Komentarz do Wyjścia 25:29

ועשית קערתיו וכפתיו AND THOU SHALT MAKE THE DISHES THEREOF AND THE SPOONS THEREOF — קערתיו are the forms (moulds) that were made to fit the shape of the bread (Menachot 97a). The bread was shaped like a case broken open as regards two of its sides (two opposite sides of which have been removed; these are what we would call the front and the back). It had a bottom underneath, but no top, and this bottom was turned up on both ends to form, as it were, walls. On this account it was called לחם הפנים, “bread with faces” — because it had faces (surfaces) looking in both directions towards the sides of the House (the Sanctuary). The bread was placed lengthwise across the breadth of the table with its sides standing up exactly in a line with the edge of the table. There were made for it a golden mould and an iron mould: in the iron one it was baked, and when it was taken out from the oven it was put on the golden one until the next day, the Sabbath, when it was arranged on the table (the mould then being removed). This golden mould is here called קערה (Menachot 94a; cf. also Berliner’s Rashi 2nd ed. p. 426).

AND THOU SHALT MAKE ‘KE’AROTHAV VEKAPOTHAV UKSOTHAV UMENAKIYOTHAV.’ Rashi explained: “Ke’arothav are the forms [the moulds that were made to fit the shape of the bread]; vekapothav are spoons in which the incense was put;¹²⁶See Leviticus 24:7. uksothav are rods in the shape of halves of hollow canes [which were put between one loaf and another so that they would not become mouldy]; umenakiyothav are the trestles which were notched in [five places] to support the canes.” These vessels [that Rashi referred to] are indeed mentioned in the Gemara.¹²⁷Menachoth 97a. And the Rabbi further said: “The word mechilathei [which Onkelos used for the Hebrew menakiyothav] means ‘bearers,’ similar to the expressions: and I weary myself ‘kalkeil’ (to bear it);¹²⁸Jeremiah 20:9. I am weary ‘hachil’ (bearing it).¹²⁹Ibid., 6:11. The beginning of the verse reads: Therefore I am full of the fury of the Eternal. Now the Sages of Israel have differed on this. For some say that ksothav are the trestles, and menakiyothav are the hollow canes. But Onkelos who translated menakiyothav by [the Aramaic] mechilathei was of the same opinion as he who says that menakiyoth are the trestles [supporting pillars attached to the table].” These are Rashi’s words. But I do not find them to be correct, for the word mechilathei [of Onkelos] in the Aramaic language is but a term meaning measures, such as ephahs and the like. Thus Onkelos rendered, eiphath tzedek¹³⁰Leviticus 19:36. — mechilon dikshot (a true measure); Thou shalt not have in thy house ‘eiphah v’eiphah’¹³¹Deuteronomy 25:14. — thou shalt not have mechilta umechilta (diverse measures). In a similar sense it is found whenever mentioned in the Talmud and in the Sages’ words: kayal meikal (he was measuring);¹³²Menachoth 53 b: ka kayol. bimchilta d’kayil inish ba mitkil (with the measure that one measures others, with that he is measured).¹³³Targum Yerushalmi Genesis 38:26. Similarly, I am weary ‘hachil’¹²⁹Ibid., 6:11. The beginning of the verse reads: Therefore I am full of the fury of the Eternal. means “I am weary of being a holding measure” [of G-d’s fury], and it is associated with these expressions: alpayim bath yachil (it held two thousand baths);¹³⁴I Kings 7:26. v’chol bashalish aphar ha’aretz (and He comprehended the dust of the earth in a measure);¹³⁵Isaiah 40:12. too little ‘meihachil’ (to receive) the burnt offering.¹³⁶I Kings 8:64. Similarly, I am weary ‘hachil’¹²⁹Ibid., 6:11. The beginning of the verse reads: Therefore I am full of the fury of the Eternal. is in my opinion not an expression of “bearing” but is instead a form of that very same meaning of “holding,” thus saying, “I am weary of holding” [G-d’s fury], similar in usage to these expressions: the land is not able ‘l’hachil’ (to hold) all his words;¹³⁷Amos 7:10. the spirit of a man ‘y’chalkeil’ his infirmity,¹³⁸Proverbs 18:14. meaning that he will be able to hold the pain within himself and not become weary [and broken in spirit] because of it. Behold, heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot ‘y’chalkelucha’¹³⁹I Kings 8:27. — they cannot hold and contain the greatness of Your exaltedness, for there is no limit and measure to You — how much less this house that I have built!¹³⁹I Kings 8:27. 'Y’chalkeil' his words rightfully¹⁴⁰Psalms 112:5. means that he is not a fool who spendeth all his spirit,¹⁴¹Proverbs 29:11. but holds his words within himself when necessary, and uses them as necessary. 'Vay’chalkeil Yoseiph'¹⁴²Genesis 47:12. means that Joseph gave them as much food as they could hold; he gave neither too much nor too little, but bread according to the want of their little ones.¹⁴³See Ramban on Genesis 41:48 (Vol. I, p. 507) that Joseph had gathered all food essential to life “even figs, fresh and dried, etc.” Now of this kind of food he gave his family abundantly, but bread he gave them according to the want of their little ones (Genesis 47:12). And such is the explanation of all [other similar expressions].
But Onkelos’ opinion [who translated umenakiyothav — umechilathei] is not clear. Perhaps menakiyothav is in the opinion of Onkelos a term for measures, since they had [in the Tabernacle and later in the Sanctuary] a measure holding two tenth parts [of an ephah] flour, with which to measure one cake,¹⁴⁴Leviticus 24:5. and they did not measure it twice with the one tenth measure of the meal-offering. We must then say that Onkelos differs from the Mishnah which teaches:¹⁴⁵Menachoth 87a. “There were two dry-measures in the Sanctuary: the tenth, and the half-tenth” [of an ephah], and in his opinion there were three dry-measures: the tenth, the half-tenth, and the two tenths.
The correct interpretation of Onkelos’ opinion appears to me to be that mechila is the form (mould) made for the dough, just as the Rabbis have said:¹⁴⁶Ibid., 94a. “There were in the Tabernacle three moulds [for the showbread]: he placed it in a mould whilst it was still dough; when baked in the oven it was put in another mould, and when he took it out he placed it in a [third] frame so that it should not spoil.”¹⁴⁷The first and third moulds were made of gold; the one for the oven was an iron mould. This [third] frame which was used so that it should not spoil did not have to be shaped to the form of the bread and its size; instead, it was made like a sort of dish to support the sides of the bread, this being the ke’arothav mentioned in the verse. But the first mould for the dough was shaped to the form of the bread and its size, namely, ten [handbreadths] long and five wide, and its horns¹⁴⁸Small pieces of dough were put on the four corners of each of the breads (Menachoth 96 a). seven fingerbreadths [high]. Into this mould the dough was put, measured and shaped to fit its form, and for this reason it was called mechila because it was made to “the measure.” The term menakiyoth then [according to Onkelos] is a name just like ephah and s’ah [a third of the ephah measure is a s’ah], similar, to ke’arothav and ksothav and other nouns which are not descriptive. Perhaps those just measures which are called a just ephah, and a just hin,¹⁴⁹Leviticus 19:36. and termed menakiyoth [of the root naki — clean] because they are clean of any falsehood, and thus they clear their owners of any cheating and sin. And ksavoth is a general term covering the canes [which were put between one loaf and another] and the trestles [notched in five places upon which the canes separating the loaves rested]. Perhaps because of their notches they were so called [ksavoth], with the letter tzade [ktzavoth — sides, corners] being used instead of the letter sin [ksavoth], this word [ksavoth] being similar to [the word ktzavoth found in the following verse]: so that they that dwell in ‘ktzavoth’ (the uttermost parts) stand in awe of Thy signs,¹⁵⁰Psalms 65:9. by interchanging the letter tzade with the sin, just like in the word s’chok [“laughter,” which is the word tzchok].
Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra wrote: “There is an error in Chronicles,¹⁵¹I Chronicles 28:17. The verse there reads: ‘v’hamizlagoth’ (and the forks), ‘v’hamizrakoth’ (and the basins), ‘v’haksavoth’ (and the jars), of pure gold; ‘v’lichphorei’ (and the bowls of) gold by weight ‘lichphor uchphor’ (for every bowl); ‘v’lichphorei’ (and for the bowls of) silver by weight ‘lichphor uchphor’ (for every bowl). — Ibn Ezra’s comment is to the effect that there are new vessels here mentioned for the table in the Sanctuary that are not found here in the Torah in connection with the table in the Tabernacle. — Ramban will point out mat Ibn Ezra erred in thinking that this Verse 17 refers back to the tables of showbread mentioned above in Verse 16, since it really refers back to Verse 13, as explained in the text. for in speaking of the vessels of the table in place of ke’aroth [mentioned here] it writes mizrakoth (basins); in place of kapoth [mentioned here] it writes kiporim (bowls); ksavoth is mentioned there as here; and in the place of menakiyoth it speaks of mizlagoth (forks). And all these were made of gold for the purpose of the table [and yet we do not find the mizrakoth, kiporim, and mizlagoth mentioned here in connection with the table in the Tabernacle]! Perhaps these were other vessels which David commanded to be placed on the tables¹⁵²II Chronicles 4:8. which his son Solomon would make, but the table in the Tent of Meeting did not have these vessels.” The error, however, is in Rabbi Abraham’s words, [not in the Book of Chronicles], for that which Scripture states, and the forks, and the basins, and the jars of pure gold; and for the golden bowls by weight for every bowl,¹⁵¹I Chronicles 28:17. The verse there reads: ‘v’hamizlagoth’ (and the forks), ‘v’hamizrakoth’ (and the basins), ‘v’haksavoth’ (and the jars), of pure gold; ‘v’lichphorei’ (and the bowls of) gold by weight ‘lichphor uchphor’ (for every bowl); ‘v’lichphorei’ (and for the bowls of) silver by weight ‘lichphor uchphor’ (for every bowl). — Ibn Ezra’s comment is to the effect that there are new vessels here mentioned for the table in the Sanctuary that are not found here in the Torah in connection with the table in the Tabernacle. — Ramban will point out mat Ibn Ezra erred in thinking that this Verse 17 refers back to the tables of showbread mentioned above in Verse 16, since it really refers back to Verse 13, as explained in the text. is not connected only with the tables of showbread¹⁵³I Chronicles 28:16. [mentioned in the preceding verse], but it reverts back to that which Scripture stated [several verses above], and for all the work of the service of the house of the Eternal, and for all the vessels of service in the house of the Eternal.¹⁵⁴Ibid., Verse 13. And then it continues, of gold, for all vessels of every kind of service,¹⁵⁵Ibid., Verse 14. and then it mentioned, and the forks, and the basins¹⁵¹I Chronicles 28:17. The verse there reads: ‘v’hamizlagoth’ (and the forks), ‘v’hamizrakoth’ (and the basins), ‘v’haksavoth’ (and the jars), of pure gold; ‘v’lichphorei’ (and the bowls of) gold by weight ‘lichphor uchphor’ (for every bowl); ‘v’lichphorei’ (and for the bowls of) silver by weight ‘lichphor uchphor’ (for every bowl). — Ibn Ezra’s comment is to the effect that there are new vessels here mentioned for the table in the Sanctuary that are not found here in the Torah in connection with the table in the Tabernacle. — Ramban will point out mat Ibn Ezra erred in thinking that this Verse 17 refers back to the tables of showbread mentioned above in Verse 16, since it really refers back to Verse 13, as explained in the text. which are vessels of the altar, and the jars for the table, and the bowls for the altar. And finally it stated, and for the altar of incense refined gold by weight,¹⁵⁶Ibid., Verse 18. concluding: All this [do I give thee] in writing, as the Eternal hath made me wise by His hand upon me, even all the works of this pattern.¹⁵⁷Ibid., Verse 19. Thus David [in speaking to his son Solomon] included all needs of the Sanctuary.

קערותיו וכפותיו, these vessels were popularly used at Royal banquets, etc.

קערתיו. a form similar to the one in which bread is baked.

Make its dishes … and its supports (menakios). The word menakios derives from a root meaning “clean.” The menakios are listed last to indicate that one’s livelihood must be “clean” of any taint of theft and that one must welcome the poor in a way that is “clean” of any taint of disgrace.

ועשית קערותיו, “you will make its dishes, etc.” Onkelos translates that which Rashi describes as קערות, the forms in which the show-breads were baked (iron forms, and subsequently displayed), golden forms, as being the מנקיות. In a dispute on the subject, in the משנה, (compare Tossaphot 96,b commencing with the words לא היה) Onkelos decides in favour of the view of the sage who considers the מנקיות as being sort of branch-like semi-open tubes, מכילתא, in Aramaic. The reason advanced by the author for his view is that these מנקיות supported the weight of the forms in which the show-breads were displayed on the table, especially the highest layer of the show-breads. The source, linguistically speaking, is the phraseהכיל ,נלאתי in Jeremiah 6,11, which means: “I am exhausted and cannot contain it anymore.” Nachmanides, not assuming that the word may have an Aramaic origin, quotes numerous verses in Scripture where the word means: “supporting something.” He explains that what Onkelos means is that these are the forms in which the show-breads had been baked, and, due to their thinness, they could not be allowed to lie there without being enclosed as during the seven days that each bread stayed on the table from one Sabbath to the next, they would have broken up into small pieces without such support. The Talmud speaks of three kinds of forms, one of which was exactly matching the dimensions of the bread, i.e. the dough that was baked in them; these were the ones called here מנקיות. In Aramaic they are called מכילתא, as they had to be true to the measurements of the dough. Incidentally, Onkelos translates the words איפת צדק, “a true measure,” as מכילין דקשוט. (Leviticus 19,36) This was a form, presumably made of wood or clay, in which the dough was placed prior to being transferred for baking into a similar form made of iron. Finally, there was a form made of gold, to which the breads were transferred after having cooled off, and they were placed on display on the two parallel racks above the table. The measurements of these latter forms did not have to be so meticulously tight fitting. The main purpose of the latter forms was to act as containers. The קשוות is a term which includes the various other small utensils including the shelving tubes. Perhaps they were named thus as they were meant to prevent the breaking up of these breads, and the letter ש in this word is used in lieu of the letter צ. We find a similar substitution of the letter ש for the letter צ in Psalms 65,9 וייראו יושבי מאותותיך, “the dwellers at the far corners of the earth were awed by Your signs (miracles).” The word מנקיות describes a certain measuring cup, or something similar; they are called thus to symbolize that they are accurate, not deceptive, i.e. איפה צדק “true measure.” (Lev. 19,36) The owners will be perceived as free from sin, נקי, as they do not use these devices to enrich themselves by deceiving their customers. I find it difficult to understand, if that were the meaning, why the מנקיות should not have been mentioned first.

It was bent upwards at both ends. . . Meaning: the dough was erect at each end, like walls, with space in the middle between them. It was like an upside-down ח .

V. 29. Wenn צפוי זהב טהור, gediegene Reinheit, die Basis bildet, auf welcher der jüdische Wohlstand dargereicht wird (V. 24 u. 25), so sind für die Erhaltung und segensreiche Zweckerreichung des Wohlstandes feste bestimmte Formen und Normen, Stützen und reinhaltende Ventilationsmittel — קערתיו ,כפתיו ,קשותיו מנקיותיו — aus reinem Golde gegeben.

ועשית קערותיו, “you are to make its bowls, etc.;” in which to knead the dough for the showbreads which would be displayed on it (the table).

וכפתיו AND ITS SPOONS — ladles (or rather, cups with flat bottoms) in which the incense was put. There were two such vessels for the two handfuls of incense which was put upon the piles in which the loaves were arranged, as it is said, (Leviticus 24:7) “And thou shalt put pure frankincense upon each pile”.

וכפותיו, for the two spoonfuls of frankincense as mentioned in Leviticus 24,2 ונתתה על המערכת לבונה זכה, ”with each row you shall place pure frankincense, etc.”

Lined up with the edge of the shulchan. . . The showbread was right at the edge of the shulchan, so that the thickness of the shulchan[’s tabletop] was lined up with the [“face” of the] showbread. And similarly at the other edge. As a result, “It has a ‘face’ ‘looking’ in two directions towards the sides of the House (i.e., mishkon).” This was because the length of the table was placed to the width of the mishkon. I.e., to the width of the [section of the] Tent of Meeting that was outside the Curtain [of the Holy of Holies].

קערתיו אלו הדפוסים נקערתיו (Menachoth 97 a). Die Schüsseln waren Formen um dem Brote bis zur Hinordnung auf den Tisch die bestimmte Form zu erhalten. Das Brot "des jüdischen Wohlstandes" ward nämlich in bestimmten metallenen Formen gebacken und zur Erhaltung dieser Form in goldenen Formen bis zum Hinordnen auf den Tisch bewahrt. Diese Form war nach ר׳ חנינא, dessen Überlieferung das Meiste für sich hat (siehe Menachoth 94 b und תוספו׳ das.), eine an beiden Enden aufwärts gebogene Fläche: |__|, כמין תיבה פרועה, und zwar betrugen die beiden aufwärts stehenden Wände zusammen so viel — nach ר׳׳מ fast so viel — als die Grundfläche. Durch diese Form bot jedes Brot so viel, oder fast so viel, zum Tragen des nächsten Brotes dar, als es mit seiner Grundfläche einnahm! Spricht dies etwas anderes, als die allen Egoismus beseitigende, die brüderlichste Hingebung fordernde Bedingung alles Wohlstandes aus: dass jeder eben so sehr für den andern als für sich erwerbe und besitze, eben so viel, oder doch fast so viel dem Nächsten als der Fülle des eigenen Tisches zuwende? (Ja, nach der anderen Überlieferung: כמין ספינה רוקדת, bildete jedes Brot nur mit dem vierzigsten Teil seiner Länge eine zollbreite Grundfläche und strebte mit allem übrigen allmählich zu dem nächsten auf ihm liegenden hin). Diese Brüderlichkeit tritt in solchem Maße in allen Beziehungen des Brotes hervor, daß wir sie notwendig als die Grundbedingung dessen betrachten müssen, was durch dieses Brot seinen Ausdruck finden soll, somit nach unserem Verständnisse als die Grundbedingung des jüdischen Wohlstandes. Schon von vornherein bestand jedes Brot aus zwei עשרונים. (Wajikra 24, 5). Ein עשרון ist aber das tägliche Maß des Lebensbedarfs eines einzelnen, entsprechend dem עומר לגולגלת des vom Himmel gespendeten Manna. Zwei Zehntel sind somit von vornherein der doppelte Bedarf, für sich und zugleich für den Nächsten. Sie wurden ferner nicht nur in der bezeichneten Form, sondern überhaupt nur paarweise gebacken: נאפות שתים שתים ובדפוס (das. 94 a). Endlich waren es im ganzen zwölf Brote (den zwölf jüdischen Volksstämmen entsprechend), die in zwei gleichen Schichten neben einander gepaart auf den Tisch geordnet wurden (das. 98 a). Stoff, Form, Bereitung und Ordnung tragen somit ausgeprägt den Charakter der Brüderlichkeit.

כפותיו, “its ladles,” within which to place the frankincense, between the two rows of the showbreads.

וקשתיו — These had the form of halves of hollow canes which are split along their length (Menachot 96a). Articles similar to these were made of gold and three of them were set in a row above each loaf so that another loaf (that above it) should rest on top of the “canes”; thus they (these canes) separated one loaf from another so that air could enter between and they would not become mouldy (Menachot 97a). In the Arabic language anything hollow is called קסוא (and this corresponds to the root of this word, which therefore denotes something hollow).

קשותיו ומנקיותיו, the details of these tools are all spelled out in Menachot 94 seeing that the 12 show-breads were arranged in two stacks of six each, with adequate ventilation between each form containing these breads. Here these utensils are referred to as subordinate, part of the table, whereas in Numbers 4,7 the same utensils are described as subordinate to the libation, i.e. קשות הנסך. The reason is that these utensils were designed to provide cover, the root of נסך there being סכך as in the covering used for the Sukkah. These utensils covered and separated one layer of reads from the other.

A golden form and a metal form were made for it. . . [Rashi knows this] because it is written, “Its dishes” (in the plural form), implying there were two dishes. And so with all [the table’s accessories, written in plural]; they all were multiple.

Aus Menachoth 96 a ist ersichtlich, dass aus den vier Enden der perpendikulären Brotflächen קרנות: aufwärts gehende Höhewinkel wie am Altare hervorgingen, die aber horizontal geneigt wurden, um dem nächsten Brote zum Stützpunkte zu dienen: קרנות לגוויה דלחם כייף להו ולחם עלייהו נח ליה. Bezeichnen קרנות, wie wir das beim Altare näher nachzuweisen haben, das aufwärts zu Gott Emporstreben, so geben dieselben an dem Brote des jüdischen Wohlstandes in der eben bezeichneten Weise den Gedanken: außer dem Nächsten sei der jüdische Wohlstand noch Gott zugewandt. Das Gott Zugewandte erhalte aber eben darin seine Verwendung, dass es der Unterstützung des Nächsten zu gute komme.

וקשותיו, “and its jars;” in which the water for preparing the dough for the showbreads would be kept. קשוה is a vessel as we know from the Talmud in Sanhedrin folio 81 where the stealing of it is described as so serious a sin that if the thief is caught and killed on the spot by someone incensed at this sin, this is considered as an acceptable punishment, and the person administering it is not considered as having committed murder.

מנקיותיו — It is translated in the Targum by ומכילתיה “and the trestles (supports) thereof” (cf. Menachot 96a). According to him these were attachments to the table like a kind of golden pegs (pillars) standing on the floor and reaching in height far above the table up to the height of the pile of bread. They were notched in five places, one above the other, and the ends of the canes which were between one loaf and another were supported on these notches so that the weight of the upper loaves should not press heavily upon the lower ones in which event these would be broken. The word מכילתיה used by Onkelos as a rendering of מנקיותיו denotes “bearers;” it is of the same root as the verb in (Jeremiah 6:11) “I am weary to bear (הכיל) it.” But as for the term מנקיות (which is a Piel of נקה and would denote “cleansers”) I do not know how it is applicable to these attachments the purpose of which was not to keep the bread clean but merely to serve as supports for the canes. But there are some of the Jewish Sages who hold that קשתיו (connected with קשה “hard”) are the pegs (or pillars) and they are so called because they served to keep it (the loaves) hard and firm, so that it should not break, whilst מנקיותיו are the “canes” which kept the bread clean so that it should not become mouldy. Onkelos, however, who translated מנקיותיו by מכילתיה understood it according to the opinion of him who holds that מנקיות were the supporting pillars (cf. Menachot 97a).

אשר יסך, by means of these utensils the libations were to be offered.

Were as a covering over it. . . Meaning: the half tubes that were inserted between one bread and the other acted as sort of a covering over the bread. Although the verse makes no mention of bread, “By which they shall be covered” refers to that which needs to be covered, i.e., the bread.

Durch diese Richtung auf Gott wird die brüderliche Hingebung Pflicht, die Liebespflicht wird Rechtspflicht, סדn wird צדקה. Was der Nächste nur zu hoffen hat, hat Gott ein Recht zu fordern, und Gott fordert für den Nächsten!

ומנקיותיו, “and its cleansing tools, bowlshaped used to clean out the oven as well as the surface of the table.”According to Rashi these were multiple shelflike structures on each of which one of the showbreads would be placed in a manner that allowed fresh air to circulate around each and thus prevent it from becoming moldy, as they were on display from one Sabbath to the next. They would also protect these thin breads from break into crumbs due to their weight if each had rested on the one beneath it. All this is discussed in the Talmud in minute detail. (Menachot, folio 94) Our author quotes all these details. As the Torah did not, and alas in our time we do not possess a Temple, I have decided to omit translating this and refer the interested reader to the Talmud.

אשר יסך בהן means BY WHICH THEY SHALL BE COVERED. It is of the קשות, the “canes,” that the words אשר יסך are said, because these lay over it like a cover and a screen. Thus, too, in another passage (Numbers 4:7) it says, ואת קשות הנסך, “and the קשות for covering;” both words, יסך and הנסך, denote screening and covering.

כפתיו אלו בזיכין נכפתיו (das.). Der Weihrauch lag sofort in Opferschalen bereit, um als Räucherwerk Gott gestreut zu werden. (Tamid V. 4, VI. 3 ist בזך auch für das tägliche קטרת das ordnungsmäßige Gefäß). Ist Weihrauch der Ausdruck für das Wohlbehagen, die Befriedigung und Zufriedenheit, die eben das Brot, die Nahrung erst zum Wohlstande machen, so bringen die Opferschalen, in welchen der Weihrauch, dieser Ausdruck der eigenen Zufriedenheit, zum Weihrauch für Gottes Altar, also zum Ausdruck des zu erringenden göttlichen Wohlgefallens bereit liegt, den Gedanken: dass das eigene Wohlgefallen ganz in das göttliche Wohlgefallen aufzugehen habe, wir an dem Wohlstande nur so viel Freude finden können, als diese Freude Gott zur Freude gereicht, und Gottes Zufriedenheit die volle Bedingung der eigenen Zufriedenheit sei. Unser eigenes Wohlbehagen muss in reiner Opferschale Gott zum Wohlgefallen bereit sein. Auch die בזיכין waren zwei, und ihre Gepaartheit wesentlich wie die der Schichten מעכבין זה את זה (Menachoth 27 a). Wenn demnach die Form und die Gepaartheit der Brote und des Weihrauchs Menschenbrüderlichkeit als eine erste Bedingung des Wohlstandes setzten, so stellen die בזיכין, die Opferschalen, in welchen der Weihrauch bereit stand, das Gotteswohlgefallen als eine zweite Bedingung des Wohlstandes auf.

אשר יוסך בהן, “wherewith to pour them (the libations).”

קשותיו אלו סניפין ומנקיותיו אלו קנים אשר יוסך בהן שמסככין בהן את הלחם (das.). Aus der Mischna 96 a und das. 94 b ergibt sich, dass jede Schicht zwei goldene Säulen zur Stütze hatte (סניפין, im Texte: קשות), die mit kleinen Vorsprüngen, פיצולין versehen waren, auf welchen Halbröhren (קנים, im Text: מנקיות) ruhten, die zwischen ein Brot und das andere zum Schutze der Brote gelegt waren. Schon der Umstand, dass diese Säulen anderwärts (Bamidbar 4, 7) קשות הנסך, "die Träger der Deckung" genannt werden, ergibt, dass diese Stützen eigentlich zu den Röhren אשר יוסך בהן, womit das Brot belegt wurde, gehörten, zunächst für sie die Stütze bildeten, diese das Brot deckenden Röhren trügen. Dies spricht somit entschieden für die Auffassung Raschis (das.), während nach תוספו׳ die Säulen nur das untere Brot zu stützen hatten, das doch unmittelbar auf dem Tische ruhte, daher am wenigsten der Stütze bedurfte. Der Ausdruck קשות הנסך fände nach תוספו׳ schwer eine Erklärung. Von den סניפין heißt es 94 b, dass sie dem Brote zur Stütze dienten, סמכי ליה ללחם damit die Brote nicht durch die aufeinander drückende Last zerbrachen, אגב יוקרא דלחם תלח, sie vermittelten dies jedoch durch die auf ihnen ruhenden Zwischenröhren. Wenn, nach תוספו׳, die Röhren nur auf den Broten geruht hätten, so würden sie die Last nur vermehrt, nicht aber durch Mittragen erleichtert haben. Von anderer Seite trugen aber auch die Röhren das Brot nicht allein, sondern in Gemeinschaft mit dem von ihnen gedeckten Brote; die aufstehenden Brotwände waren eingekerbt, in diese Einkerbungen die Röhren so weit. eingesenkt, dass sie durch die Stützen nur um ein Unbedeutendes über die Brotwände gehalten wurden und so nur ganz unmerklich die Brote vor gegenseitiger Berührung schützten, שקועי משקע להו ומגבה להו פורתא (das. 96 a).

Wir betrachten somit die Stützen mit den die Brote deckenden Röhren, קשות und מנקיות, als eine zusammen gehörende Veranstaltung. Die von den goldenen Stützen gehaltenen, die Brote von einander scheidenden goldenen Halbröhren hatten die doppelte Bestimmung: אגב יוקרא דלחם תלח, die Brote vor Zerbrechen durch den auf ihnen lastenden Druck des nächsten Brotes, und משום איעפושי sie vor Fäulnis durch die zu nahe Berührung zu schützen. Während die קערות den Broten diejenige Gestaltung gaben und erhielten, die sie für ihre Bestimmung befähigte: Träger eines des andern zu sein, somit die brüderliche Vereinigung vermittelten, wurde durch קשות הנסך, durch die Deckunghalter jene Sonderung hergestellt, die die unverletzte und ungetrübte Erhaltung jedes einzelnen bedingt. Jene bewirkten, dass trotz der Sonderung das eine das andere trug. Diese: dass trotz der Vereinigung keines das andere verletzte und verderbte, jedem vielmehr seine Selbständigkeit und seine eigene Atmosphäre gewährleistet blieb.

Übertragen wir diese durch die Anschauung gegebenen Momente auf den Gedankenkreis der den Nationalwohlstand tragenden Bedingungen, innerhalb dessen uns jene Formen als die Brüderlichkeit, die Liebe, erschienen: so haben wir den Begriff zu suchen, der ebenso die besitzenden Kreise zur Erhaltung ihrer unverletzten und unverkümmerten Selbständigkeit sondert, wie jener sie zur gegenseitigen Unterstützung brüderlich vereint. Dieser Begriff ist aber sofort kein anderer als: das Recht. Die Grundsätze des Rechts sind die goldenen, unveränderlich festen Säulen, die die goldenen, unveränderlich festen Marklinien zwischen den zum brüderlichen Ganzen in Liebe vereinigten Persönlichkeiten tragen und die Selbständigkeit eines jeden gegen Verletzung und Verkümmerung durch den Nächsten decken. Die Grundsätze des Rechts sind die קשות הנסך, sind die קשות und מנקיות, sind die Stützen und die reinhaltenden Elemente, die das Walten der freien ל Liebe erst ermöglichen. Ohne das tragende und sondernde Recht stürzt alles zu einer personlosen, unfreien Masse, zertrümmert und verkümmert durch Gewalt und Verderbnis der Menschen, zusammen. Erst das Recht schafft Persönlichkeiten selbständigen Eigentums, das die durch Gott zur Pflicht erwachsene Liebe frei der Miterhaltung des Nächsten zuwendet. Schwerlich ließe sich das Recht erschöpfender darstellen, als dies durch die סניפים und קנים in allen ihren feinsten Nuancen geschehen.

Zum Begriff der Brüderlichkeit, der dem Brote des jüdischen Wohlstandes durch Stoff, Form, Bereitung und Ordnung so wesentlich aufgedrückt ist, gesellt sich somit der Begriff des Rechts, der erst dem Ganzen Stütze und Dauer und die Möglichkeit des Daseins sichert.

Fassen wir alles zusammen, was die Darstellung des Tisches ausspricht, so sagt derselbe: dem jüdischen Wohlstande schafft ein in den Schranken des Heiligen und Reinen sich frei entwickelnder Fleiß die goldene Basis — שולחן עצי שטים וזר זהב טהור סביב ועליו צפוי זהב טהור.

Brüderlichkeit ist sein gestaltendes Prinzip: דפוס לחם הפנים כמין תיבה פרוצה,

Recht seine erhaltende Säule: קשותיו ומנקיותיו,

Gottes Wohlgefallen das Beglückende in ihm: בזיכי לבונה.

Es sind somit alle die unsere Tätigkeit beherrschenden Prinzipien des göttlichen Gesetzes im Grundriss:

die Schranken des Heiligen und Reinen: חקים,

die Brüderlichkeit: מצות,

das Recht: משפטים,

das Gotteswohlgefallen: עבודה,

und nur für einen von solchen und für solche Normen gebauten Tisch heißt es: