English translation — בשלח ב

Sicha in <pg>77</pg>

A.

On the verse<sup>1</sup>

"The Sanctuary, O Lord, which Your hands established" it is said in the Mechilta

(And brought in Rashi on the verse)

"The Holy Temple is beloved before the Holy One, blessed be He, for when the Holy One, blessed be He, created His world, He created it only with one hand, as it is said<sup>2</sup>

Even My hand founded the earth, and when He came to build the Holy Temple, as it were, with two hands, as it is said, The Sanctuary of the Lord<sup>3</sup>

Your hands established; when will You build it with Your two hands<sup>4</sup>..

The Lord shall reign forever and ever"

(In the future, when all the kingdom is His.

Rashi<sup>5</sup>).

And this is that the explanation of "Your hands established" is according to its simple meaning,

that the Sanctuary is the work of the hands of the Holy One, blessed be He.

But in the Gemara⁶

it is stated: "Greater are the deeds of the righteous than the deeds of heaven and earth, for regarding the deeds of heaven and earth it is written: 'Even My hand laid the foundation of the earth

(one hand.

Rashi)"

and My right hand spread out the heavens,' whereas regarding the deeds of the hands of the righteous it is written: 'The sanctuary, O Lord, which Your hands have established'⁷,

and Rashi explains: "The sanctuary is the work of the hands of the righteous"

[And even though in the verse it is stated: "The sanctuary, O Lord, which Your hands have established" — behold, the work of the hands of the righteous is called..

the work of the hands of the Holy One, blessed be He"⁸].

And seemingly, there is room to say,

that the dispute of the Gemara and the Mechilta

(whether "The sanctuary, O Lord, which Your hands have established" is the work of the hands of the Holy One, blessed be He

(literally)

or the work of the hands of the righteous)

depends on the well-known dispute whether the Third Temple will be built by human beings⁹

or will be built by the Holy One, blessed be He, Himself¹⁰

(and according to all opinions, it speaks in the verse about the future Temple).

And based on this, one can say that this that Rashi on the verse brought the drasha of the Mechilta is because he follows his approach everywhere in the Talmud<sup>11</sup>

that "the future Temple that we await is built and perfected, it will be revealed and come from heaven, as it is said, 'The Sanctuary, O Lord, which Your hands have established'"<sup>12</sup>.

<pg>78</pg>

However, according to this, one must wonder on the other hand — why did Rashi write

(in his commentary on the Talmud)

regarding the third Temple,

that "the Temple is the handiwork of the righteous" — contrary to his approach

(the aforementioned)

in many places that the future Temple "will be revealed and come from heaven".

And therefore it seems more to explain,

that the dispute is — about which Temple is spoken in the verse "The Sanctuary, O L-rd, which Your hands have established"¹³

: according to the Mechilta

(and Rashi on the Torah)

it refers to the third Temple,

and therefore they explain "Your hands have established" that the Temple is the work of the hands of the Holy One, blessed be He; but according to the Gemara it refers to the first Temple

(and the second)

which according to all opinions are the work of human hands¹⁴.

And one must understand what is the foundation and reason of their dispute,

if in the Song of the Sea it speaks about the first Temple

(and the second)

or about the future third Temple?

2.

And behold, also among the commentators of the Torah on the spot we find two methods in the explanation of these verses,

for according to several commentators<sup>15</sup>

it refers to the Mishkan and the first Temple that was built by David

(and Solomon),

and what is said about this "the Sanctuary, O Lord, which Your hands have established" is like His saying "according to all that I show you"<sup>16</sup>

; "and you shall erect the Mishkan according to its ordinance which you were shown on the mountain"<sup>17</sup>,

that "the Holy One, blessed be He, showed<sup>18</sup>

to Moses the pattern of the entire Mishkan built"<sup>19</sup>,

and "so David said, 'All this was in writing from the hand of the Lord upon me, He gave me insight'"<sup>20</sup>,

and therefore it is called by the name of the Holy One, blessed be He; however, according to Rashi

(and others)

it refers to the Temple that will be built in the future,

as above.

And superficially, one can be precise in this: Rashi's method and interest in the Torah on the spot is to explain the simple meaning of the verse,

and in simplicity, behold this is written in continuation to its beginning "You bring them and plant them on the mountain of Your inheritance, the foundation of Your dwelling place that You, O Lord, have made",

that is, the entry into the land and the building of the first Temple — and why does Rashi divide the verse into two,

and the time of all the exiles separates between them,

and afterwards comes the end of the verse concerning the Temple of the future

[and without this, superficially this explanation is farther from the simple meaning of the verse,

than the explanation that what is said "Your hands have established" refers to the Temple in general

(the first)

(that was built by human beings and is called "Your hands have established" because "all this was in writing from the hand of the Lord upon me, He gave me insight")].

And also from the side of logic it is not understood — how does it fit that

(middle)

song and thanksgiving for the miracles of Kri'as Yam Suf,

Bnei Yisrael will mention about the Beis HaMikdash of the future,

which emphasizes that the Mikdash that will be built when they enter the Land is destined to be destroyed²¹

[And as emphasized in the language of the Mechilta here "When will you build it with your two hands,

a parable of bandits who entered the king's palace, plundered his possessions and killed etc. and destroyed etc. later the king sat with them in judgment, seized from them, killed etc. and sat in his palace and afterwards his kingdom became known to the world"]

— that through this addition they mixed matters of calamity into

(within)

the song²²

!<pg>79</pg>

3.

And one can say the explanation of this:

What Rashi explains: "And when will it be built with two hands? At the time that Hashem will reign forever and ever, in the future, when all sovereignty is His,"

the explanation is not that this was the intention of Moshe and the Children of Israel when they said this song,

to mention about the building of the Temple in the future

(after his time, Rashi)

— rather this is Rashi's explanation,

that in actuality this will be in the future,

but when they said the song, Israel intended that this would be in the Temple simply

(the first),

that the Holy One, blessed be He, will build this Temple with His two hands and then "Hashem will reign forever and ever" will be fulfilled.

as explained in many places²³,

that had they not sinned, Israel would have entered the Land of Israel in a manner of complete and eternal redemption without any exile after it²⁴.

And with this, the reason for the difference between Rashi and the Mechilta is simply understood: in the Mechilta it elaborates with a parable

(as above)

"When will You build it with Your two hands?

A parable: to bandits who entered the king's palace, plundered his possessions, and killed etc. and destroyed etc.

(all this was over a long period of time and)

after a time the king sat with them in judgment, seized from them, killed etc., and sat in his palace, and afterwards his kingship became known to the world" — that is, the discussion is about the Temple that will be built in the future,

a long time after the Temple will be destroyed

(the first and the second)

; but Rashi did not bring this elaboration,

for according to Rashi, the intention of Israel²⁵

was that the Temple that would be built immediately upon their entry into the land would be built with the "two hands" of the Holy One, blessed be He.

That is: according to the Mechilta, the conclusion of the verse "The Sanctuary, O Lord, which Your hands have established" does not refer to the Sanctuary that is discussed in the first part of the verse "The place for You to dwell in, which You have made, O Lord"

[for simply, Israel said it in connection with the first Sanctuary that was built when "You bring them in and plant them on the mountain of Your inheritance"; and note that this "the throne below is aligned opposite the throne above" — this is the explanation of "The place for You to dwell in, which You have made, O Lord"

(as stated in the Mechilta&lt;sup&gt;26&lt;/sup&gt;)

— applies to all Sanctuaries,

also to the first and second Sanctuaries]

; however, according to Rashi,

Israel did not intend another Sanctuary,

but rather that same Sanctuary at the beginning of the verse

[except that in practice, sin caused this not to be fulfilled,

and it will not be until the future,

as per Rashi].

We thus find,

that there are three approaches in the explanation of "The Sanctuary, O Lord, which Your hands have established": according to the Mechilta it refers to the future Sanctuary,

which will be built

(a long time)

after the first Sanctuaries are destroyed; according to the Gemara it refers to the first Sanctuary

(and second&lt;sup&gt;27&lt;/sup&gt;),

which are the handiwork of the righteous; while according to Rashi&lt;sup&gt;28&lt;/sup&gt;,

even though it refers to the Sanctuary that was built then upon their entry into the land,

nevertheless the intention is that the Holy One, blessed be He, will build it with His two hands "and when

(it comes into actuality)

etc."

4.

And one could say,

that these three approaches depend on the three ways in the study and exposition of the language of the song:

According to several literalists²⁹,

the way of the Scriptures in parable and poetry and the like to double the matter in different words,

merely for beauty of style; on the other hand,

in study according to the homiletic method — they expound every matter in the song as a matter in itself.

<pg>80</pg>

And one could say,

that Rashi's method in his commentary on the Torah is method 3,

intermediate between them: also regarding the song, Rashi holds that there is no mere repetition,

but rather when a detail and a new matter is added

[and as Rashi wrote

(old)³⁰

regarding the Song of the Sea "for He is highly exalted..

the repetition comes to say..

and likewise the entire song you will find repeated",

and Rashi explains in the verses a reason for the repetition of the matter³¹]

; but on the other hand,

the addition is not in a new matter

(entirely),

but an additional detail in that same matter

[in the manner of "And as for the repeating of the dream to Pharaoh twice, it is because the thing is established by God, and God will hasten to do it" — that the repetition adds force and alacrity in this matter itself].

[in the manner of "And as for the repeating of the dream to Pharaoh twice, it is because the thing is established by God, and God will hasten to do it" — that the repetition adds force and alacrity in this matter itself].

And so it is in our verse — that there is in it a repetition of language,

"A place for Your dwelling You have made, O Lord,

the Sanctuary, O Lord, Your hands have established"; and the intent of the repetition can be explained in three ways:

(a)

that this is a complete repetition,

only for the beauty of the expression,

(b)

that this adds an entirely new matter,

(c)

this is an additional detail in that same matter.

And this is the difference between the three opinions mentioned above:

In the Mechilta — there our Sages expounded — they expounded the double expression "The Sanctuary, O L-rd, [which] Your hands established" regarding a new matter

(that was not spoken about before this)

— the Sanctuary of the future that will be built after the first and second are destroyed;

Explanation of the Gemara that it refers to the building of the first Temple

(and the second)

by means of righteous ones — corresponds to the opinions that the duplication in the verse is for poetic beauty,

and according to this the intent of the verse in "the Sanctuary, O Lord, Your hands have established" is like at the beginning of the verse "A dwelling place for You, O Lord, You have made"&lt;sup&gt;33&lt;/sup&gt;

;

And according to Rashi,

this duplication comes to add an additional detail in this Temple that will be built upon their entry into the land,

that in addition to the fact that the Holy One, blessed be He, made "a dwelling place for His presence" above,

behold, additionally, that He will build the Temple below with His two hands

[except that in actuality this was not fulfilled upon their entry into the land the first time,

and when will it be fulfilled — "in the future to come"].

5.

And it is necessary to explain in greater depth the content of the difference between the three interpretations,

and with the introduction of the explanation of the reason that in the Song of the Sea

(whose content is the thanksgiving for the miracle of the splitting of the Red Sea and the killing of the Egyptians)

is mentioned in general "the Holy Temple" and its virtue

("the dwelling place... the Sanctuary...")

— for at first glance, what is it doing here?

That which is mentioned in the song regarding the entry into the land — "You will bring them and plant them on the mountain of Your inheritance"¹

— is understood,

for this is the continuation and completion of the redemption from Egypt,

as it is said³⁴

"I will bring you up from the affliction of Egypt to the land of the Canaanite, etc."³⁵

(and as they said before this in the song itself³⁶

— "You led in Your kindness this people whom You redeemed; You guided them with Your strength to Your holy abode"³⁷)

; and since the splitting of the Red Sea is the conclusion and the end of the exodus from Egypt

(for only then was all fear of the Egyptians nullified),

therefore they included it in the Song of the Sea,

that from now, when the exodus from Egypt was completed, behold<pg>81</pg>

They are ready for the purpose of the Exodus from Egypt — "You will bring them and plant them on the mountain of Your inheritance."

And one should add,

that this is not only a request for the future

(that the Holy One, blessed be He, will complete the matter of the Exodus from Egypt until its purpose, which is the entry into the Land),

but also this is part of the thanksgiving for the past,

the miracles of the Splitting of the Sea — because the miracles of the Splitting of the Sea,

besides their effect on the Egyptians

(and to the extent of destroying them so that not one of them remained),

also helped that the Children of Israel could enter the Land with ease,

as they said in the Song³⁸

"Then the chiefs of Edom were terrified, etc., all the inhabitants of Canaan melted away",

and this is their intention in saying³⁹

"Let terror and fear fall upon them, etc., until Your people pass over, O Lord, until this people You have acquired pass over",

as Rashi explains: "terror on the distant ones and fear on the close ones",

that this fear remained upon them until they crossed the Jordan

(and as Rashi brought on this the verse of Joshua⁴⁰

"For we have heard how the Lord dried up, etc.")

; therefore they said "You will bring them and plant them, etc.",

because also the manner of the entry into the Land was connected with the miracles of the Splitting of the Sea as above.

But it is not understood — what is the matter of the building of the Beis HaMikdash here?

[With difficulty one can say,

that the building of the Beis HaMikdash indicates the completion of the entry into the land,

and as it was in actuality that the entire land was not conquered until the days of David,

and also in the content of the matter,

it is explicit in the verse that the building of the Beis HaMikdash came after the rest from the enemies around⁴¹.

But from the language of the verses here it implies,

that the matter of the Beis HaMikdash comes here not as a part and conclusion of conquest and entry into the land,

but as a matter and praise in itself].

And further: what is the practical difference here, this detail that the Sanctuary was built with "Your hands"?

6.

And one can explain the explanation in this:

At the conclusion of the song

(in the verse after this)

it is said "Hashem will reign forever and ever",

and the Ramban explains,

"He says that He has now shown that He is King and ruler over all, that He saved His servants and destroyed His rebels; so may it be the will before Him to do throughout all generations forever".

And this means that the content of the matter of the song is not only praise and thanksgiving for the actual miracles and wonders that the Holy One, blessed be He, performed in the destruction of Egypt etc.,

but rather

(mainly)

praise for this, that through the Splitting of the Red Sea the kingship and dominion of the Holy One, blessed be He, was revealed,

both in the actual destruction of Pharaoh and Egypt,

and in its modes,

that the Holy One, blessed be He, disrupted the systems of nature,

and everything for the sake of the rescue and redemption of Israel.

And behold, the ultimate perfection in the actual revelation of the kingship of the Holy One, blessed be He, was in the fulfillment of the command "And they shall make Me a sanctuary and I will dwell"⁴²,

in the building of the Holy Temple,

that He descended to dwell in the land⁴³,

and therefore in the building of the first Holy Temple the redemption of Israel was in its completeness from all the surrounding enemies,

so that there was no longer any dominion of the nations of the world in the land⁴⁴.

And this is also the content of the matter of building the Temple with His two hands: the difference in simple terms between an act done with one hand and an act done with two hands is⁴⁵,

that an act with two hands means that the doer is occupied only with this,

but not so an act with one hand, for during the act he can engage in a completely different matter,

and like the above example — at the time of the creation of the earth with the left, He created the heavens with the right.

&lt;pg&gt;82&lt;/pg&gt;

And this is the content of the difference between the world⁴⁶

that was created with one hand⁴⁷

and the Temple that was built with His two hands: in "the world" its essence is not openly apparent

(so much)

the truth of its existence,

that is, that it exists only from the truth of its being found⁴⁸,

because it was created "with one hand"; but not so in the Holy Temple, where His Shechinah dwelled and ten miracles were performed in it openly⁴⁹,

in a manner that the limitations of the natural world were nullified etc. — because it was built with two hands,

And therefore specifically in the Holy Temple they would pronounce the Name as it is written⁵⁰.

And behold, this matter is in all the Holy Temples,

also the first Holy Temple,

And correspondingly, the explanation of the Talmud is that this verse refers to the sanctuaries that were the work of human hands.

However, according to the explanation of the Mechilta and Rashi,

that this verse and the one after it

(Hashem will reign forever and ever)

are one matter, it is not to be explained that "the Sanctuary, O Lord, which Your hands have established" refers to the first Sanctuary,

because in it the kingship of the Holy One, blessed be He, was not in completeness,

since it was destroyed,

and therefore they explain that the conclusion of the song,

namely the completeness of the kingship of the Holy One, blessed be He,

is the future Holy Temple.

However, in this there is a distinction between the Mechilta and Rashi — which depends on the general intention of the Song of the Sea:

The Song of the Sea is the first song⁵¹

that is explicitly mentioned in the Torah.

And based on this it is understood that among the ten songs brought in the Mechilta⁵²,

it is the most general song,

the opening for all the songs⁵³,

and it can be said that this is what they learned in the Mechil-<pg>83</pg>

Ta⁵⁴

"Then Moses sang" is not written here, but rather "Then Moses will sing"; we find that the resurrection of the dead is derived from the Torah,

that the intention in this

(is also)

that in this song is included all the subsequent songs of the redemption of Israel until the song of the future.

For just as the redemption from Egypt was a beginning and opening for all the redemptions until the future redemption⁵⁵,

so too the Song of the Sea about the redemption of Israel and the kingship of the Holy One, blessed be He, at the time of the splitting of the Red Sea,

includes all the redemptions and the revelation of the kingship of the Holy One, blessed be He, until the end of all generations,

and it is in the future Holy Temple, as "The Lord will reign forever and ever."

And therefore it was brought in the Mechilta the parable of bandits who entered the palace of the king, plundered etc. and destroyed the palace of the king; after a time the king sat etc. and sat in his palace, and afterwards His kingship became known to the world — because the emphasis of the completeness of the kingship of the Holy One, blessed be He, in the future Holy Temple is in this, that it comes after the destruction of the Holy Temple beforehand.

However, according to Rashi in the simple meaning of the verse,

the content of the matter of the song is — the song of the Exodus from Egypt,

the kingship of the Holy One, blessed be He, which comes to revelation through the miracles and wonders at the sea and in the redemption of the children of Israel from Pharaoh and Egypt⁵⁶,

except that the completeness of this kingship of the Holy One, blessed be He,

that is, the kingship of the Holy One, blessed be He, in the redemption of the children of Israel from Egypt,

it is in the coming to the land,

and in the building of the Holy Temple by the Holy One, blessed be He,

that there will be "all the kingship His",

and this is the content of the matter of the building of the Holy Temple with His two hands.

7.

And one must explain the difference between the language of the Mechilta "and afterwards His kingship became known to the world",

and the language of Rashi "that all the kingdom is His":

In the revelation of the kingship of the Holy One, blessed be He, there are two matters⁵⁷

:

a)

Loss of the rebels and opponents to His kingship, may He be blessed&lt;sup&gt;58&lt;/sup&gt;,

And as brought in the continuation of "I have come to My garden" (the L-rd, may He be blessed)&lt;sup&gt;59&lt;/sup&gt;,

The discourse that was given by His Holiness, our master, my father-in-law, the Rebbe, to be learned on the day of his passing-hillula,

That the nullification and loss of the opponent pertains to the perfection of the kingship,

And therefore for the victory over the opponent, the king spends all his treasures and the treasures that his fathers stored up&lt;sup&gt;60&lt;/sup&gt;

; And so it is in the kingship of the Holy One, blessed be He,

As it is said&lt;sup&gt;61&lt;/sup&gt;

He brings forth wind from His treasures, He who smote the firstborn of Egypt,

That Egypt represents the straits and boundaries, and the firstborn of Egypt represent the strength and might of the husk (kelipah),

And for this He brings forth wind from His treasures&lt;sup&gt;62&lt;/sup&gt;.

b)

In this, that all inhabitants of the world will recognize and know that to You every knee shall bow,

And all accept the yoke of His kingship, may He be blessed,

And as it will be in the future to come, that "then I will turn to the peoples a clear language, to call all of them in the name of the L-rd, to serve Him with one accord"&lt;sup&gt;63&lt;/sup&gt;.

And one must say that this is the difference between the Mechilta and Rashi:

In the Mechilta the emphasis of "His kingship became known to the world" is

(primarily)

in the destruction of the opponent,

as understood from the parable "After a time the king sat in judgment upon them, seized some of them, killed some of them, crucified some of them, and sat in his palace, and afterwards his kingship became known to the world";

And according to Rashi's explanation, the main point is not in the destruction of the opponent, but in this that "all the kingship is His",

And as Rashi explains in his commentary on "Hashem our G-d, Hashem is One"⁶⁴

— "Hashem, Who is our G-d now, and not the god of the nations..

He is destined to be Hashem, One, as it is said⁶³

for then I will turn to the peoples a clear language, to call all of them in the name of Hashem, and it is said⁶⁵

on that day will Hashem be One and His name One".

(From the talks of Shabbos Parshas Beshalach and Shabbos Parshas Yisro 5744)