Selected and Adapted by Rabbi Do\l Karon

Quote from the Rosh Yeshiva The Torah tells us ... that the Mishkan is to be built through Bnei Yisrael's donations .... One gets the impressi on that the Torah here encourages good will and voluntarism, that it praises the Jewish people for their unsolicited contributions. However, Rashi (25:2) writes that the sockets, which supported the beams of the Mishkan, were manufactured not from voluntary donations, but from the mandatory half-shekel tax levied from the people regardless of their generous contributions .... One's service of the Almighty must be based primarily upon an ingrained sense of obligation, duty, commitment - not good will and voluntarism. One must feel obligated to fulfill the mitzvot, and cannot perform them merely because he finds them interesting or appealing. Some people think that a good Jew is one who fully identifies with everything he does .... Rashi here teaches us that while the Mishkan required voluntary donations, the sockets - the basis and foundation of the Mishkan - were built not from voluntary contributions but from mandatory taxation. One must inculcate in himself, before anything else, a profound sense of commitment. -Harav Yehuda Am ital zt"I Parashat Teruma The Mishkan

Based on a Sicha by Harav Baruch Gigi Based on : https://www.etzion.org.il/en/mishkan-O

The commentators are divided over the question of when it was that Bnei Yisrael were commanded to build the Mishkan. Some maintain that the parshiot of Sefer Shemot are recorded in chronological order, such that the command precedes the sin of the golden calf. Others believe that the command was given after and in response to the sin, after it was clear that for Bnei Yisrael - at least at that time - God's transcendental reality in the world was not sufficient; they could not maintain a complete physical severance from God and needed some tangible manifestation of His Presence in their midst. Rash i's well-known position (31:18) is that "The Torah does not follow chronological order. The sin of the golden calf preceded by far the command to fashion the Mishkan." Ram ban (33:7) disagrees: "Rashi wrote .. . 'and the Torah does not follow chronological order.' But this does not seem correct to me, for what reason is there to mention this [the command to build the Mishkan] here, in the middle of the narrative [if it did not take place at this point]?" Ram ban's position, here as elsewhere, is that the order of the Torah does follow the chronology of the events that it records. His approach in our context implies that the construction of the Mishkan is a fundamental, essential component in the life of the nation, rather than just an act of repair following the sin of the golden calf - since, in his view, the construction of the Mishkan had already been commanded before that incident occurred. In his introduction to Sefer Shemot, Ramban develops this idea: When they left Egypt, even though they had emerged from the house of slavery still they were considered exiles, for they were in a land that was not their own, wandering about in the wilderness. And when they came to Mount Sinai and built the Mishkan, and the Holy One, blessed be He, restored His Presence to their midst, they regained the level of their forefathers, who had enjoyed God's Presence ... , and they became His chariot, [as it were], and then they were considered truly redeemed. And therefore this Book (Shemot) ends with the completion of the matter of the Mishkan and of God's glory filling it perpetually. Thus, the redemption of Am Yisrael did not end with the Exodus from Egypt, nor even with the giving of the Torah . Redemption means a life lived before God, and on the national level - Am Yisrael representing a "chariot for the Divine Presence." A person who lives a full and interesting life, but bereft of any consciousness of standing before God, is not redeemed. Thus, the Mishkan is an essential part of the national life of Am Yisrael, granting the nation the title of "chariot for the Divine Presence." The presence of the Mishkan is a continuation of the experience of Sinai, and a foundation for God's perpetual presence in the midst of the encampment, creating a life of holiness. Without the Mishkan, Am Yisrael is not living that life of holiness before God. "Then they regained the level of their forefathers" - which forefathers? Avraham, Yitzchak and Yaakov, who "hosted" God in their tents, as it were, as a matter of course: "And God appeared to him at Alonei Mamrei while he sat at the entrance to his tent in the heat of the day" (Bereishit 18:1)! God cannot be revealed to every individual in the nation of Israel; hence He chose to let His Presence rest in one place - the Mishkan - in order to offer every individual member of the nation the possibility of a redeemed and holy life with an awareness of God's Presence in their midst: "Let them make Me a Mishkan, that I may dwell in their midst" (25:8) . (Translated by Kaeren Fish)

Parashat Teruma Mishkan, Mikdash and Ohel Mo'ed By Harav Yaakov Medan

Based on: https://www.etzion.org.il/en/concerning-mishkan

A. "Mikdash" vs . "Mishkan" We generally use the terms "Mishkan" and "Mikdash" as names for the structures in which God's Shekhina rested. The Mishkan (Sanctuary) refers to the portable structure that Moshe established in the desert, as well as to the temporary edifice that Bnei Yisrael established in Shilo under Yehoshua 's leadership following 14 years of conquest and division of the land. The Mikdash is the building that King Shlomo built in Jerusalem and which Nevukhadnetzar destroyed (the First Temple), as well as the building that Zerubavel and Yehoshua ben Yehotzadak built with the return of the Babylonian exile under Persian rule (the Second Temple); King Herod renovated this building and Titus destroyed it. It is this building that we pray will be built again speedily in our days, and it will stand forever - , and so may it be God's will. However, these terms sometimes have more specific significance. Regarding the term 'Mikdash ,' the Gemara (Eruvin 2a-b) points out that a verse (Bemidbar 10:21, see there) referring to Mikdash is actually speaking of the Ark of the Covenant. Accordingly, perhaps we should reinterpret the verse mentioning the "Mikdash" in our parasha: "THEY SHALL MAKE ME A MIKDASH and I shall dwell in their midst. As all that I show you, the form of the Mishkan and the form of all its vessels - so shall you fashion [them]. AND THEY SHALL MAKE AN ARK of shittim wood, two cubits and a half long, and a cubit and a half wide, and a cubit and a half high." (25:8-10) From verse 10 onwards the Torah specifies the form of the Ark, referred to in verse 8 as a "Mikdash." Verse 9, dividing between these stages, is the conclusion of the first section (w. 1-9) - a sort of summary of the sections that follow in the paras ha (compare 25:40 and 26:30). As such, in the next verse, the word "Mikdash" again refers to the Ark of the Covenant. This is comparable to the description in Divrei Ha-Yamim {I, ch . 28), where verse 2 describes David's desire "to build A HOUSE OF REST FOR THE ARK OF GOD'S COVENANT," and then verse 10 refers to that construction as "A HOUSE FOR THE MIKDASH ." A comparison of the verses shows that the "Mikdash" means the Ark, and the entire edifice is named after it.

The "Mishkan" in its more specific sense refers to the bottom layer of curtains: "YOU SHALL MAKE THE MISH KAN OF 10 CURTAINS, fine twisted linen and blue and purple and scarlet, [with] artistic keruvim shall you fashion them" (26:1) . Thus, regarding the construction of the boards, we are told: "You shall fashion the boards FOR THE MISH KAN ... " (26:18). The boards are FOR the Mishkan, while the curtains themselves are the Mishkan.

2 Indeed, when the Mishkan was established in Shilo, it was built of stone; the boards were put away, since they were not essential to the Mishkan. But the stone edifice in Shilo was built without a permanent roof; the curtains of the Mishkan that Betzalel and Oholi'av had made in the desert were placed over it. These curtains gave the building its name - Mishkan.

Let us now address the relationship between the specific references of the terms "Mishkan" and "Mikdash." The Mikdash, as we said, was the Ark - the ARK OF TESTIMONY (Aron ha-Eidut), named after the Tablets of Testimony it housed. The Mishkan is also referred to as the "Mishkan ha-Eidut" (Mishkan of testimony), named for the Tablets of Testimony within it: "These are the accounts of the Mishkan, the MISH KAN OF TESTIMONY, as they were counted by Moshe's word, the work of the Leviim being by the hand of ltamar ben Aharon the Kohen" (38:21). The rest of the shiur will focus on this name for the Mishkan.

B. "Mishkan" and "ohel" As we have noted, in Sefer Shemot and in Sefer Bamidbar, the name by which the building is usually known is "Mishkan." In Sefer Vayikra, on the other hand, it is referred to as the "ohel mo'ed" (tent of meeting). Sometimes both names appear together: "He abandoned the Mishkan of Shilo, the tent (ohel) where He dwelled among people" (Tehillim 78:60). In one sense, "ohel" is the general name for the whole structure. More specifically, "ohel" refers to the goat skins that were spread over the curtains of the Mishkan: "You shall fashion curtains out of goatskins as a covering (ohel) over the Mishkan." (26:7). Let us examine the difference between the curtains of the 'Mishkan' and the curtains of the 'ohel.' The curtains that comprise the Mishkan are splendid, royal items, fashioned from the finest of materials: blue, purple and scarlet thread, fine twisted linen, with artistic keruvim woven into them. Their loops are made of blue thread, with gold clasps joining them. These curtains are relatively short; they drape over and hang in the air - nowhere do they reach the ground. The curtains comprising the ohel, on the other hand, are not necessary beautiful. They are black - the color of goat hair in this region in biblical times. (White goats were imported only much later on.) When these curtains covered the Mishkan curtains, the Mishkan would probably have looked like a Bedouin shepherd tent: a black tent made of goat hair. The loops here are regular loops, and the clasps are made not of gold but of brass. These curtains are longer; reaching the ground, even trailing along the ground, with no artistic images woven into them . There is an obvious, technical explanation for the difference between the 2 sets of curtains: the Mishkan curtains are the bottom, inner layer. They are visible to one standing inside the Mishkan, and they are its essential content. These curtains are beautiful, but they are delicate and cannot withstand desert weather conditions without fading or tearing. Desert weather features drastic temperature changes between day and night, sandstorms, sudden showers, etc. The ohel curtains surround the Mishkan curtains on the outside. They are less beautiful, but sturdier and more resistant to weather damage. But perhaps there is also a more fundamental, qualitative difference between the 2 sets of curtains. Let us consider this difference through the perspective of Shir Ha-shirim: "I am black but beautiful, 0 daughters of Jerusalem; like the tents of Kedar, like Shlomo's curtains" (Shir Ha-shirim 1:5). Chazal, in the midrashim, note the contrast between black and beautiful, taking black to mean ugly. As such, this verse seems to read as follows: "I am black - but comely, 0 daughters of Jerusalem, / like the tents of Kedar - like Shlomo's curtains" - read prosaically as, "I am black like the tents of Kedar, but beautiful like Shlomo's curtains." The nation of Israel is compared in this verse to the Mishkan: on the inside, beautiful like the Mishkan curtains - indeed beautiful, precious and royal - "Shlomo's curtains." But on the outside, because of the goatskin curtains covering it, the Mishkan looks like one of the tents of Kedar, tents of desert nomads. The image of God, who dwells in the Mishkan and the ohel, is similar to that of Knesset Yisrael. God is the Supreme King of kings, and the nation of Israel is His royal flock. As King, it is appropriate that a magnificent palace be built for Him from the finest of materials: Shlomo's curtains, the curtains of the Mishkan. But God is not only King; He is also a Shepherd, and Am Yisrael is His flock in the wilderness - the natural grazing site for sheep. And thus God is likened by the prophets: "He will feed His flock like a Shepherd, gathering the lambs in His arm and carrying them in His bosom, and leading those that have young" (Yeshayahu 40:11; see also Yirmeyahu 23:2-3; Yechezkel 34:11-16). Like a shepherd pasturing his flocks in the desert, so God feeds and sustains His nation with bread and water, protecting them from all enemies and troubles. It appears that Moshe's staff - symbolizing God's outstretched arm - was also originally a simple shepherd's staff. It served him to

3 ward off bandits and animals of prey while he shepherded the flocks of Yitro, his father-in-law, in the wilderness. This same weapon came to be used against Pharoah and against Amalek, symbolizing the arm of God leading His people in the wilderness for 40 years. And God's resting place is in the ohel made of goat hair curtains and brass clasps.

Let us return to Shir Ha-shirim. God's 2 images in this text are the Beloved ("My Beloved answered and said to me: 'Arise, My love, My fair one, and come .. ." '), and Shlomo ("Go out and see, 0 daughters of Jerusalem, King Shlomo, wearing the crown that his mother crowned him with on the day of his wedding, on the day of his heart's gladness"). Closer examination shows that as "the Beloved," God appears "from the desert," as a shepherd and as a gazelle; an appearance that seems spontaneous and sudden, while as "Shlomo," God's appearance is royal and grand. God's appearances parallel the images of David - the shepherd and warrior defending his people, whose life amongst the nation is replete with ups and downs, love and alienation; and Shlomo - the magnificent king, ruling over all the lands, whose life amongst the nation is fixed and institutionalized; his status clear and unequivocal.

C. Testimony and Meeting We have noted that the Mishkan is referred to as the "Mishkan of Testimony," while the ohel is called the "Ohel Mo'ed" (tent of meeting). Just as the ohel curtains are laid upon the Mishkan curtains, so the kaporet (covering) is laid over the Ark. The Ark contains the Tablets of Testimony, while the function of the kaporet is: "When Moshe came to the Ohel Mo'ed to speak with Him, he heard the voice speaking to him from above the kaporet that was upon the Ark of Testimony, from between the two keruvim, and it spoke with him" (Bamidbar 7:89). The "testimony" (edut) is the Written Law, the written Tablets. The "meeting" is the giving of the Oral Law. God meets with Moshe in the Ohel Mo'ed (tent of meeting), and speaks with him . The Tablets of Testimony represent the institutionalized relations between Am Yisrael and the King Who appears at Mount Sinai, with all His entourage, and gives fixed, unchanging instructions. This testimony is like God's appearance in Shir Ha-shirim as "Shlomo"; it is reminiscent of the fixed, institutionalized relationship of marriage. The "meeting," on the other hand, is the element of the Oral Law. This meeting is one of direct speech with Am Yisrael, through Moshe. This is revelation at whatever time God chooses - like the dramatic appearances of the Beloved in Shir Ha-shirim. It is reminiscent of the period of engagement; it is dramatic and immediate, but not permanent. In both appearances - both 'edut' and meeting, both Ark (aron) and kaporet (covering), both Mishkan and ohel, both Written Law and Oral Law, Shepherd and King, David and Shlomo - the relationship between God and His people is realized in the Mishkan.

D. Middot We have addressed the Mishkan as a "Mishkan of testimony," but the Kodesh ha-Kodashim also houses a container of manna. The Torah takes care to specify exact measurements for the construction of the Mishkan: 2.5 cubits is the length of the Ark, 1.5 cubits is its width, and it is 1.5 cubits high. Likewise, measurements are stipulated for the Table, the altars, the boards and the curtains. Even more elaborate and exact measurements than those given for the Mishkan and its vessels are provided for the Mikdash and its vessels (Melakhim I, chapters 6-7). Special elaboration on the measurements of the Mikdash appears in the prophecy of Yechezkel : "In the visions of God He brought me into Eretz Yisrael, and placed me upon a very high mountain, upon which was a structure like that of a city to the south .. .. In the man's hand was a measuring rod of 6 cubits, by a cubit and a handbreadth" (40:2, 5) . Yechezkel goes on to rebuke the people: " ... Let them be ashamed of their sins, and measure the form " (43:10). Yechezkel sees an angel measuring the spaces, porches, openings, and posts; the angel goes on to measure chambers and floors, courtyards and tables, the house and its sides, the galleries, and the walls; the altar and the courtyards; the measurements of the Temple Mount and of Jerusalem, the areas for the Kohanim and Leviim, and - finally - the portion of the prince. It would seem that the minute detail of Yechezkel's specifications is meant to lead up to his concluding prophecy: So says the Lord God: You have done enough, 0 princes of Israel. Remove violence and spoil, and perform judgment and righteousness. Take away your exactions from My people, declares the Lord God. You shall have just balances and just quantities and just measurements. The 'efa' and the 'bat' shall be of one measure, so that the 'bat' shall be a tenth of a 'chomer,' and the

4 'efa' shall be a tenth of a 'chomer': it shall be measured according to the 'chomer'. And the 'shekel' shall be 20 'gera'; 20 shekels, 25 shekels, and 15 shekels shall be your portions. (45:9-12) All the exactness and precision of the measurements of the Mikdash comes to teach us the proper precision of a judge in judgment and of a shopkeeper in his measurements. If a proper'efa' is missing from the market, the yardstick for measuring God's Sanctuary is also absent. The container of manna placed in the Mishkan is "an omer-full:'With regard to the manna, we have learned previously that it functions as a test for Bnei Yisrael: could the entire nation gather "each person in accordance with his eating," or would one person eat what he needed and gather part of his neighbor's portion? Measures and weights, in addition to serving as a test for Bnei Yisrael in the wilderness, are also a precondition for God resting His Shekhina in His Mishkan. Translated by Kaeren Fish The Structure and Meaning of the Daily Prayer Shiur #17: and Uva-leTzion By Rav Ezra Bick

Based on: https://www.etzion.org.il/en/shiur-17-ashrei-and-uva-letzion

Tachanun, which we discussed in the previous shiur, concludes the framework of the Shemoneh Esrei. But the daily prayer is not yet over. Immediately after , we encounter a section consisting of verses. First, there is the chapter of Psalms commonly referred to as "Ashrei,'' followed by a short psalm of salvation ("May God answer you on a day of trial"), followed by the collection of verses known as "Uva Le-Tzion:' This section is the focus of our discussion in this shiur. The first element in this section is Ashrei. Most commentators offer no explanation for its location here, preferring to rely on the statement in (4b) that "one who recites Tehila Le-David 3 times every day is guaranteed a place in the World to Come:' Since Ashrei is recited in the beginning of and before , there is a need for a third recitation, so it was added at the end of Shacharit.I have never seen a better explanation, so we will leave it at that. Our focus will be on Uva Le-Tzion. This section basically consists of a series of verses, and it is difficult to explain its purpose or role. Unlike the berakhot that we have examined in the past, there is no framework with a well-defined structure that we can analyze. The one noticeable part with a familiar aspect is the presence of a Kedusha text at the beginning, but this provides more questions than answers. Why are we reciting Kedusha again, after including it in the Shemoneh Esrei? Why does this Kedusha come with a targum, a translation into Aramaic? And where is the context? In the Kedusha of the Shemoneh Esrei, we open with the call to sanctify God's name as it is sanctified in the heavens by the angels. In the Kedusha found before Keriat Shema, we describe how the angels sanctify God's name in praise and hymns, and then we cite the Kedusha. In our case, the verses of Kedusha are simply recited, with no more than a brief introduction stating the source. There is no call, introduction, or framework. Some answers to this question are based on the Kabba la. I would like to present a non-mystical explanation based on a comment of Ras hi. The Mishna in Sota (48a) states: "R. Yehoshua testified: Since the day that the Temple was destroyed, there is no day that is not cursed, and the dew has not descended with a blessing, and the flavor of fruits has been taken away:' The gemara (49a) expands this statement: Rava said: Every day has a greater curse than the previous one, as is written, "In the morning you will say, 'Who will bring the evening,' and in the evening you will say, 'Who will bring morning:"Which morning? If you say, the next morning, how does he know what will be? Rather, it is the previous morning! But if so, on what does the world endure? On the Kedusha De-Sidra and on the yehei shmei rabba of aggadeta. Rashi explains: Kedusha De-Sidra: The order (seder) of the Kedusha, as it was only instituted so that all of Israel would be engaged in a little bit ofTorah every day, when he recites its reading and the translation (targum), which is like being engaged in Torah. Since it applies to all of Israel, scholars and the common people (talmidim and amei ha-aretz), and there are 2 elements - the sanctification of the name of God and the study ofTorah - it is dear (chaviv). Rashi here defines for us the essential nature of Uva Le-Tzion, the Kedusha De-Sidra. It is an activity of learning Torah. But Rashi adds that what makes this learning ofTorah special (chaviv) is that it is the learning of"all of lsrael," the learned and the ignorant alike. This explains why the translation of the verses is part of the recitation. Any time Aramaic appears in the prayers, the explanation is that a special effort

5 was made to include the less-learned, who, in Babylonia, spoke Aramaic but might not understand Hebrew. Rashi is saying that this was the main purpose of the recitation. This is a chance to have a common experience of learning Torah of all of Israel, even those who normally would be precluded by their lack of education. The targum, then, is essential to achieve the goal. Rashi adds a second point: "There are 2 elements, the sanctification of the name and the study ofTorah:' If this were merely a cumulative addition, it would not be a cause to make the prayer special. Rashi clearly means that the 2 points somehow interrelate and combine to create something unique. What is the connection between the sanctification of the name of God and the study ofTorah? We are now basically after the morning prayer. Tefilla ends with Tachanun. What we are doing now is an answer to the question: What do we do, how do we live, when we depart from tefilla, from the presence of God? This is a very difficult transition, from kodesh to chol, from the presence of God to the mundane world outside. The answer of the Sages in constructing the morning prayer is to "learn a little bit of Torah:' After prayer, one must engage in learning. When you have finished praying, it is truly over. The experience of standing before God is finished. There is a clear demarcation between "inside" and "outside," between "sitting in the house of God all the days of my life" and living in the world of man, of trials and tribulations, of mundane values, successes and failures. Three steps backwards and you are outside. But Torah does not include the same wall of demarcation. There is no "mechitza" between the world ofTorah and the secular world. When you finish learning, the Torah accompanies you because it is part of you. In other words, Torah, even though it is the words of the living God and an intimate encounter with Him, is also part of the world. Prayer elevates you to the heavenly throne. Torah has already descended from on high, to Mt. Sinai, to the lower world in which we live. Torah is the bridge, and it is dear because every Jew is learning. If only the learned elite engages in Torah study, this is not "chaviv" - and perhaps more importantly, this will not support the existence of the world. The destruction of the Temple indicates that God has left, so to speak, the lower world. How, then, can the world persist? How can it exist if God is not present? The answer is through the common Torah of all Israel, because Torah is itself the presence of God in the world. If Israel is engaged in studying Torah, that is a recreation of the descent of Torah - and the presence of God - on Mt. Sinai. Only Israel as a national unit can be the seat of the presence of God in the world. The Torah of the elite, even if it is qualitatively and quantitatively immensely more than the "little bit" of the whole of Israel, is like the "house of God:' It is internal, sanctified, separated, an island within the world. But the Torah, even a little bit ofTorah, of all of Israel, transforms the world itself. This is what Rashi means when he says that there are 2 elements, Torah and the sanctification of the name of God. Sanctification of the name of God means raising the actual presence of God in the world. The Torah of Uva Le-Tzion, despite its simplicity, sanctifies the name of God in the world, precisely because it is the simple Torah of the common man, all together. This Torah serves as the basis of the Divine presence in the wide world, and not just in the beit mid rash. Hence, the Sages chose as the content of this "little bit ofTorah" verses that are themselves Kedusha. It is not the content of these verses that produces the sanctification of the name of God. Leaning Torah does that. But it is appropriate to make that clear by choosing the verses that explicitly state the sanctification of God, the text of the Kedusha. So this is not really a recitation of Kedusha. There is no need for an introduction, calling on the congregation to sanctify God's name, or to explain that the angels recite Kedusha on high. In fact, this kind of sanctification of God's name is completely outside the experience of the angels. Any verse would really have been just as effective. There is kedusha here, but it is not in the content of the verse but in the experience of the study ofTorah by all of Israel, as we leave the house of God and venture into the world. The experience is one ofTorah, rather than of reciting kedusha, but the result is kedusha. The prayer chosen after the kedusha verses make this very clear: "Blessed is our God, who has created us for His glory, and separated us from those who err,/ And has given us the true Torah, and eternal life has imprinted within us./ May He open our hearts in His Torah/ And place in our hearts His love and fear/ And the desire to do his will and serve Him with perfect heart:' In the Geonic siddur of R. Am ram Gaon, the prayer concludes at that point. (In the siddur of R. Saadya Gaon, only the Kedusha is found.) But today, in all siddurim, this is followed by a collection of verses about trust and faith in God: "Blessed is the man who trusts in God and God is his trust:'This now makes sense. We are going out into the world, leaving the safety of the sanctuary. We are on the bridge, leaving behind the walls of the house of God, having completed prayer. To do so, we must arm ourselves with the attribute of faith and trust. In the Sefardic rite, and actually in most Ashkenazi siddurim as well until the modern era, the very last verse is "Strengthen and fortify your hearts, all those who hope for God:'Torah of all Israel is the strength of the heart, to go out into the world and sanctify the name of God, of all who hope for God. 'i17 □ '7n'YJi1 7J , □ JJ.J.7 ynN1 ljnn To subscribe, or for comments, questions or sponsorship opportunities, please write us at: [email protected]

6