English translation — ראה א

A.

In the laws of the Chosen House¹

the Rambam says "the entire Temple was not on level ground but on the slope of the mountain

(and further he continues and explains the details of the differences and the ascents etc. —)

When a person enters from the Eastern Gate of the Temple Mount, he walks level until the end of the rampart.

And he ascends from the rampart to the Women's Courtyard by twelve steps etc. and walks the entire Women's Courtyard level and ascends from it to the Courtyard of Israel which is the beginning of the Courtyard by fifteen steps etc. and walks the entire Courtyard of Israel level and ascends from it to the Courtyard of the Priests by a step one cubit high etc. and walks the entire Courtyard of the Priests and the Altar etc. and ascends from there to the Entrance Hall by twelve steps etc. and the Entrance Hall and the Sanctuary are entirely level."

That which the Rambam begins

(and adds)

the negation — "the entire Temple was not on level ground

(but on the slope of the mountain)

and does not say only the positive "the entire Temple was on the slope of the mountain" — one must say:

Since according to the Rambam,

the fulfillment of the positive commandment "And they shall make Me a sanctuary"²

is in building the Holy Temple — in continuation of the "Tabernacle that Moses our teacher made

(Numbers)

as he says at the beginning of Hilchos Beis HaBechirah³

; and as he also interprets there regarding the "things" that are in the building of the Temple⁴

"These are the things that are essential in the building of the Temple,

they make in it the Sanctuary and the Holy of Holies, and there shall be before the Sanctuary one place, and it is called the Hall,

and all three are called the Heichal, and they make another partition around the Heichal, distant from it, like the curtains of the courtyard that were in the wilderness, and everything enclosed by this partition, which is like the courtyard of the Tent of Meeting, is called the Courtyard, and the whole is called the Sanctuary".

And from the plain meaning of his language it is understood,

that the "things" that are "essential in the building of the Temple" are similar to and analogous to what was in the Tabernacle⁵.

regarding the "three camps" that were in the desert,

that so too is "corresponding to them for generations"].

Therefore one could think,

that just as the entire Mishkan was

(simply)

on one level surface,

not one part higher than the other,

so too in this manner was the Mikdash,

Therefore the Rambam begins: "The entire Temple was not on level ground

(like the Mishkan),

but on the slope of the mountain".

2.

The Rambam is after all a book of "laws laws".

It is understood,

that that which the Rambam describes that the "entire Temple was not on level ground but on the slope of the mountain" is not merely because that is how the form of the House was in practice — since the Temple was built on a mountain,

which ascends continuously in a slope,

they therefore needed<sup>8</sup>

to build the parts of the

House higher and higher — but this is a matter of halacha<sup>10</sup>

in "the entire Temple"<sup>11</sup>

— and in both details of negation and affirmation: the "entire Temple"

(a)

must be not on level ground — "was not on level ground",

and "but"

(b)

it must be "on the slope of the mountain".

And furthermore one can say: from that which the Rambam is precise to say in the language "not ...

but" — and not "the entire Temple was on the elevation of the mountain and not on the plain" — it implies¹²

that this is not a matter only lechatchila,

but a condition that is indispensable¹³.

One must however understand: since the building of the Temple is a continuation of the commandment "And they shall make for Me a Sanctuary",

whose fulfillment began with the Mishkan; and the things that are essential in the building of the House are analogous to the things in the Mishkan as mentioned above — what is the rationale that in this matter the Temple needs to be different from the Mishkan¹⁴?

And although the Holy Temple was in many details different from the Tabernacle,

beginning from the measure of the Temple and many details in the structure itself — it is: a)

also in them they must have a reason,

b)

in several of them — the reason is simple,

such as — the Temple was

(also)

of stones and the like,

much larger and higher than the Tabernacle etc. because it was for generations in the same place and the like,

here specifically they emphasize with great detail that "the entire Temple was not on level ground

(like the Tabernacle)

but on the slope of the mountain etc."

c)

3.

And one can say the explanation of this:

The different places that were in the Temple "on the slope of the mountain" — that the walk from one part to the other was in a manner of ascent by steps — correspond to that which each of them has in itself an addition,

an ascent in holiness relative to the place before it

(as the Rambam says in chapter after this¹⁵).

And accordingly, it may be said,

that the law of "the entire Temple was not on level ground but on the slope of the mountain" is connected with the ascents of the levels in the holiness of the Temple — each part of the Temple which is higher in its area of place has a higher holiness¹⁶.

And therefore it is a law only in the Temple and not in the Tabernacle — because that which the differences of levels in holiness create a law in their area of place,

is connected with the category of holiness that was innovated in the Temple

(relative to the holiness of the Tabernacle).

The explanation in this:

There is a fundamental difference between the Mishkan and the Beis HaMikdash: the Mishkan was a temporary structure,

as it is written¹⁷

"And I was walking in a tent and in a Mishkan",

and in the language of the aforementioned Rambam that the "Mishkan that Moshe made ...

was temporary"; in contrast, the Beis HaMikdash was a "permanent dwelling"¹⁸,

and in the language of the Rambam¹⁹

"Once the Temple was built in Jerusalem, all places were forbidden to build in them a house for Hashem and to offer in them sacrifices, and there is no house for generations except in Jerusalem alone and on the Temple Mount"²⁰.

And the difference between them in the category of holiness is: in the Mishkan, the levels of holiness were

(primarily)

in the building and its parts — the planks and curtains etc.

(which were anointed with the anointing oil²¹

and which were fixed),

in them there was no change; in the Beis HaMikdash, however, there was²²

"holiness of place"²³

— the actual place of the Temple became sanctified; and in two matters: a)

Specifically regarding the Beis HaMikdash it is said in our parshah²⁴

"the place which the L-rd your G-d will choose",

There was the act of sanctification of the ground

(floor)

of the Temple etc.²⁵.

And even though also regarding the Mishkan it says in the verse²⁶

(by a sotah)

"and of the dust that is on the floor of the Mishkan the kohen shall take" — it was a)

only temporary — "for the time being",

b)

b)

even also at that time — it was not because of the holiness of that place²⁷

and ground in itself,

but because of the Ohel Moed

(curtains and planks)

— the Mishkan which stood upon the ground.

And for this reason there is a difference between the place of the Mishkan and the place of the Mikdash,

that by the Mishkan,

after they had dismantled it and journeyed from there²⁸,

no holiness remained in the first place²⁹

(and analogous to how it was by Mount Sinai after the Giving of the Torah³⁰,

"When the horn is drawn out, they shall ascend the mountain"³¹)

But not so by the Beis HaMikdash³²,

the law is,

as the Rambam rules³³,

that "they offer all the sacrifices even though there is no built house, and they eat the most holy sacrifices in the entire azarah even though it is desolate and not surrounded by a partition."

Because the place itself was sanctified

("because of the Shechinah"³⁴)

— "the place which the Lord will choose etc." — the choice is in the place,

therefore holiness remains there

(forever and ever)³⁵.

4.

Based on this, it is understood that specifically in the Temple was the novelty,

that "the entire Temple was not on level ground but on the slope of the mountain" and the details of the differences in the ascents from place to place in the Temple:

Specifically in the Temple, where there is a holiness in relation to the "place" itself — the place is a "place which the L-rd will choose, etc." — there it is relevant to say that the distinctions of holiness in the Temple create distinctions in the place of the Temple,

in the height of the terrain of the places,

with which one place is distinguished from another place.

Because the holiness of the place of the Temple is not

(only)

a general holiness,

equal throughout the entire Temple,

rather there are distinctions of levels in the holiness of the place corresponding to the levels of holiness of the parts of the building — Sanctuary,

Courtyard.

as standing

(air)

from the aforementioned Rambam that "they eat most holy sacrifices in the entire courtyard even though it is ruined etc.",

that the eating of most holy sacrifices is its place in the courtyard<sup>36</sup>].

But not so the Tabernacle which was not in the manner of permanence in place — it was not a "place which the Lord will choose",

rather the holiness of the Tabernacle was in the

(parts)

Tent of Meeting,

boards and curtains and covering — therefore by the Tabernacle there was not,

not drawn and fixed the distinction of the holiness of the parts of the Tabernacle in the place in the desert — where it was

(temporary)

the encampment of the Tabernacle.

And therefore the place of the Mishkan was "on level ground" — within the area of the Mishkan itself, one place

(from part)

the Mishkan was not divided from another place.

And therefore the Rambam emphasizes the distinction between Mishkan and Mikdash — although there are

(as above)

many differences between them — because specifically in that "the entire Mikdash was not on level ground but on the slope of the mountain"

(the differences of elevations of the parts of the Mikdash)

is expressed a fundamental novelty of the Mikdash relative to the Mishkan — being the "place which Hashem will choose," the Mikdash and its parts opened up in its place — in the holiness of the place.

5.

According to this, however, one must understand:

According to the above,

that the ascents in the area of the place are connected with the different levels and ascents in the holiness of the place,

that the higher the holiness of the part of the Temple was, the higher was its

(area)

place — why were there no steps

(and multiple steps)

to go up to the Holy of Holies?

The Holy of Holies was indeed

(as its name implies, holy of holies)

divided in its holiness from all parts of the Temple,

and as the Rambam elaborates in the following chapter³⁷

that the highest holiness³⁸

is in the Holy of Holies "that no one enters there except the High Priest on Yom Kippur during the service."

should it not have been higher

(much higher)

in its location area?

This will be understood by first explaining the above,

in the difference between the Mishkan and the Temple,

according to the style of Chassidus³⁹

The Tabernacle,

which was a temporary dwelling

(as it were)

for the Most High,

was built from trees

(planks)

— vegetation and curtains —

(partly made from)

animal

(only the ground,

upon which they temporarily established it, was inanimate,

earth⁴⁰)

: but the Holy Temple,

which was a "permanent dwelling" of the Holy One, blessed be He,

was built mainly from stones

("And one does not build with wood protruding at all, but either with stones or with bricks"⁴¹)

which is lower than the categories of vegetation and animal.

And the reason for this is explained: the purpose of the Tabernacle was

(not so much to effect a permanent change in the physical world,

but)

(mainly)

to "mirror" the order of the chain of descent of the worlds⁴².

And therefore the construction of the Tabernacle corresponded to how the matters are drawn down in the order of the chain of descent,

the covering of the Tabernacle above was from "animal," and likewise the curtains of goats' hair below it,

and

(for the most part)

the curtains below them.

Below this, the minority of the Tabernacle curtains and the lower parts of the Tabernacle,

the planks of the Tabernacle,

were from vegetation,

and even lower, the sockets and the ground of the Tabernacle,

were silver and earth,

— inanimate,

inanimate.

The advantage and accomplishment of the Beis HaMikdash

(relative to the Mishkan)

is in that through it is carried out the intention of the Holy One, blessed be He, to have a dwelling place in the lower worlds⁴³

specifically,

that the holiness,

the indwelling of the Divine Presence,

should be drawn down and permeate the world,

down to the lowest level of physicality of the world — also the category of the inanimate,

in which its life-force and its spirituality are not seen openly.

And since the Beis HaMikdash is its essence to actualize the indwelling of the Divine Presence in the world in a manner that the holiness should permeate and elevate the physical,

therefore this was expressed also in the physical reality of the world itself — that the place where the Beis HaMikdash stood was on a mountain,

higher than the surrounding places⁴⁴

; and the higher the ascent and level of holiness in the Mikdash,

the higher in physicality was also the physical place.

But not so the Mishkan,

which

(main point)

its essence was not that the indwelling of the Shechinah within it should permeate the physicality of the world down to the inanimate,

the earth,

below which there is none — therefore the indwelling of the Shechinah and the holiness within it remained as if a separate entity,

this was not reflected in the physical place.

And therefore,

although in the Mishkan there were distinctions in levels of holiness,

it was, however — in place in this world — entirely on level ground,

not raised in accordance with the degree of holiness,

on level ground even with the place of the wilderness.

6.

Based on this, it is also understood the reason why the Holy of Holies in the Temple,

the most holy place,

was not distinguished in its height from the Sanctuary of the Temple:

The concept that the holiness spirituality of the Mikdash acts in the elevation of the physical place — and therefore one place is higher than the other,

according to the differences in the holiness — applies only regarding such levels in holiness where the lower level is approximately the higher one,

higher

(only)

"by twelve steps" and the like; but when it comes to such a level in holiness that is incomparably higher

(to the point of being above the category of higher and lower)

- by an incomparably lofty level — it is not applicable that this should be expressed in a number of steps,

steps — in measured and limited height,

and consequently — not in physical height of place.

And this is the difference between the other parts of the Mikdash and — the Holy of Holies: the parts of the Mikdash,

the holiness of one is higher,

but approximately,

has a value relative to the part and level of holiness adjacent — and corresponding to the difference in value is the difference between them in the number and height of the steps from place to place,

one is higher than the other also physically.

But by

(the holiness of)

the Holy of Holies,

where there was revealed in the place of

(Atzmut,

of)

the impossible of impossibilities⁴⁵

in the place of the Ark

(which is not from the space⁴⁶),

which is incomparable entirely to the rest of the parts of the Temple,

higher altogether than the category of above and below — such a height cannot be expressed

(even in the manner of a hint and example)

in a height of a physical place,

which is measured and limited.

7.

But a matter in this — and with an introduction of the precision in the language of the Rambam "when a person enters from the Eastern Gate of the Temple Mount, he walks until the end of the rampart on level ground, and ascends from the rampart to the Women's Courtyard by twelve steps etc., and walks all of the Women's Courtyard on level ground and ascends etc.",

that by the steps and ascents he speaks

(not so about the height of the place itself,

but)

how the person walks and ascends.

And one can say that the Rambam is thereby hinting that all these levels in holiness that a person "goes" from level to level,

is this in the manner of "ascending",

it must effect an elevation in the person,

he must raise himself and ascend from level to level⁴⁷.

When one comes, however, to the levels of the Holy of Holies,

it is not the manner that the person is "going ...

and ascending",

he rises higher in his ascents in holiness,

but he is entirely in nullification of existence completely,

"all equally"⁴⁸.

And this is connected with the Beis HaMikdash which is "

(Veshachanti)

besocham"⁴⁹,

with the aspect of "Kodesh HaKodashim" which is in the personal Mikdash of every Jew,

penimiyus d'penimiyus halev,

bechinas yechidah shebanefesh⁵⁰,

that in it there is no form or limitation,

and all the more so there is no extension

(which is hinted⁵¹

in the thorn of the yud⁵²),

that from her side a Jew is "nullifying and removing himself and his will to be nullified to Him, blessed be He"⁵³,

and in this is the essence of the connection of a Jew — which is above boundary and form,

yechidah leyachedcha,

similar to the entry of the Kohen Gadol

(but a messenger of "all Your people the House of Israel in every place that they are")

once a year into the Kodesh HaKodashim.

(From the sichah of Shabbos Parshas Massei 5744)