Chasidut su I Re 6:40
Kedushat Levi
Exodus 25,9.“in accordance with all the pattern I show you; the pattern of the Tabernacle and the pattern of all its furnishings so you shall make it.” Rashi (Sanhedrin 16) comments on this verse that these instructions, i.e. that just as the building of the Temple was to be approved by Moses who represented all the judges of the High Court, the building of future Temples would also have to be approved and supervised by the judges of the High Court.
Tossaphot on that folio already raises questions concerning this interpretation; they point out that the measurements of the altar of the Tabernacle did not correspond to the measurements of the altar in Solomon’s Temple (Kings I chapters 6-7) Nachmanides also found difficulty with Rashi’s commentary in Sanhedrin.
When you consider our explanation above (at the end of Mishpatim) that the words: וכן תעשו ומראה כבוד ה', refer to how a person can be certain that his manner of serving the Lord pleases his Creator, then the words: וכן תעשו, do not refer to the measurements of the Tabernacle or the Temple at all. There was no need for the Torah to repeat its instructions on these points as all the details had already been spelled out. Moses had received visual instructions from G’d, instructions that could hardly be “confirmed” by a human Court which had not been “shown” the dimensions G’d had shown to Moses. The entire Tabernacle must be viewed as the tangible symbol of holy thoughts expressed by the righteous when they worship the Creator, which, as we explained, need a כלי, visible, tangible instrument, in the form of a commandment to be performed by the worshipper, in order to give concrete expression to the נדבת לבו, the generosity of the heart, of which Exodus 25,2 speaks. The completed Tabernacle is the expression of the collective service of the Jewish people, or the לבוש, the “garment” behind which the holy nature of the collective soul of Jewish people resides.
The Talmud in Sanhedrin 89 already explains that no two prophets convey the same message from G’d to the people using the same wording. There is an element of individuality which permits each prophet to “dress up” the message in a style that he considers appropriate to his listeners. He also receives the vision from G’d in a manner that allows for his individuality, one that G’d is thoroughly familiar with, of course. It follows that Moses and his generation received G’d’s instructions concerning the Tabernacle in a manner that was appropriate for them, whereas Solomon and his generation received the instructions in a manner appropriate for the level of their respective generation. The tangible expression of the difference between the spiritual level of these two generations, one a people wandering in the desert, the other a people that had lived in a sovereign Jewish homeland for over 400 years already was reflected in the size and appurtenances of their respective “Temples.”
When Rashi explained the word לדורות, to describe the meaning of וכן תעשו, he meant that the same yardsticks that applied in the desert when the Tabernacle was being built were also to be applied in future generations when a Temple will again be built. The tangible version of the people’s service of G’d is to conform to the manner in which the subject would be communicated to the prophet or High Court that is the highest spiritual authority of the people at the time.
Nachmanides’ critique of Rashi that the altars in the two Temples were of completely different sizes is completely out of place, as Solomon constructed the altar in accordance with specific instructions given to him, emphasizing further that what was appropriate in the desert was not appropriate in his time. G’d’s appearing to Solomon when he had completed the Temple (Kings I 6,11-12) is proof that although the measurements of that Temple were quite different (though proportionate), he had not deviated from the instructions given by G’d to Moses in our portion.
Tossaphot on that folio already raises questions concerning this interpretation; they point out that the measurements of the altar of the Tabernacle did not correspond to the measurements of the altar in Solomon’s Temple (Kings I chapters 6-7) Nachmanides also found difficulty with Rashi’s commentary in Sanhedrin.
When you consider our explanation above (at the end of Mishpatim) that the words: וכן תעשו ומראה כבוד ה', refer to how a person can be certain that his manner of serving the Lord pleases his Creator, then the words: וכן תעשו, do not refer to the measurements of the Tabernacle or the Temple at all. There was no need for the Torah to repeat its instructions on these points as all the details had already been spelled out. Moses had received visual instructions from G’d, instructions that could hardly be “confirmed” by a human Court which had not been “shown” the dimensions G’d had shown to Moses. The entire Tabernacle must be viewed as the tangible symbol of holy thoughts expressed by the righteous when they worship the Creator, which, as we explained, need a כלי, visible, tangible instrument, in the form of a commandment to be performed by the worshipper, in order to give concrete expression to the נדבת לבו, the generosity of the heart, of which Exodus 25,2 speaks. The completed Tabernacle is the expression of the collective service of the Jewish people, or the לבוש, the “garment” behind which the holy nature of the collective soul of Jewish people resides.
The Talmud in Sanhedrin 89 already explains that no two prophets convey the same message from G’d to the people using the same wording. There is an element of individuality which permits each prophet to “dress up” the message in a style that he considers appropriate to his listeners. He also receives the vision from G’d in a manner that allows for his individuality, one that G’d is thoroughly familiar with, of course. It follows that Moses and his generation received G’d’s instructions concerning the Tabernacle in a manner that was appropriate for them, whereas Solomon and his generation received the instructions in a manner appropriate for the level of their respective generation. The tangible expression of the difference between the spiritual level of these two generations, one a people wandering in the desert, the other a people that had lived in a sovereign Jewish homeland for over 400 years already was reflected in the size and appurtenances of their respective “Temples.”
When Rashi explained the word לדורות, to describe the meaning of וכן תעשו, he meant that the same yardsticks that applied in the desert when the Tabernacle was being built were also to be applied in future generations when a Temple will again be built. The tangible version of the people’s service of G’d is to conform to the manner in which the subject would be communicated to the prophet or High Court that is the highest spiritual authority of the people at the time.
Nachmanides’ critique of Rashi that the altars in the two Temples were of completely different sizes is completely out of place, as Solomon constructed the altar in accordance with specific instructions given to him, emphasizing further that what was appropriate in the desert was not appropriate in his time. G’d’s appearing to Solomon when he had completed the Temple (Kings I 6,11-12) is proof that although the measurements of that Temple were quite different (though proportionate), he had not deviated from the instructions given by G’d to Moses in our portion.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Flames of Faith
If you examine the creation account, the first three statements detail spiritual items that do not fully exist in our dimension of reality: “In the beginning,”354The words “and God said” are missing from this statement, because this creative power is the hidden root. With it, God created speech and the incipient forces that would later become material existence (Rav Wolfson). “Let there be light,” and, “Let there be a divider between [spiritual] waters above and the waters below on earth.”355The first statement created an initial existence, one which could not be fully verbalized. This does not exist fully in our world, where items are relatively completed. The second statement created a light that according to our sages was too holy for mere man so it was hidden away for the righteous in the World-to-Come. The third statement created a spiritual barrier that will never be touched by man. The fourth statement, “Let the waters gather and reveal the dry land,” and all the subsequent creative demands deal with the earthly realm. Evidently, in our dimension of reality, God appears through the seven lower Sephiros, and the first three lights are only fully realized in Heavenly worlds.356Later on it is taught that the deeper meaning of seven days of creation is that they refer to the seven lower Sephiros, or the seven revelations of God’s light that animate the seven days of the week—each day has a different revelation. The Temples that stood in Jerusalem and the mobile tabernacle the Jews constructed in the Desert were places that were filled with these seven Lights. That is why Betzalel, who constructed the tabernacle, knew the secrets of creation, because he had to bring down the same influences that fill the physical world (See further Innerspace pg. 57). This is also the meaning of the verse about Solomon’s temple, va-yivnehu sheva shanim, “And he built it seven years” (1 Kings 6:38). It does not say, “he built it for seven years,” rather “he built it seven years,” for the building was a manifestation of the seven emanations that are symbolized with the term, seven years. We mourn for the destruction of Temples of Jerusalem on the ninth of Av. During the subsequent seven weeks, on each Shabbos, we read a different prophecy of consolation. The seven prophecies of consolation correspond to the seven lower Sephiros. During each of those seven weeks, a different Sephirah light appears. Since the Temple was a display of the full seven, re-experiencing the seven Sephiros is a partial rebuilding of the Temple and a consolation for its loss (heard from the Stitchiner Rebbe).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy