English translation — פקודי ב

A.

In the reason why one finds in the Torah regarding the work of the Mishkan,

that Moshe Rabbeinu gave an account of what was made from the silver and copper<sup>1</sup>

from the donation of the Mishkan but not what was made from the gold<sup>2</sup>

— says the Kli Yakar<sup>3</sup>,

that as soon as they finished all the works of the Mishkan

(in general and in particular)

and everything that needed to be made from <b>silver</b> and <b>copper</b> was in order "to remove himself from suspicion"&lt;sup&gt;4&lt;/sup&gt;

Moshe

(<b>before</b> they made the priestly garments in which there was <b>gold</b>)

wanted to give an account of the silver and copper and he did not want to wait with the account

(until they would make the priestly garments&lt;sup&gt;5&lt;/sup&gt;

and only then give the account of the gold together with the silver and copper).

And that which he did not make an account of the gold immediately after the completion of the making of the priestly garments,

he explains based on the words of the Midrash&lt;sup&gt;6&lt;/sup&gt;

: "When Moshe came to give

An account for every single thing missing from the weight, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-five shekels, and he forgot and did not know what he did with them; a heavenly voice came out and said, "And the one thousand seven hundred and seventy-five make hooks for the pillars," to fulfill what is said&lt;sup&gt;7&lt;/sup&gt;

Not so My servant Moses, in all My house he is faithful."

D.

E.

Although that what the heavenly voice testified "And the thousand etc." was about silver

(not — gold),

but since the Jews saw that from heaven they testified about Moses,

they no longer needed to have an account for the gold.

The explanation&lt;sup&gt;8&lt;/sup&gt;

is however not simple&lt;sup&gt;9&lt;/sup&gt;,

because: a)

the words "and the thousand and seven hundred etc."

(that the heavenly voice testified)

about the account of silver stand in the verse &lt;b&gt;before&lt;/b&gt; the account of

&lt;b&gt;copper&lt;/b&gt; — is just as Moses after the heavenly voice did not need to give an account of the gold,

so too he did not need to give the account of copper! b)

In any case: if there was a heavenly voice in order to announce from heaven that Moses "is faithful" — why was this in a manner

(— time)

that he should be prevented from giving an account only of the gold and not at such a time that he should entirely not need to give any account — also not of the silver and copper, since before Heaven it is revealed that they will suspect?

2.

And one can say that "The accounts of the Mishkan ..

which were accounted at the command of Moses" is

(not simply giving an account,

but it is)

related to the very essence of the matter of the Mishkan,

And with an introduction:

At first glance,

why does the Torah repeat here again at the beginning of the portion

(immediately after the first verse)

"And Bezalel son of Uri son of Hur of the tribe of Judah made all that the Lord commanded Moses, and with him Oholiab son of Ahisamach of the tribe of Dan, a craftsman and designer etc."&lt;sup&gt;10&lt;/sup&gt;?

We already know from before that they were the ones who did the work&lt;sup&gt;11&lt;/sup&gt;?

According to the midrashim of our Sages, may their memory be blessed&lt;sup&gt;12&lt;/sup&gt;,

or also according to Rashi's commentary&lt;sup&gt;13&lt;/sup&gt;,

the Torah here comes to inform us that "he did all that the L-rd commanded &lt;b&gt;Moses&lt;/b&gt;" — "It does not say here 'that Moses commanded him,' but rather 'all that the L-rd commanded Moses,'

even matters that He had not told him

(Moses)

his master, his mind concurred with what was said to Moses at Sinai"&lt;sup&gt;14&lt;/sup&gt;.

This seemingly must, however, have an additional explanation¹⁵

: Why is this stated <b>between</b> the verse "These are the accounts of the Tabernacle etc. which were accounted at the command of Moses" and the calculation "All the gold etc. and the silver of the accounts of the congregation".

It should have been placed either <b>before</b>

(at the end of parashat Vayakhel),

or <b>after</b> the verses where the account of the gold, silver, and copper is given.

3.

And the explanation of this can be said:

The Mishkan had to be related to the entire Jewish people¹⁶.

It is called in our parshah "Mishkan HaEidut — a testimony <b>to Israel</b> that the Holy One, blessed be He, forgave them for the sin of the Golden Calf, for He caused His Shechinah to dwell among them"¹⁷.

And the donations of all thirteen

(fifteen)

items had to be given in a manner that they would belong entirely to the public,

not remain related to an individual¹⁸.

And this was accomplished by bringing everything to Moshe Rabbeinu,

who was the Nasi of all Israel,

and through

This is the entire terumah that Jews brought became public property¹⁹.

After Moshe had given the donations of the Mishkan&lt;sup&gt;20&lt;/sup&gt;

to Betzalel and Oholiav

(and every wise-hearted man)

to do with the donations all the crafts of the Mishkan,

(and in particular if you say that they did not re- ceive any reward for the work&lt;sup&gt;21&lt;/sup&gt;),

they received through their making a <b>sort of</b> ownership over the works of the Mishkan because "the name of the craftsmen is upon the craft"²²

(although it did not entirely emerge from the ownership of the public)²³.

And therefore it had to be "These are the accounts of the Tabernacle etc. which were counted at the command of Moses": after Bezalel etc. had completed the work of the Tabernacle,

there had to be an action

(the counting and numbering through Moses our teacher),

in all these labors of the Tabernacle so that they would entirely be the property of the Tabernacle,

which is a testimony <b>to Israel</b>,

the entirety of Israel.

With this they were removed from the connection that had been created through the making of Bezalel and Oholiab and all the wise-hearted — to become completely public property.

but also the particular matter for which each detail was made had to be through Moses our teacher,

and this was revealed through the counting at the command of Moses,

<b>after</b> their work of Bezalel etc.].

And therefore the Torah interrupts and says immediately after the verse "These are the accounts of the Tabernacle etc. which were counted at the command of Moses" the two verses "And Bezalel etc. and with him Oholiab etc.",

<b>Before</b> it speaks about the accounting

of all the gold etc. and the accounting of silver and copper etc. —

With this is explained the content and the necessity of the appointment by Moshe²⁴.

D.

All this is regarding the work of the Mishkan.

Regarding however the priestly garments, one finds that immediately at the time of the command to Moshe concerning the priestly garments,

"And you²⁵

bring near to yourself" Rashi says "after you finish the work of the Mishkan".

D.

E.

The priestly garments and their making

(that through the priestly garments becomes the "to sanctify him to minister to Me" of Aharon²⁶

and his sons)

is not in the middle,

or at all from

Work of the Mishkan.

Their making must be specifically "after &lt;b&gt;the completion of&lt;/b&gt; the work of the Mishkan"&lt;sup&gt;27&lt;/sup&gt;.

And one must say the precision in this: the sanctity of "to serve Me"

(in the Mishkan&lt;sup&gt;28&lt;/sup&gt;)

can be only when there is the reality of a place where "and I will dwell" can be,

and consequently — the possibility of the reality of "to serve &lt;b&gt;Me&lt;/b&gt;" becomes,

of priesthood — for service,

only then can there be "to sanctify him,

to induct him into the priesthood through the garments"&lt;sup&gt;29&lt;/sup&gt;

: but when the &lt;b&gt;reality&lt;/b&gt; of a place to serve is not yet present,

there is no concept of the type of priest and sanctity of priest of the Mishkan&lt;sup&gt;30&lt;/sup&gt;

(and wearing of garments which is a detail and completes their priesthood&lt;sup&gt;31&lt;/sup&gt;)

This is related to the making of the garments: the reality of making the priestly garments is after the completion of the work of

(reality)

the Mishkan.

And based on this will be understood why it did not need to be "Poked"

(also)

regarding this

(part 5)

gold from which they made the priestly garments:

The content and action of "Pekudei HaMishkan" is,

as the continuation of the verse — because it is "Mishkan <b>HaEidus</b>",

as above "a testimony for Israel that the Holy One, blessed be He, forgave them for the incident of the calf, for He caused His Shechinah to dwell among them".

And consequently it is relevant that the work of the Mishkan in which "He caused His Shechinah to dwell" should be a consecration that

is entirely belonging to all of Israel,

without any connection to individuals

(among Israel,

even not a connection through the performance of the work,

as above).

But not so the priestly garments,

which are not a part of the work of the Mishkan but pertain to the service of the priests,

is even though also regarding them there is the law that they must be from public funds&lt;sup&gt;32&lt;/sup&gt;,

but in this there is not the emphasis that they should have no connection whatsoever to the workers*&lt;sup&gt;32&lt;/sup&gt;,

because their existence is not a part of "Mishkan &lt;b&gt;of testimony&lt;/b&gt;" — the work of the Mishkan.

And based on this it will be understood and sweetened what one finds a difference in the donation: regarding the donation of the Mishkan it says that they brought it all to Moses,

and Bezalel,

Oholiab and every wise-hearted man took it "from before Moses"&lt;sup&gt;33&lt;/sup&gt;

: but not so the gold and blue wool etc. from which they made the priestly garments,

although this was "&lt;b&gt;from the offering&lt;/b&gt; &lt;b&gt;that was sanctified&lt;/b&gt; &lt;b&gt;for My name"&lt;sup&gt;34&lt;/sup&gt;&lt;/b&gt;

but the verse says "&lt;b&gt;And they&lt;/b&gt; shall take the gold"&lt;sup&gt;35&lt;/sup&gt;,

"&lt;b&gt;Them&lt;/b&gt; &lt;b&gt;the wise-hearted&lt;/b&gt; who will make the garments shall receive from &lt;b&gt;the volunteers&lt;/b&gt; the gold and the blue wool to make from them the garments"&lt;sup&gt;36&lt;/sup&gt;.

5.

According to the above, there will also come an additional explanation why the matter was initiated specifically by Moshe — even though the matter of "musaro l'tzibbur yafeh yafeh"³⁷

in general is also when one gives over the thing to a treasurer and the like:

This is not only from the aspect of the presidency of Moshe³⁸,

but

(also)

from the aspect that Moshe, from his own side, did not need to come to the atonement that is through the Mishkan; and as already discussed once³⁹,

that Moshe was the only one who had no connection, heaven forbid, to the sin of the calf,

even not in the manner of "yesh b'yado limchot".

And consequently, he did not need to come to the matter of Mishkan ha'eidut "eidut l'Yisrael she'vitar lahem HaKadosh Baruch Hu al ma'aseh ha'eigel".

And therefore,

all other Jews,

from the aspect that they had to bring to the Mishkan for atonement,

through their involvement in the making of the Mishkan becomes a connection of the things made by them with them,

the craftsmen,

and consequently there is then lacking in the &lt;b&gt;completeness&lt;/b&gt; of the consecrated property as public property.

And in order that it should become public property in completeness

(that is, after their making),

it had to be specifically through Moshe.

Until also its erection was specifically through Moshe,

"And they brought the Mishkan to Moshe etc."&lt;sup&gt;40&lt;/sup&gt;,

Everything was brought to Moshe and specifically through him was the Mishkan erected&lt;sup&gt;41&lt;/sup&gt;.

6.

And one can say only a reason why it is connected specifically with Moshe:

The superiority of the Mishkan over the other Temples is in that it is eternal,

as the Gemara says⁴²

From when the first Temple was built, the Tent of Meeting, its boards, its bars, its pillars, and its sockets were hidden away.

And the reason for this is,

because the Mishkan is the work of Moses' hands,

it is not possible that it should become nullified⁴³.

And therefore, in every particular and particular of the making, there had to be the counting by Moses only of their making,

in order that it should be an eternal matter.

Not so the priestly garments, their purpose is not that the garments should remain eternal

For generations,

They are only a detail

(necessary)

in the priesthood of the priests serving in the Holy Temple.

It is not found regarding them⁴⁴

that they were hidden together with the Tent of Meeting, its planks, etc.⁴⁵,

The concept of eternity.

7.

And it can be said that the above explanation in the matter of "the counting of the Mishkan ..

by Moses" — that the counting by Moses revealed the connection between the Mishkan and its vessels to Moses — is also consistent with the inner interpretation of "These are the countings of the Mishkan",

as the Alter Rebbe explains in the "Chassidic portion" of the week — in Likkutei Torah⁴⁶

He says there,

that the interpretation of "&lt;b&gt;the countings&lt;/b&gt; of the Mishkan ..

&lt;b&gt;counted&lt;/b&gt; by Moses" is from the language⁴⁷

"A man is obligated to visit his wife",

because "the union is called visitation"

(that through "the countings of the Mishkan ..

counted by Moses" there came about the union of Vav-Hei — the union of Zeir Anpin and Malchut,

and afterwards the union of Yud-Hei).

And it can be said that this is also

(they were derived from them),

that through "Poked al pi Moshe" there was a union between the Mishkan and Moshe⁴⁸,

it became one thing with Moshe Rabbeinu,

as above at length.

Ch.

In the above explanation of "Pekudei" — from the expression "a person is obligated to be with his wife" — is not a separate explanation from the simple explanation

(from the expression of counting and accounting),

rather they are dependent on each other: how did the "pekidah" and <b>union</b> of the Mishkan with Moshe Rabbeinu come about — this is through the matter of <b>the counting</b>.

Will one understand this with an introduction: At first glance, the two explanations above in "Pekudei" — counting and unification — are opposite explanations: "Counting" is the most <b>external</b> and <b>lowest</b> level of the thing,

Furthermore — it emphasizes the <b>limitation</b> of the things that one counts,

No less and no more.

But the matter of "Pekidah" and unification indicates a most internal unification until "and they shall become one flesh"⁴⁹,

An influence that is above measure and limitation.

Until through this the power of the Infinite is drawn downward⁵⁰.

Since however these are two explanations of the same word,

It is understandable

(As discussed several times⁵¹),

That

(In addition to that they are opposite to each other — they are also

(And this is also the main point))

Related <b>and dependent</b> upon each other.

And the explanation in this: In this consists the task of the Mishkan — that one takes specifically <b>limited</b> things,

and within this limit one draws down the unlimited⁵²,

until in the manner of <b>and I will dwell</b>.

And simply the matter: Earlier one built the Mishkan,

and

afterwards the indwelling of the Divine Presence from above was revealed — "and the glory of the Lord filled the Mishkan"⁵³

until in a manner that "and Moses could not come into the Tent of Meeting because the cloud rested upon it etc."⁵⁴.

And the two opposites are hinted at in the two interpretations of "Pekudei": Pekudei from the term counting — that Moshe Rabbeinu counted and made the account of the donations of the Mishkan — indicates the boundary within the Mishkan; and "Pekudei" from the term pekidah and yichud — upon the drawing down of the boundless

(without boundary).

9.

The inner interpretation of the two opposites mentioned above in "Pekudei" is not only that in the Mishkan there were both opposites — boundary and without boundary — but moreover: that both became <b>one</b> thing; the boundary itself

(of the Mishkan)

did not become nullified from its limitation,

and together with this became

(one thing with the)

without boundary⁵⁵.

And as was seen openly in the Ark — that there was the essence of the Mishkan,

resting of the Shechinah — that "the place of the Ark is not from the measurement"⁵⁶.

Then the explanation

In this,

that not only was there in the place of the Ark a revelation of the Shechinah

(which is not from the measurement),

but the <b>place</b> <b>of the</b> <b>Ark</b> <b>itself</b> was "not from the measurement".

But more: <b>specifically</b> <b>at the time</b> the Ark was in a <b>measurement</b> and in all the details

(length,

width,

height)

— two and a half cubits its length and a cubit and a half its width and a cubit and a half its height — it was

(at the same time)

"not from the measurement"⁵⁷

The construction of the Mishkan is,

that the boundary itself is without boundary.

And this is the connection between the two interpretations in Pekudei: Moshe Rabbeinu made the <b>exact</b> <b>account</b> of the donation of the Mishkan,

and the <b>account</b> <b>itself</b>

(which Moshe Rabbeinu counted)

accomplished⁵⁸

the pekidah <b>and unity</b>,

the drawing down of the Shechinah and holiness which is above boundary in a manner of unity with the boundary — including,

that the boundary becomes eternal.