Commentary for Exodus 35:5

נדיב לבו [WHOSOEVER] IS OF A WILLING HEART — Because his heart prompts one to generosity, he is called נדיב לב, one who is prompted to generosity by the heart. I have already explained the various materials which formed the contribution towards the Tabernacle and the work done for it in the passages where the commands about them were given.

Y’VI’EHA’ (LET HIM BRING IT), THE ETERNAL’S OFFERING. This is like “yavi (let him bring) the Eternal’s offering.” But Scripture mentions a pronoun and then returns to explain it. Similarly: And she opened and saw him, the child;¹⁹Above, 2:6 when he went in, the man;²⁰Ezekiel 10:3. It should have said: b’vo ha’ish — when the man went in. the nation and the kingdom which will not serve him, Nebuchadnezzar;²¹Jeremiah 27:8. which I do give to them, the children of Israel.²²Joshua 1:2. There are many similar instances.
By way of the Truth, [the mystic lore of the Cabala], the phrase here is like “let him bring it ‘with’ the Eternal’s offering,” meaning that he is to bring the higher offering as alluded to in the secret of and they take for Me an offering.²³Above, 25:2. I have already explained it.²⁴Ibid., Verse 3. Our Rabbis have a Midrash²⁵Sotah 12b. on the verse, and she opened and saw him, the child,¹⁹Above, 2:6 that she saw with him the Divine Glory.
Now it was necessary for Moses to tell the whole congregation all the work which G-d had commanded him, in order to let them know that they had to bring large donations, for the work is great.²⁶I Chronicles 29:1. That is why he told them, The Tabernacle, its tent, and its covering etc.,²⁷Verse 11. mentioning all in a general way. The reason for the definite article in ‘eth hamishkan’ (the Tabernacle),²⁷Verse 11. ‘eth ha’aron’ (the ark),²⁸Verse 12. ‘eth hashulchan’ (the table),²⁹Verse 13. and all those mentioned with the definite article, is as if to say: “the Tabernacle and the vessels which we will explain to the wise men doing the work in their details and measurements,” but speaking now to the whole congregation, he told them only their names in general.

קחו מאתכם, you shall select from amongst yourselves men to collect the donations for G’d.

יביאה את תרומת השם, "let him bring it, i.e. the offering for the Lord." This verse clearly demonstrates that in the building of the Tabernacle we encounter both tangibles, perceptibles, and intangibles, imperceptibles. This is what is meant in Tikkunim 21 where we read that the תרומה, the donations for the Tabernacle, contained an intangible element, i.e. a contribution from the שכינה. The Torah calls this element תרומת השם, "G'd's contribution." It was this intangible contribution that enabled the tangible parts to be joined together and to form a sustainable whole, a tent that would not collapse. The most essential part in the construction was G'd's goodwill, i.e. an intangible. When the Torah writes יביאה, "he (the generously minded donor) is to bring it," this means that the donor is to elevate his gift to such a spiritual level that it may merge with the תרומת השם, G'd's contribution. When the Torah speaks of the כל נדיב לבו, it defines the kind of person whose gift will be of the calibre that can merge with G'd's intangible gift. If the human donor does not possess the spirit the Torah describes as נדיב לב, then the gift of such a person has no chance of merging with the Divine contribution described here as the invisible contribution תרומת השם.

יביאה את תרומת ה', “he shall bring it as his contribution to Hashem.” The meaning is the same as if the Torah had written יביא, without the letter ה at the end. It happens quite frequently in Scripture that the pronoun is used, as in this case, prematurely, and only afterwards does the Torah explain to what this pronoun [in this instance the letter ה for “it” referred. Another such example is found in Exodus 2,6 ותפתח ותראהו, “She opened it and saw him, את הילד, “the boy.” Moses now proceeds to tell the entire congregation all the details of the work to be performed, not because all the people would participate in it, but to make them aware of the gigantic nature of this project, undertaken in the desert in the absence of workshops, etc. It was also to bring home to them that substantial contributions were required to ensure the successful conclusion of the project. Interestingly, when referring to the Tabernacle as well as to its furnishings, Moses uses the definitive article, i.e. the letter ה, making it sound as if all these phenomena were already familiar to the people whom he addressed. By use of this definitive article, he intimated that the details would be conveyed to the artisans commissioned to actually carry out the work.

Take from among yourselves. Before the making of the calf it is written, “Have them take for Me a terumah-offering from every man whose heart impels him” (25:2). But now they were commanded, “Take from among yourselves”—to exclude the mixed multitude who were the instigators of the sin.

Since it is his heart that inspires him. . . Rashi is answering the question: Why did Scripture choose to write, “Generous of heart”? Rashi answers: “Since it is his heart that inspires him.”

V. 5. נדיב לבו Wir haben schon die Verwandtschaft נדב mit נטף bemerkt, nach welcher נדב ein Herausquellen aus dem Innern bedeutet. Ebenso wie נדב die aus dem Innern quellende Tat bezeichnet, also kommt auch נטף von der aus dem Innern quellenden Rede vor: והטף אל דרום Jechesk. 21, 2 usw. Eine andere Nuance des Wortes und des Begriffs ist נדף, das die Bewegung durch eine unsichtbare aber starke Kraft bedeutet: אשר תדפנו רוח. (Ps. 1, 4) u.f. נָדִיב ist der, dessen Handlungen nur unter dem Diktat seines Innern stehen: der Freie, Unabhängige. Während somit schon נריב an sich den freiwilligen Charakter der Handlung bezeichnen würde, ist diese Freiwilligkeit noch durch Beifügung des נריב לב ,לב und in noch höherem Grade durch נדיב לבו "von seinem Herzen bewegt" ganz besonders hervorgehoben. Es ist damit all und jeder nötigende, oder auch nur von außen bestimmende Einfluss zurückgewiesen. Schebuoth 26 b wird hieran der Satz gelehrt, dass für תרומת המשכן, sowie für קדשים überhaupt, in Beziehung auf welche der Ausdruck כל נדיב לב עולות (Chron. II. 29, 31) vorkommt, גמר בלבו אינו צריך להוציא בשפתיו, d.h. der auch unausgesprochene, nur im Innern gefasste Vorsatz bindend sei, während für alle anderen Gelobungen nur der auch ausgesprochene Vorsatz bindet, גמר בלבו צריך להוציא בשפתיו. übertragen kann die bindende Kraft des unausgesprochenen Vorsatzes von תרומת המשכן und קדשים auf andere Gelobungen nicht werden, weil, wenn die Bestimmung נדיב לב exemplifikatorisch für alle Art Gelobungen sein sollte, sie nur bei einer der beiden Weihungen stehen würde; dass sie bei תרומת המשכן und קדשים steht, beweist, dass sie nur auf diese Fälle beschränkt bleibt — שני כתובין הבאים כאחד אין מלמדין. Es gibt eine Auffassung, die den exemplifikatorischen Charakter einer Gesetzesbestimmung erst durch dreimalige Wiederholung negiert ansieht, ג׳ כתובין וכו׳ אין מלמדין. Allein auch dann würde diese Bestimmung nicht auf andere Gelobungen zu übertragen sein, weil חולין מקדשין לא גמרינן, weil sich eine solche Bestimmung von Weihegelobungen von Heiligtümern nicht auf andere Verhältnisse übertragen lässt. (נדרי צדקה, Almosen-, überhaupt Wohltätigkeitsgelobungen haben nach Joreh Deah 258, 13 Anm. in dieser Beziehung den Charakter von נדרי הקדש). Chagiga 10 a wird noch in dem Satze כל נדיב לבו יביאה das von der Halacha tradierte Prinzip des היתר נדרים, d. i. der Lösbarkeit von Gelobungen, die sonst פורחין באויר, in der Luft schwebend, d. h. ohne Nachweis im schriftlichen Gesetzesworte schienen, nachgewiesen, יש להם על מה שיסמכו. Danach erklärte sich das sonst überflüssig scheinende Suffixum in יביאה. Selbst im Momente des Bringens soll der Bringende נדיב לבו, noch völlig Herr seines Entschlusses, somit nicht absolut von seinem gelobenden Weihevorsatz gebunden sein. Gereut ihn die Gelobung, so kann sie selbst im Momente des Bringens noch gelöst werden. (Im Texte, Chagiga 10, wird die Stelle freilich nur כל נדיב לב zitiert, und wird dies in Raschi כל נדיב לב הביאו ergänzt, welches V. 22 sein würde. Allein die Erläuterung daselbst: ואם מתחרט יתירו לו scheint mehr auf den Satz: כל נדיב לבו יביאה hinzuweisen. Jedenfalls findet durch diese Halacha das pleonastische Suff. unseres Verses seine volle Erklärung. אם עודנו גלבו נודבו עליו יביאו.)

כל נדיב לבו, the donations must not be forced contributions.

זהב וכסף, "gold and silver." I have given special attention to the manner in which the various items listed as materials required for the Tabernacle are connected to one another by the conjunctive letter ו. At first glance, the presence of that letter and the absence of that letter seem arbitrary. There are 13 items (verses 5-9) all of which are joined together with the conjunctive letter ו. On the other hand, sometimes three different kinds of materials are lumped together and joined by only a single conjunctive letter ו (compare verse 11). In verse 13 the Torah resumes the method of presenting each item by joining it to the following item with the conjunctive letter ו. What prompted the Torah to be so selective in the use of the conjunctive letter ו?

'יביאה את תרומת ה, he shall bring the voluntary donation together with the terumat Hashem which is mandatory (the half shekel). The latter is known as beka lagulgolet.

In order to comprehend this we have to quote a statement by our sages in Shemot Rabbah 30,3 that the letter ו indicates an addition to something that was recorded previously whereas the absence of such a letter where one could have expected it suggests that what is introduced at that point has no connection with what had been reported previously. Having learned this, we can proceed to evaluate the respective presence or absence of the letter ו in different parts of this paragraph. The paragraph begins by listing contributions for the construction of the Tabernacle, listing thirteen different materials and joining each one to the other with the conjunctive letter ו to show that each of these materials was of equal importance in the construction of the Tabernacle and was equally indispensable. All of these materials could be subsumed under the heading תרומת השם. The Torah considered someone who had contributed copper as on the same level as someone who had contributed gold, for instance. According to Menachot 110 the Torah describes the person who offered a bird as a total offering as having offered a ריח ניחוח, no less so than a person who offered a four-legged mammal as an עולה, a total offering. The evaluation is based on the principle אחד המרבה ואחד ההמעיט, that the quantity of a contribution does not determine how G'd evaluates it but the intent does. As long as the intent is to please Heaven that is all that matters. In this connection, you may wish to read what I have written on Leviticus 1,17.

Another reason that these 13 items are joined together in the Torah by the conjunctive letter ו is that all of these materials were indispensable. The Tabernacle could not function if any of these materials had been absent. The aforesaid applied only from the point of view of the materials which had to be contributed; it did not mean that furnishings or other parts of the Tabernacle constructed out of, say gold, were of the same significance as parts made of copper, for instance. Different parts of the Tabernacle each represented different levels of sanctity.