he must derive a lesson in the service of G-d,

but this is a thing that a Jew must refrain from seeing

(and as the Gemara⁶³

says that — regarding a woman, it is called a seat, not a chariot),

Then the power is that also from such an event something should come into the service of G-d,

and moreover — this should add to the understanding and comprehension of the Torah,

is connected with "heart",

yechidah of the soul

(the point of Judaism that exists equally in every Jew)

is

dwells primarily

(not in the intellect,

but)

<b>in the heart</b>⁶⁴,

and regarding the aspect of yechidah, no concealment and hiding applies⁶⁵,

from any matter in the world,

even not from things that are

(seemingly),

not according to Torah,

And on the contrary: the power to transform

intentional sins into merits comes from the aspect of the yechidah in the soul which is in the heart,

And therefore specifically from the aspect of "my heart" one understands and one <b>does </b>in actuality and one perceives that also that which one saw against his will,

contrary to his will — a Sarah riding on the horse,

must and ought he to be distressed⁶⁶

about this — until that he will

(also)

(also)

from a mere indication

(and against his will)

come⁶⁷

— <b>as the advantage </b>of light from darkness⁶⁸

— to advantage in holiness,

until and the way in our matter — it comes to an explanation in the matter of the ephod⁶⁹

— from the garments of the High Priest that "make" for him thereby "honor and glory".

(Sichos

(Motzaei)

Shabbos Parshas Tetzaveh 5737,

5739)