English translation — תרומה א

Sicha 1<pg>135</pg>

A.

One of the things that Israel were commanded to bring for the donation of the Mishkan

("And this is the donation which you shall take from them"<sup>1</sup>)

is "skins of tachashim"<sup>2</sup>,

and Rashi explains "tachashim" — "a species of animal".

And behold, in our Rabbis, of blessed memory, we find a dispute regarding the matter: in the Babylonian [Talmud]³

The words of Reish Lakish in the name of Rabbi Meir were brought: "The tachash that was in the days of Moses was a creation unto itself, and the sages did not decide whether it is a type of wild animal or a type of domestic animal, etc."

But in the Jerusalem [Talmud]⁴

It says: "The rabbis say it is a type of pure wild animal"⁵

(And so it is in the Tanchuma⁶

"Rabbi Yehuda says: A large pure wild animal was in the desert, etc., and its skin had six colors, and they took it and made curtains from it")⁷.

And based on this

(And so it is explained in the commentaries⁸),

Rashi establishes [the halacha] according to the words of the Jerusalem [Talmud]

(And the Tanchuma)

That it is "a type of wild animal".

And it requires further study,

From where does Rashi in the plain sense of Scripture have to decide between these opinions,

that it is "a type of animal"?

2.

Afterwards Rashi continues "And it was only temporary,

and it had many colors; therefore he translates ססגונא as one who rejoices and takes pride in his colors."

And behold, the reason that Rashi needed to say that "it was only temporary",

one can say simply,

that since it is not known to the student of Scripture

(a five-year-old for Scripture)

that there is a type of animal whose name is tachash,

Rashi explains that indeed this is not a known animal⁹

because "it was only temporary"¹⁰.

<pg>136</pg>

[And based on this, it is also understood the reason that Rashi used "it was only temporary",

that this is in the manner of the language of the Babylonian Talmud "and for the moment it was provided to Moses and he made from it the Mishkan and it was hidden" — and not like the Jerusalem Talmud "a kind of pure animal the Holy One, blessed be He, created for Moses in the desert, because he did with it the work of the Mishkan it was hidden",

or like the language of Rabbi Nechemiah in the Tanchuma "it was a miracle and for the moment that it was created in that moment it was hidden"¹¹

— because in the plain sense of Scripture there is no necessity that there was here a special creation or a miracle

(and likewise a special act of hiding the tachash),

but only that "it was only temporary",

and therefore its memory was forgotten in the Tanakh⁹].

And likewise this is understood that Rashi continues "and many colors it had",

since this is not a known animal

(because "it was only for a time"),

Rashi needs to explain in what are the skins of the tachash unique,

because of which Hashem commanded to bring them for the donation of the Mishkan¹²

(and especially since it is not stated in the verse that they need to dye the skins,

as he explained regarding "skins of rams — dyed red"),

therefore Rashi explained that "many colors it had"

(and they do not need dyeing).

But it is puzzling what is the lengthy language of Rashi "therefore he translates sasgona that it rejoices and prides itself in its colors",

for seemingly it would have sufficed to write briefly "like its translation

(sasgona)

",

from which it is proven that the tachash has many colors; and what is Rashi's emphasis

(a)

"therefore he translates etc.'",

(b)

his conclusion in explaining the words of the Targum "that it rejoices and prides itself in its colors"?

And behold, at first glance, the words of Rashi

(in the explanation of the Targum)

their source is in the Gemara¹³,

that the Gemara explains the words of Rabbi Nechemya that "one covering

[of the ram skins dyed red and tachash skins]

it was and it was similar to a kind of tela ilan",

that "he said thus: it is like a kind of tela ilan that has many colors, and not tela ilan, for there it is impure and here it is pure,

Rav Yosef said: if so, this is what we translate sasgona, that it rejoices in many colors" — and this is the language of Rashi: "therefore he translates sasgona, that it rejoices and takes pride in its colors."

But it has already been explained many times that it is not Rashi's way in his commentary on the Torah to copy the language of the Sages except only that which pertains to the simple meaning of the verse,

And what does the lengthy language

(of the Gemara and)

Rashi pertain to the explanation of the word "tachash"?

[And especially in our case,

that the intention of R. Yosef in his statement "If so"

(is support.

Rashi),

is not only to prove that the tachash has many colors,

but primarily to explain that it is pure

(unlike the "tela ilan" which is impure)

— because since "it is pure, it is understandable that we translate it sasgona because it is not similar to tela ilan except in that it has many colors"¹⁴].

There are commentators¹⁵

that Rashi came to explain the words of the Targum,

that since Rashi wrote "and it was only temporary",

how can it be said in the Targum

(in Babylonia)

the name of this animal that was not known either before the time of the Mishkan or after it?

Therefore Rashi wrote "therefore it translates sasgona, that it rejoices and prides itself in its colors",

that the intention of the Targum is not that this is<pg>137</pg>

The name "tachash" in Aramaic,

but this is a description of the appearance of the tachash,

"Shashash..

in its colors".

But this explanation is also forced,

since

(as discussed many times)

the purpose of Rashi on the Torah is not to copy and explain the words of the Targum.

3.

And one must say the explanation in this — simply:

Rashi in his explanation "a type of animal" did not come to negate the explanation that tachash is "a type of domestic animal"¹⁶,

but rather to negate the assumption that "tachash" is a name of a color,

and the explanation of "skins of tachash" is like "skins of red rams",

for just as "skins of red rams" means skins of rams that "were dyed red after their tanning"¹⁷,

so too there is room to explain "and skins of tachash",

that they dyed skins with a color called "tachash"

[and according to the opinions that we find in the Yerushalmi¹⁸,

that "Rabbi Yehuda says Tainin, after its dyer it is called"

(skins of rams were dyed, skins of tachash, and they are called tachash after the color that is similar to tachash.

Korban HaEdah),

and Rabbi Natan says Galaktinin

(a name of a color¹⁹.

Korban HaEdah²⁰)].

And therefore Rashi writes: "Tachashim — a type of animal,"

and his intention simply,

that they took hides of a type of animal whose name is tachash and not that they took hides

(of rams)

and dyed them with the color of tachash²¹.

[And Rashi's proof simply is,

that if the intention were that they dyed the hides

(of rams)

with

(the color of)

tachash — it should have said "hides of rams dyed red and tachashim"

(and the like),

and not "and hides of tachash"; and from that the verse adds "and hides of tachash" it is understood,

that these are not the hides about which it spoke previously

("hides of rams")²²,

but rather they are hides of tachash

(and tachash is "a type of animal")].

And this is also the continuation in Rashi's words "therefore the Targum renders it ססגונא, that it rejoices and takes pride in its colors":

With this Rashi brings a proof from the Targum that it is not simply a name of a color,

with which the hides were dyed,

but rather it is a type of animal,

for תחש is translated as "ססגונא",

that the animal "rejoices and takes pride in its colors"²³.

And therefore Rashi did not write briefly "its Targum is sasgona",

because then there would be room to explain that the intention of the Targum is that "tachash" is a color composed of a combination of many hues,

or²⁴

"sasgona" means six hues

(like the opinion in Tanchuma that in the skin of the tachash there are six<pg>138</pg>

hues)²⁵

— rather he emphasizes "that rejoices and prides itself in its hues",

by which it is understood that the intention of the Targum is "a type of living creature".

4.

But still we need to understand the precise wording of Rashi "that he rejoices and takes pride in his colors",

for ostensibly it would have sufficed "that he rejoices"

(as the language of the Gemara)²⁶,

and what is the addition that

(not only "that he rejoices" but also)

"takes pride in his colors"?

And we can say,

that with this Rashi also alludes to the unique quality of the "tachash skins",

that it is not only because of the beauty of the colors in these skins,

but because this emphasizes the characteristic of the tachash,

that skins of these colors cause the tachash to take pride in its colors

(and this is a primary matter in it to such an extent,

that this is part of its name in the language of the Targum).

And this is also the advantage and importance in this donation of "skins of tachash": it is understood and simple,

that a donation from a living species is superior in its importance to a donation from a plant species

(as we find regarding offerings on the altar)²⁷,

and in this is their special importance of "skins of tachash" also relative to "skins of rams dyed red",

not only because in the skins of tachash there were "many colors"

(unlike the other colors that were brought each one by itself,

blue and purple and scarlet etc.'),

but mainly because the colors are part of the skin of the tachash itself.

For in the donation of the "skins of rams dyed red"

(that they dyed them after they already were)

the donation from a living species is only regarding the body of the skin itself,

but not regarding the color of the skins; unlike the donation of skin of tachash,

the color is also included in the donation of a living thing,

since the colors are part of the essence of the skin of the living thing,

to the extent that this touches upon the nature of the living thing — "that rejoices and prides itself in its colors"

(as above).

And it can be said,

that this is an additional reason for why these curtains were the uppermost covering on the Mishkan²⁸

— because in addition to the fact that these curtains surpassed the others in their beauty²⁹,

and furthermore,

that the beauty of a dyed skin is not comparable to the beauty and splendor of a skin that has a multiplicity of colors in its nature and formation — behold, in the skins of tachash the colors are part of the nature of "living",

as above.

5.

And one should add explanation in this, that the covering of tachash skins was the uppermost covering of the Mishkan,

for this level that is in tachash skins,

that also the color in them is a part of the living being,

has in it a special expression of the inner content of the entirety of the Mishkan:

"Living" is a hint to the Holy One, blessed be He,

Who is called "the Life of the worlds",

because He, blessed be He, is the source of life of all the worlds,

and in the language of the Rambam³⁰

that "<pg>139</pg>

All the existents from the heavens and the earth and what is between them were not found except from the truth of His existence; and it is understood that the intention of the Rambam in what he said that "all the existents...

were not found except from the truth of His existence" is only for all the existents in their generality,

but also in the details of the existent³¹,

that every detail of the existent "was not found except from the truth of His existence".

That is to say:

Everything in the world is divided

(in general)

into three parts: a)

the essence of the existence of the thing,

which is the aspect common to every thing.

b)

the unique quality of each thing,

in which each thing is different from another.

And like fire and water,

which differ in their nature and quality,

so that the nature of fire is the opposite of the nature of water.

c)

the remaining details of each thing,

which are not part of the essence of its quality and content.

And all the above matters of the created being "are not found except from the truth of His existence" — that is, in addition to the essence of the existence of the created being,

and likewise its unique content and definition of each created being — also the secondary details are found from "the truth of His existence".

And this is the matter of the curtains of "tachash skins" in the Mishkan:

Since the matter of the Mishkan is — "and I will dwell in their midst"³²,

the indwelling of the Shechinah in a revealed manner,

it is understood,

that in it it was in a revealed manner that from the "true existence" of the Holy One, blessed be He, all existences are found in all their details.

[And as explained in the books³³,

that the "physical forms" in the Mishkan and its vessels — it is possible "to contemplate from them the supernal forms that are their prototype",

this is because they are drawn down from them,

and as the Rema elaborated in his book Toras HaOlah].

And therefore it should have been in the Mishkan a matter that indicates the connection between the external things of the creations,

with "the truth of His existence" — and this is hinted at in "skins of tachash",

that even the color of their skin

(which is nothing but an external thing)

is from "the species of the living" — to indicate,

that even the most external things of the creations,

down to their color,

"are not found except from the truth of His existence",

"the Living One of the worlds"³⁴.

6.

And one may add to this,

according to the explanation of our master the Elder

(in Torah Or³⁵)

regarding the difference between the matter of the creation and its form,

that the matter of the creations was created by the word of G-d and by the ten utterances,

but not so "the manner of the form of the firmament

(for example)..

was made by the desire of G-d that did not come to expression in speech or utterance" — that the reason for this is because "speech and utterance..

is the agent of entity" in all creations,

for if it had been created only "by the desire of G-d and His will alone..

the world would be nullified in actual existence",

but not so with the form of the creations

(whose source is "in the desire of G-d..

that did not come to expression in speech or utterance")

the matter of nullification is drawn into the creations.

See there at length.

[And it can be said,

that this is expressed in that the form of the creations is an external thing that has no "content" — that the inner reason for this is,

because in the form of the creation the matter of nullification is drawn,

and therefore it comes in the form of the creation that has no "existence" and content of its own

(like the "existence" that is in the very existence of the creation,

and likewise in the content of the creation and its definitions)].

And based on this, the reason will be understood in greater depth

(the inter-&lt;pg&gt;140&lt;/pg&gt;

Mi)

That the uppermost covering was specifically of tachash skins,

Because the matter of nullification in the creations

(That this is its main content of the Mishkan — the indwelling of the Shechinah which effects a revealed nullification to the Holy One, blessed be He),

Belongs to the "form" of the creations more than to the other parts of the creation

(As above)

; And this nullification is hinted at specifically in "tachash skins",

That even the color of the skin

(Which is only an external thing)

Is from "the species of the living",

And on the contrary,

This external thing belongs to the essential essence of the living³⁶,

More than the particular characteristics in it,

Therefore he specifically "rejoices and takes pride" in its colors.

7.

Based on the above, one can also explain the reason that this matter was expressed specifically in the curtains of the Mishkan,

Because the distinctions in the parts of the Mishkan,

Vessels and boards and curtains of the Mishkan correspond to the three matters above³⁷

:

vessels of the Sanctuary,

that each one of them is distinct from its fellow and in each one of them there was a different service according to the particular quality of the vessel,

behold through them is revealed how the particular content and definition of every thing in the world is the word of G-d and its particular life-force which brings it into being and sustains it,

and the truth of its existence is as it is above;

the boards,

which encompass all that is within them equally,

indicate an encompassing light,

and through them is effected and revealed that all existents exist only from the truth of His existence,

that this matter is something equal among all existents,

that "all existents...

from the first form until a small mosquito that is in the navel of the earth, all from the power of His truth came into being"³⁸

;

And the curtains,

which encompass all that is in the Mishkan and the beams from above,

they also indicate an encompassing light,

but a more elevated encompassing [light],

therefore they needed to be dyed,

and especially the uppermost curtains of the covering of tachash skin — to indicate,

that also the external form of things in the world is nullified to the "Life of the worlds",

and on the contrary,

this nullification of the external form comes from a more elevated level,

an encompassing light of holiness

(the will and desire of G-d)

which is higher.

Eight.

The three matters mentioned above also exist in the service of man:

In every mitzvah and mitzvah — there are three matters:

a)

the action of the mitzvah,

in which all of Israel, each and every one, are equal,

from the greatest of the great to the smallest of the small

(for example: the act of laying the tefillin of Moshe Rabbeinu is equal to the act of laying tefillin of a simple person in all times),

and in the language of the Tanya³⁹

"One Torah and one law for all of us in the fulfillment of the entire Torah and mitzvot in the aspect of action",

b)

the intention of the commandment,

that in this there are distinctions from one to the other,

and it depends on the level of the person in his inner service in his mind and heart — the attribute&lt;pg&gt;141&lt;/pg&gt;

his understanding of the greatness of the Creator etc.,

which brings to love of G-d and fear of G-d

(and in the language of the ruling of the Rambam&lt;sup&gt;40&lt;/sup&gt;

"And what is the way to love Him and fear Him at the time that one contemplates etc.'"),

and they are "the hidden things of the L-rd our G-d"&lt;sup&gt;41&lt;/sup&gt;

about which it is stated in the Zohar&lt;sup&gt;42&lt;/sup&gt;

that "each one according to his measure."

ג)

הידור מצוה

(which does not impede the fulfillment of the commandment),

up to beautification in additional details beyond the essence of the commandment,

and in particular — matters dependent on custom.

And behold, there is room for a person to err and think,

that the main precision in the fulfillment of the commandments is only in the first two matters mentioned above,

because:

The need for precision in the performance of the commandments is understood and simple,

for the deed is the main thing,

and as the Alter Rebbe elaborated in Tanya⁴³,

that "if one recited the Shema in his thought and in his heart alone with all the strength of his intention, he has not fulfilled his obligation and must repeat and recite...

and if he uttered with his lips but did not intend with his heart, he has fulfilled his obligation post factum";

And likewise the need for intention in the commandments is understood,

for a commandment without intention is "like a body without a soul",

and as the Alter Rebbe elaborated in Tanya⁴⁴

about the greatness of the necessity in the fulfillment of the commandments out of love of G-d and fear of G-d;

But regarding the additional matters and especially the customs,

what is the precision in them?

And especially in customs that pertain to the education of young children,

who do not understand and are not able to place upon their hearts what they see and hear,

and especially infants of a very tender age,

And upon this comes the instruction that even color,

the external shade,

is a part of a living species,

that things like external depiction must be done with vitality,

and vitality that comes from the essence of the soul,

And how many of the customs of Israel have their root above more than several matters of laws⁴⁵,

And the custom of Israel is Torah⁴⁶,

Custom annuls law⁴⁷,

And like the response of the Rashba⁴⁸

known in this regard.

And through this that each one adds in all matters of Torah and mitzvos — whether the fulfillment of Torah and mitzvos in practice and in beautification of mitzvos,

"the revealed things to us and to our children"⁴¹,

whether in "the hidden things to Hashem our God" in the service of God in love of God and fear of God,

and whether specifically in customs of Israel — through this is done "and I will dwell in their midst",

within each and every one of Israel,

And this brings closer and hastens even more the building of the third Holy Temple,

a dwelling place for Your presence, the work of Hashem⁴⁹,

that the Temple below is aligned opposite the Holy Temple above⁵⁰,

speedily in our days, literally.

(From the talk of Shabbos Parshas Terumah 5734)