English translation — פקודי

Sicha 1<pg>218</pg>

A.

After the general introduction "In the first month of the second year, on the first of the month, the Tabernacle was erected"<sup>1</sup>,

were explained in the verse<sup>2</sup>

the details of the matters: And Moses erected the Tabernacle etc. and he spread the tent over the Tabernacle etc.,

and afterwards it details the bringing of all the vessels of the Tabernacle to their places and the services performed with them<sup>3</sup>

: "And he placed the table etc. and he arranged upon it the arrangement of bread etc. and he placed the menorah in the Tent of Meeting etc. and he kindled the lamps etc. and he placed the golden altar etc. and he burned incense upon it etc.",

and only afterwards<sup>4</sup>

"And he placed the screen of the entrance to the Tabernacle"; and after "And the altar of burnt offering he placed etc. and he offered upon it the burnt offering and the meal offering"<sup>5</sup>,

it is stated<sup>6</sup>

"And he erected the courtyard all around the Tabernacle and the altar etc.".

And behold, the Ramban here¹

elaborates,

that the intention of the verses is not to relate the order of the actions in actuality,

and concludes with "and he offered upon it the burnt offering and the meal offering in their time"^*6,

for the courtyard around the Mishkan had not yet been erected, and they do not sacrifice without hangings, for they would be slaughtered outside, but

(he made)

all of them in their time

(after the completion of the erection of the Mishkan and the courtyard⁷)

".

But from the fact that Rashi did not write that the intention of the verses is not to explain the order of the actions,

it implies apparently,

that according to the simple meaning of Scripture,

the section was stated in order⁸,

namely that the services and offerings of each vessel were done immediately upon its being brought to its place in the Tent of Meeting⁹.

And accordingly, it is found that according to Rashi's method, all the services,

the arranging of the bread,

the kindling of the lamps,

and the incense offering on the altar and the sacrifice on the outer altar — were before

(the placing of the entrance of the Mishkan and)

the erection of the courtyard,

and he was not concerned with what the Ramban wrote that "they do not sacrifice without hangings"^*9.

2.

And behold, in tractate Zevachim, Rashi and Tosafos disagree regarding what the Gemara says¹⁰

"In two places holy things are eaten..

before the Levites set up the Mishkan and after the Levites dismantle the Mishkan":

Rashi explained¹¹

that "after the Levites dismantle the Mishkan",

means also the dismantling of the courtyard curtains, and the altar is still in its place¹²,

and according to Tosafos¹³

means when the altar and the courtyard curtains are in their place,

for if the courtyard curtains were also dismantled,

the camp of the Divine Presence does not exist regarding most holy things.

And according to this, one can say seemingly that Rashi on the Torah follows his method in his commentary on the Talmud,

that one can explain the eating of holy sacrifices also when there are no hangings for the courtyard, and the Ramban holds like the explanation of the Tosafot there.

<pg>219</pg>

[And in explaining the reasoning of the dispute, one can say,

that the application of the law of the courtyard of the Tent of Meeting can be explained in two ways: a)

simply,

that the law of the courtyard applies by means of the partition of the hangings of the courtyard around the altar

(and as implied by the language of the Rambam regarding the Temple courtyard<sup>14</sup>

"they make another partition around the Sanctuary distant from it like the hangings of the courtyard that were in the desert, and everything enclosed by this partition, which is like the courtyard of the Tent of Meeting, is called the Temple courtyard"),

b)

the erection of the altar before the entrance of the Tent of Meeting establishes for it the boundary of the courtyard of the Tent of Meeting and the application of the boundary of the Temple courtyard

(and courtyard),

and the hangings of the courtyard are only like a condition and sign

(up to where the courtyard of the Tent of Meeting extends),

but not that they effect the application of the courtyard of the Tent of Meeting

(and the law of the Temple courtyard)].

— And even though at first glance there is a distinction between the dispute of Rashi and Tosafos and the two approaches in the commentary on the Torah,

the explanation of the verses,

for in the Talmud there it is after the Tabernacle and the curtains were erected

(the courtyard of the Tabernacle)

and the curtains were removed and the question is whether then there is disqualification of "going out"

(regarding eating of most holy sacrifices),

and it implies that regarding the offering they need the curtains of the courtyard also according to Rashi's view,

except that there is a special teaching in the Gemara there¹⁵

that after it was offered, the meat is not disqualified by "going out,"

and it is permitted to eat it even without curtains since the altar remains —

behold from Rashi's words there it is proven that this law is not only regarding eating of most holy sacrifices,

but also regarding offering,

and furthermore,

not only that they can offer etc. on the altar when they dismantled the curtains,

but they offer when they erect the Tabernacle even before the placement of the curtains:

In the explanation of the words of the Gemara<sup>16</sup>

"In two places" — "before the Levites set up the Mishkan" Rashi<sup>17</sup>

"Before the Levites set up the Mishkan that it states here is not precise, for one thing you do not find that the altar was placed before the setting up of the Mishkan, since before the camp of the sons of Kehat, carriers of the altars, the sons of Gershon and Merari, carriers of the Mishkan, would camp and set it up..

The sons of Gershon set up the Mishkan until the arrival of the sons of Kehat"<sup>18</sup>.

And he continues, "And if you establish it by 'they changed the order,' how can you slaughter offerings before they set up the Mishkan? Doesn't it say in Eizehu Mekoman<sup>19</sup>

Regarding peace-offerings that were slaughtered before the Levites set up etc., they are invalid,

And if you read it, establish it by 'they changed the order,' and that one in Eizehu Mekoman specifically says peace-offerings because it is written about them<sup>20</sup>

And he shall slaughter it at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting, and one does not derive other holy things from them."

Behold, it is explained that according to Rashi, the reason we do not read "before the Levites set up the Mishkan" is because of the reality,

Since initially they set up the Mishkan and the courtyard<sup>21</sup>

And afterwards the sons of Kehat come and bring in the vessels,

But not because it is forbidden to offer on the altar before the erection of the courtyard<sup>22</sup>

(And the Mishkan),

<pg>220</pg>

And on the contrary,

according to what Rashi explained that if they changed the order

(and they offered on the altar before the erection of the Mishkan and the courtyard)

they are invalid, this is A)

because there is lacking here the entrance of the Tent of Meeting<sup>23</sup>,

and not because there is no sanctity of the altar and courtyard of the Tent of Meeting and it is like slaughtering outside

(according to the words of the Ramban).

B)

This law is only regarding peace-offerings and not regarding other sacred offerings.

And thus in our case in our parshah,

where A)

there was here the category of "entrance of the Tent of Meeting",

as it is explicit "and the altar of burnt-offering at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting",

except that "the courtyard around the Mishkan and the altar" had not been erected,

B)

the discussion is about the offering of a burnt-offering and a meal-offering

(and not peace-offerings)

— properly the offering on the altar is valid before the hangings of the courtyard were set up<sup>*23</sup>.

But when you examine, there is no place to explain that according to Rashi the order of the offering on the day of the establishment of the Tabernacle was in such a manner because he follows his method in the Talmud,

for even according to his method in the Talmud this is only a service that is valid after the fact<sup>24</sup>,

and it is obvious that the proper and desirable order of offering in the Tabernacle is when the Tabernacle is complete in all its parts and all its vessels in their place<sup>25</sup>.

And behold, in these verses it deals with the beginning of the establishment of the Tabernacle on the eighth day of the consecration,

and it is not reasonable that on this day they would perform the services in the Tabernacle in a manner valid only after the fact and not in the desirable manner initially — and certainly the burning, the offering, and the service with all the vessels were when they were complete<sup>26</sup>.

3.

And therefore it seems to explain the dispute of Rashi and the Ramban based on what we have explained elsewhere<sup>27</sup>

that they disagree in explaining the reason that Moses established the Tabernacle during the seven days of consecration before the first of Nissan,

even though the Holy One, blessed be He, commanded him<sup>28</sup>

"On the day of the first month, on the first of the month, you shall establish the Tabernacle, the Tent of Meeting";

The Ramban²⁹

wrote "for

(the Holy One, blessed be He)

said to him<pg>221</pg>

At first

(before the seven days of inauguration)

And you shall set up the Mishkan according to its ordinance, as you were shown on the mountain"³⁰,

And when the Holy One, blessed be He, said to him "On the first day of the month, on the first of the month you shall set up, etc." that is that "On the first day of the month its setting up shall be for permanence³¹,

behold he knew that during the days of inauguration he would need to set up and take down etc.".

That is,

according to the Ramban, the first command

("And you shall erect etc.")

refers to the seven days of the consecration, and its meaning is erection in order to dismantle it,

and the second command, which refers to Rosh Chodesh Nissan, is about a different type of "erection,"

"to establish it."

But Rashi in his commentary on the Torah does not explain that the intention in the command of its erection on Rosh Chodesh Nissan is "you shall establish it to stand,"

and since he is unspecific, it implies that he holds that the meaning of "On the day of the first month etc. you shall erect the Tabernacle etc." is

(not that on this day "its erection will be to stand,"

but rather)

according to its simple meaning,

that its erection

(simple)

will generally be on this day,

and that is to say that this verse is an "explanation" of the verse "And you shall erect etc."

And accordingly,

that Moses erected the Tabernacle before Rosh Chodesh Nissan,

he was not commanded about this

(explicitly)³²,

but rather he learned this from the fact that he was commanded to initiate Aaron and his sons into their service,

and the initiation into service must be in the place where the service will be done afterwards permanently.

And he was also commanded that all seven days of the consecration should be "at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting etc."³³,

thus it is necessary to erect the Tabernacle.

That is, according to Rashi, the setting up of the Mishkan before Rosh Chodesh Nissan did not have the definition of "and you shall erect the Mishkan",

which comes as a fulfillment of the command "and make for Me a sanctuary"&lt;sup&gt;34&lt;/sup&gt;,

but was only a detail

(and condition)

in the fulfillment of other commands; unlike according to the Ramban, even before the eighth day of the inauguration there was in this the definition of the erection of the Mishkan,

except that it was not in the manner of the eighth day of the inauguration when there was "its erection for permanence".

And accordingly it is found,

that according to the Ramban,

the main definition of "the inauguration of the Mishkan" was during the seven days of the inauguration,

and consequently the Mishkan on the eighth day is already not in the category of "inauguration" but is the completion of the Mishkan,

as its service must be in its completeness — the regular service throughout all the time.

And according to Rashi

(according to the simple meaning of the plain text)

since during the seven days of the consecration there was not the category of the erection of the Mishkan, but rather the initiation of Aharon and his sons,

it follows,

that only on the eighth day of the consecration was there an act of "the erection of the Mishkan" as an "initiation" for the services of the Mishkan.

And that is, that on the eighth day itself there were two categories in the Mishkan: a)

the eighth day,

the eighth of the days of consecration,

which is the initiation for the service of the Mishkan,

and the fulfillment of the command "And they shall make for Me a Sanctuary"

[and therefore we find that

(also)

on the eighth day of the consecration Moshe offered&lt;sup&gt;35&lt;/sup&gt;

communal offerings

(as Rashi says&lt;sup&gt;36&lt;/sup&gt;),

and also we find several changes in the order of the service on the day of the erection of the Mishkan relative to the fixed order of service for generations

(in the arrangement of the showbread&lt;sup&gt;37&lt;/sup&gt;,

the raising of the lamps and more&lt;sup&gt;38&lt;/sup&gt;)],

b)

after the Shekhinah dwelt, &lt;pg&gt;222&lt;/pg&gt;

the Shekhinah dwelt,

that then the Mishkan was completed and sanctified in its entirety — after it was anointed and the Shekhinah dwelt in it through the offerings of Aharon&lt;sup&gt;39&lt;/sup&gt;,

then from then on it is considered the beginning of the perpetual service of the Mishkan for the entire duration of its time&lt;sup&gt;40&lt;/sup&gt;.

And therefore it is not difficult that all the details of the service in all the vessels were done immediately after their erection

(according to the plain meaning of the verses),

because in this portion it deals with the "inauguration of the Tabernacle",

and not with

(the beginning)

of the continual service

(the regular)

in the Tabernacle⁴¹,

and "inauguration" has different conditions⁴².

And it can be said that they follow their respective approaches: according to the Ramban,

that the verse descends here to explain all the services performed in all the vessels immediately after the account of the erection of each vessel,

even though in practice the service in them was not performed until after the completion of the erection of the Tabernacle and its vessels and their anointing⁴³,

because by this the verse comes to explain the nature of each vessel,

and the Ramban follows his approach that he holds⁴⁴

that the vessels are the preparation for the service⁴⁵

"because we were commanded to place bread before the Lord always, and He commanded us regarding the preparation of this service, that it is to place it on a table described thus, and that it be arranged for us that this lighting be in a golden menorah of its weight and nature thus and thus, and behold they are holy implements",

and he disagrees with the opinion of the Rambam⁴⁶

that the vessels are parts of the Temple and are included in the commandment of "And they shall make Me a sanctuary".

But according to Rashi in the simple meaning of Scripture, it can be said that he holds like the opinion of the Rambam,

that all the vessels are from the parts of the Sanctuary,

and therefore it is understood that this that all the details of the service performed with all the vessels were said immediately after their placement — even though it is simple that one may not offer a sacrifice in a vessel before the building and erection of the entire Mishkan,

which is completed specifically when it is entirely intact and all the vessels are in their place

— it is because in this portion it deals with "the inauguration of the Mishkan",

as above.

4.

But explanation is needed: why was the inauguration of the Mishkan

(on the eighth day of the consecration)

in such a manner — offering on the altar before the erection of the courtyard of the Tent of Meeting?

<pg>223</pg>

And one must say the explanation in this

(at least in the inner aspects of the matters)

:

The command "And they shall make for Me a Sanctuary" is a command for generations to build a house for G-d,

And in the language of the Rambam⁴⁹

"A positive commandment to make a house for G-d prepared to offer in it the sacrifices etc. as it is said 'And they shall make for Me a Sanctuary'",

And this command applies to all Houses of Sanctification⁵⁰.

Except that this command was said to Moses and was first fulfilled in the building of the Mishkan which Moses made.

And it is found,

that even though the fulfillment of this commandment in its completeness was in the building of the Temple in Jerusalem,

that a permanent building was made "and there is no place for a dwelling for generations except in Jerusalem alone and on Mount Moriah"⁵¹,

whereas the Mishkan was only "temporarily"⁵²,

nevertheless,

since the commandment

(according to its simple meaning)

and the fulfillment of the commandment

(according to its simple meaning)

was done by Moshe in the making of the Mishkan,

therefore its fulfillment throughout all the generations comes from the power of the Mishkan and its making by Moshe in this.

[And as it is in the form of the Temple,

that the Rambam wrote¹⁴

that the things that are essential in the building of the Temple, they are the things that were in the Mishkan: they make in it the Holy and the Holy of Holies and there shall be before the Holy one place and it is called the Ulam 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 desert and all that is enclosed by this partition which is like the courtyard of the Tent of Meeting is called the Azarah and the whole is called the Mikdash — so it is in the details of the matters of the Temple⁵³].

And according to this, one could say,

that the inauguration⁵⁴

of the eighth day of the consecration is additional to the inauguration of the Mishkan — "inauguration" of all the Temples and all matters of the Temple in all generations.

And behold, according to most of the poskim we hold as halacha that "we offer all the sacrifices even though there is no built House, and we eat most holy sacrifices in the entire azarah even though it is desolate and not surrounded by a partition"⁵⁵.

And even though the Rambam wrote them

(mainly)

regarding the sanctity of the place of the Temple and the courtyard from the aspect of the sanctification of Shlomo,

"that he sanctified the courtyard and Jerusalem for their time and sanctified them for the future to come"⁵⁶,

and as the Rambam explained⁵⁷

the distinction between "the Temple and Jerusalem" and "the sanctity of the rest of Eretz Yisrael",

that "the sanctity of the Temple and Jerusalem is because of the Shechinah and the Shechinah is not nullified",

it seems to me that there is to say more than this,

that also in the Temple itself

(not only its place)

there is in it eternality even when it is not built and surrounded by a partition⁵⁸,

and this is made and drawn from the <pg>224</pg>

the inauguration of the Mishkan⁵⁹

by Moshe on the eighth day of the consecration,

in a manner that he performed service in it before the completion of the building — and this is in that "and the altar of burnt offering he placed at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting and he offered upon it the burnt offering and the meal offering" before the erection of "the courtyard around the Mishkan and the altar",

this was an inauguration for all this.

5.

And it is to be explained in greater depth,

with an introduction of another question,

that superficially, that the vessels were placed before the erection of the entire Mishkan, this is the opposite of the order that the Holy One, blessed be He, commanded,

and as Rashi brought at the beginning of the parshah⁶⁰

"Which he commanded Moses is not written here, but rather 'all that the Lord commanded Moses'..

For Moses commanded Bezalel to first make vessels and afterwards the Mishkan. Bezalel said to him: The custom of the world is to first make a house and afterwards place vessels inside it. He said to him: Thus I heard from the mouth of the Holy One, blessed be He."

And so was the order of the erection of the Mishkan and its vessels at the time of the journeys,

and as above, that first the sons of Gershon and the sons of Merari would erect the Mishkan,

And when the sons of Kohath come, "they find it in its place and bring into it the Ark and the Table and the Menorah and the Altars"⁶¹.

And thus it is most perplexing why on the first day of the erection of the Mishkan the order was reversed: regarding the altar of burnt offering which was erected and they offered upon it before they erected the courtyard around it,

And regarding the rest of the vessels,

that "And he brought the ark into the Mishkan" and afterwards "And he placed the screen of the partition"⁶²,

And likewise the bringing in of the vessels into the Tent of Meeting and the offering upon them was before the completion of the building by means of "And he placed the screen of the entrance to the Mishkan",

since ostensibly a building without an entrance is not a complete building.

But these are the very things: "In the ordinary way of the world",

namely according to the regular order one must "first make a house and afterwards place vessels inside it",

And a building such as this which is defined by the boundaries of "the order of the world" is not an enduring and eternal matter; and in order that there be the matter of eternity and permanence in

(the commandment)

"And they shall make for Me a Sanctuary",

that they offer even though there is no house "and they eat etc. not surrounded by partitions" — the empowerment for this comes specifically from the erection in such a manner as was on the eighth day of the consecration,

which is not "as the way of the world",

but rather in a change

(above)

from the constant order.

And therefore it could take effect,

that there could be an act of offering regarding the showbread and the lighting of the menorah and the incense offering on the golden altar even before the completion of the Mishkan,

and before the placement of the screen of the entrance to the Mishkan

(and also before the placement of the altar of burnt offering and the erection of the courtyard around),

for this rule that in order for the name "Mishkan" to take effect they need all the parts and all its vessels is in the manner of "order" — "the normal way of the world",

but not before this,

for then it is before the condition of the normal way of the world,

then there is no limitation in this.

6.

And from this also a lesson in the service of man to his Maker: the service of man as it should be in the regular manner,

the perpetual offerings in their order,

is the service according to order and gradation,

from below upward,

first the service in general,

in general matters and afterwards in particular matters.

But from time to time

(and especially in the generation of the heels of Mashiach when "we know not until what" in the secret of the service of clarifications)

the manner of service must be above "the normal way of the world" — order and gradation — rather grab and eat, grab and drink.

And in general,

it must be so at the beginning of every education&lt;pg&gt;225&lt;/pg&gt;

a boy and a girl in Israel,

that even though it must be "Train the youth according to his way"&lt;sup&gt;63&lt;/sup&gt;

specifically,

one should not suffice only with education in "limited" service that is according to order and custom of the world,

even though this is also according to the order of holiness,

rather the education must be in a manner that is above reason and intellect&lt;sup&gt;64&lt;/sup&gt;,

until the manner of service of self-sacrifice.

And specifically education in such a manner,

brings that "even when he grows old he will not depart from it"⁶³

regarding the matter of the permanence and eternity of the strength of Judaism of the educated one,

that even when he is not in the house and partitions of holiness,

he stands strong and firm in the service of G-d,

and "offers"

(his body and his animal soul to G-d⁶⁵),

"even though there is no

(he is in)

house" — a dwelling where the holiness of the Holy One, blessed be He, shines permanently and in a revealed manner

(in the synagogue and study hall),

and also "eats holy things",

that a matter of holiness in its strength becomes his eating — his sustenance and vitality,

"even though

(the environment)

is desolate and not surrounded by a partition" — the restrictions of holiness.

And by that each one will educate himself and his household and his environment in such a manner,

this hastens even more the completion of the time of education,

which is our service of the time of exile

(as the words of our Rabbis, of blessed memory⁶⁶),

with the coming of our righteous Messiah,

and the building of the third Holy Temple⁶⁷,

which will be an eternal building,

the building of the Holy One, blessed be He⁶⁸,

speedily in our days, literally,

and in our time.

(From sichos of Shabbos Parshas Vayikra-Purim 5745,

Shabbos Parshas Shemini 5725)