Commento su Numeri 8:4

וזה מעשה המנרה AND THIS IS THE WORK OF THE CANDLESTICK — “This” — we may gather that the Holy One, blessed be He, showed it to him (Moses) with His finger, because he was puzzled by it (how to construct it); and that is why it states, “this is [the construction of the candlestick]” (Sifrei Bamidbar 61; Menachot 29a).

AND THIS WAS THE WORK OF THE CANDELABRUM, BEATEN WORK OF GOLD. The meaning thereof is to allude [to the law] that throughout all [future] generations the candelabrum must be beaten [and fashioned out of one solid piece of metal], and that this is essential [for the validity of the candelabrum and lighting the lamps therein]. This is why He expressly mentioned at the beginning [that it is to be] beaten work, but did not mention [here] that in the making thereof there should be branches [going out of the candelabrum], knops, and cups shaped like almond-blossoms.³⁰Exodus 25:33. But He did mention [here that it be of] gold, for it is likewise a commandment for all generations that it be made of gold, in order to glorify the House of our G-d.³¹Ezra 9:9. Then He repeated [in the verse before us] it was beaten work, in order to say that it is only [failure to make it] of beaten work that invalidates the candelabrum, but [the requirement] of gold is not [indispensable, since it is valid if made of any metal], and certainly its other embellishments [such as the cups and knops do not invalidate it if they are missing]. And thus have our Rabbis said in the Sifre³²Sifre Beha’alothcha 61. and in Tractate Menachoth.³³Menachoth 28a.

וזה מעשה המנורה מקשה, the very composition of the menorah as a single chunk of gold, with all its lights facing the lamp on the central shaft, symbolises this united endeavour to serve G’d, i.e. to look towards the spiritual light as symbolised by that in the center of the menorah, its “trunk.” המנורה מקשה, to underline the unity, the whole people jointly striving to attain the same spiritual objective.

וזה מעשה המנורה, And this is how the candlestick was made; The reason this verse is repeated here a third time after we have read it in Parshat Terumah as well as in Parshat Vayakhel, can be explained both according to those who hold that the lamps were detachable as well as according to the scholars who hold that the lamps were an integral part of the cast candlestick. We have explained that the word בהעלותך as distinct from בהדליקך meant that the candlestick had to be taken apart in order for the lamps to be prepared. This in turn might have led one to believe that the remainder of the candlestick did not have to be cast from one piece seeing the lamps were included in the description of the "candlestick." We could therefore have applied an exegetical method of דבר שהיה בכלל ויצא (compare Baraitha of Rabbi Yishmael, introduction to Sifra on Leviticus) according to which other parts of the candlestick would also qualify even if they were detachable. The fact that the verse specifically mentions the word מקשה, cast, would only have referred to the initial construction of the candlestick. Once it had been made according to G'd's instructions it would have been permissible to detach sections in a manner that allowed them to be re-assembled. The Torah had to repeat the manner in which the מנורה was to be made to ensure that we would not arrive at such a faulty conclusion. The repetition means that the candlestick was to remain exactly as it had been cast originally. The scholars who hold that the candlestick was cast including the lamps can accept this interpretation also.

וזה מעשה המנורה, “and this was the workmanship of the menorah:” Ibn Ezra writes that the wording of the Torah here is to be understood as pointing to the unique workmanship with which this menorah had been made. Nachmanides writes that the words וזה מעשה המנורה מקשה are to be read together, meaning that the unique feature of the workmanship of this menorah was that it was cast completely out of a single chunk of gold and then hammered into the desired shape. This feature was to be preserved throughout the generations whenever for whatever reason the menorah in the Temple had to be replaced. The fact that only this feature, מקשה has been repeated here, whereas the decorative features on the arms of the menorah have not been repeated here indicates that the indispensable feature was the fact that the entire menorah was to consist of a single chunk of gold. [When the people could not afford gold, a chunk of silver would also be acceptable. Ed.] (based on Sifrey)

Since he had difficulty with it. Meaning that the word “this” refers to the instruction, but the actual [making the menorah] was only at the time when Betzalel made it. Initially Moshe had difficulty with it until Hashem showed him by pointing with the finger. He again had difficulty until Hashem said to Moshe “take a kikar…” see above in Parshas Terumah (Shemos 25:31).

V. 4. וזה מעשה וגו׳. Wenn die an dieser Stelle wiederholte Anweisung Aharons zur Pflege der Menora nur in deren Beziehung zu den vorangehenden Chanuckaopfern der Fürsten und in der Stellung Aharons zu ihnen ihre Begründung hätte, schwerlich würde dann dabei mit diesem Verse auf die Konstruktion und die Konstruktionsarbeit der Menora hingewiesen und uns die Darstellungsart derselben vergegenwärtigt worden sein. Die ganze Konstruktion der Menora ist ja ausführlich im Buche Schmot gegeben. Allein wir glauben mit der Annahme nicht zu irren, dass diese erneute Hinweisung auf die Bedeutung und Aufgabe Aharons und des Stammes Levi an dem Eingange dieses Abschnittes gleichzeitig auch auf die in ihm beginnende Fortsetzung der Entwicklungsgeschichte Israels zu seiner großen Bestimmung vorbereiten soll. Wenn diese Geschichte ergibt, wie fernab Israels Anfang im Ganzen noch von der Höhe jener Hingebung und jenes Aufgehens in Gott und sein Gesetz war, die das Ideal seiner Aufgabe bilden, so war doch bereits ein ganzer Stamm in ihm, der schon seine Begeisterungstreue für Gott und sein Gesetz bewährt hatte und daher zu Dienern, Vertretern und Verfechtern dieses Ideals im Volke gewählt zu werden gewürdigt worden war, dem Gott das Ideal "seiner Sittenvollendung und Erleuchtung" überantworten und erwarten konnte, dass wie sie in der Vergangenheit שמרו אמרתו, so auch in Zukunft ינצרו בריתו und יורו משפטיו ליעקב ותורתו ישראל (Dewarim 33, 8-10); — so sollen wir nur vor allem auf die Menora hinblicken und uns ihre Konstruktion und Bedeutung gegenwärtig halten: מקשה זהב עד ירכה עד פרחה מקשה הוא! Ein durch Hammerschlag, durch wiederholte Hammerschläge vom Wurzelstock bis zur Blüte aus einem Stück vollendeter goldener Baum ist die מנורה, ist der Träger der zu Gott und seinem Gesetze aufblühenden Lichtfülle im Heiligtume! Durch und durch golden, in unveränderlicher, der Läuterung nicht bedürftiger Reinheit gegeben ist das Geistige, dessen Darstellung und Pflege das Heiligtum bestimmt ist. Allein sein Träger ist ein Baum, ein vom tiefsten Wurzelstock bis zur höchsten Blüte sich entfaltender Baum. Im Individuum — und so auch im Volke — erfordert die Entwickelung zur höchsten Geistesblüte: Zeit. Das Individuum zählt nach Jahren, nach Jahrhunderten das Volk. Aus einem Stück ist der Baum gebildet. In der Masse, aus welcher er gebildet wird, ist bereits der Stoff zu allem vorhanden, Stoff zum Wurzelstock und Stoff zur Blüte. מקשה, schwere Hammerschläge von Israels und der Welten Meister bildeten die rohe Masse zum Wurzelstock und haben noch einst die letzte Blüte am Lichtfruchtwipfel zu bilden, מקשה זהב עד ירכה ער פרחה מקשה היא; was Mosche fürs Heiligtum gestaltete, war Darstellung des Jisraels, das Gott ihm als den Baum der ganzen Zukunft Israels gezeigt hatte, המאמין לא יחיש — :כמראה אשר הראה ד׳ את משה כן עשה את המנורה (Jes.28, 16).

וזה מעשה המנורה, “and this was the work of the candlestick;” this verse is one of three verses with which Moses had difficulty, according to our sages. This is hinted at by the word: וזה. (Compare Talmud tractate Menachot folio 29) According to Sifri here the three were: our verse, the second one the verse in Exodus 12 about the position of the moon at new moon, and the third was the verse dealing with creeping animals. The reason that the Sifri did not include the word זה in זה יתנו, “this they shall give” (the half shekel coin in Exodus 30,13) is that Moses had no problem imagining the size and shape of a coin.

מקשה means batediz in O. F., — [English = beaten], an expression of the same meaning as in (Daniel 5:6) “[and his feet] knocked (נקשן) one against another”. There was a block weighing a talent of gold and he (who made the candlestick) beat it with the hammer, and cut away with a chisel in order that its branches might be made to spread out as they should do, and it was not formed of separate pieces made into a whole by joining them together.

ACCORDING TO THE PATTERN WHICH THE ETERNAL HAD SHOWN MOSES, SO ‘HE’ MADE THE CANDELABRUM — that is, Moses mentioned above, for it was he who made efforts to learn about it and directed the making thereof by command. And so the Rabbis have said in the Sifre:³²Sifre Beha’alothcha 61. “[This is stated] in order to praise Moses, [by emphasizing] that he made it exactly as the Holy One, blessed be He, told him to make [the candelabrum].” And Rashi wrote: “So he made — [the word ‘he’ refers to] the one who made it [i.e., to whomever it was that made it, and does not refer to Moses]. But a Midrash Agadah²Tanchuma Beha’alothcha 5. — “Midrash Agadah.” Rabbinic texts on the Five Books of Moses are divided into two classes: “Midrash Halachah” (texts dealing mainly with the legal parts of the Torah), which consist of the Mechilta on the Book of Exodus, Sifra [or Torath Kohanim] on the Book of Leviticus, and Sifre on the Books of Numbers and Deuteronomy. Another set of texts deal mainly with the narrative, ethical and homiletical aspects of the Scriptures. These comprise two major works — the Midrash Rabbah and Tanchuma. There is in addition a large group of smaller Midrashim that belong to this category. The generic term “Midrash Agadah” includes all this second group of texts. has it: [The subject ‘he’ refers to the Eternal, for] it was made of its own accord [without human intervention], by the Holy One, blessed be He.”

Lump. Lump is a term meaning “piece.”

עד ירכה עד פרחה UNTO THE SHAFT THEREOF, UNTO THE FLOWERS THEREOF — Its ירך was the boxlike base which was above the feet (thus, the feet stood beneath this; cf. Rashi on Exodus 25:31), hollow, like the candlesticks of princely houses (lit., as the candlesticks standing before the princes).

Shears. [Like] scissors.

עד ירכה עד פרחה — This phrase means as much as: the whole body of the candlestick and everything attached to it.

The menorah proper. Rashi is resolving the apparent contradiction: Here it implies that it was only beaten from its base until its flowers, while in Parshas Terumah (ibid.) it is written that it was entirely beaten out.

עד ירכה — FROM THE BASE which is a massive part.

Delicate work. Meaning that from its largest point until the thinnest it was all one piece. Thus the word עד (lit. until) is used in the sense of “between.” Rashi makes a similar explanation in Parshas Bo (Shemos 11:5) referring to the verse “from the firstborn of Pharaoh sitting on the throne…”

עד פרחה — UP TO ITS FLOWER, which was the most slender piece of work in it — all was beaten out of the lump. The double form of עד … עד) עד) is used in this sense (to include everything), as e.g., (Judges 15:5) “[and he (Samson) burnt up everything] from the shocks to (עד) the standing corn and to (ועד) the vineyard and the olives".

According to the form. Rashi is answering the question: “According to the vision” implies the sense of an appearance which denotes color, but it is not correct to say that Hashem showed him the color of the menorah. Alternatively “according to the vision” refers to a vision of prophesy, meaning that just as he saw in the prophetic vision of fire, they too should make a menorah of fire. However, this cannot be so because he did not make it of fire. Therefore Rashi explains “according to the form” meaning that “according to the vision” is understood as “according to the form,” as we see written elsewhere, “Observe and make them according to the form” (Shemos 25:40). The “form” was described in terms of a “vision” because by seeing [the vision] he learned its form.

כמראה אשר הראה וגו׳ ACCORDING UNTO THE PATTERN WHICH [THE LORD] HAD SHOWED [MOSES] — i. e. according to the shape which he had shewn him on the mountain, as it is said, (Exodus 25:40) and see, that thou make them after their pattern [which was shewn thee in the mountain]".

The one who made it. Meaning the one who made all of the utensils; this was Betzalel.

כן עשה את המנורה SO HE MADE THE CANDELABRUM — “he” means, the one who made it (not Moses, as might be assumed from the wording of the text; the subject is suppressed and it means no more than: so was the candlestick made). A Midrashic explanation is: By the instrumentality of the Holy One, blessed be He, it was made of itself (according to this the subject is “God” who is mentioned immediately before) (Midrash Tanchuma, Beha'alotcha 3; cf. Rashi on Exodus 25:31).

It was made spontaneously. This is explained in Parshas Terumah. This Midrash disagrees with the first explanation.