Комментарий к Шмот 25:2

ויקחו לי תרומה THAT THEY TAKE ME A HEAVE OFFERING — “Me” means to the glory of My Name (Midrash Tanchuma, Terumah 1).

דבר אל בני ישראל ויקחו לי תרומה, tell the stewards of Israel that I desire that they should collect a contribution for Me. [the Torah had not specified “who” should take. Ed.] Moses also issued such instructions on his return from the mountain the third time as the Torah reports (Exodus 34,32) ואחרי כן נגשו כל בני ישראל, ויצום את כל אשר דבר ה' אתו בהר סיני, “after that all the people of Israel drew near, and he commanded them all that the Lord had talked about with him on Mount Sinai.” This was followed by ויאמר משה אל כל עדת בני ישראל קחו מאתכם תרומה in 35,4. The עדת בני ישראל who were to carry out this “taking (accepting) of the gifts were the Sanhedrin, the High Court. The Israelites were so anxious to contribute that they did not wait until the High Court organised all this, but they approached Moses personally bringing with them so many contributions that Moses was forced to call a halt to this (36,5). This was also the reason that there was nothing left for the princes of Israel (the tribal chiefs) to contribute other than the gemstones for Aaron’s breastplate and the various oils making up the “oil of anointing.”

דבר אל בני ישראל. "Speak to the children of Israel, etc." Why did the Torah have to spell out: "speak to the children of Israel" and did not content itself with the word לאמור at the end of verse one? It was clear that G'd meant for Moses to speak to the children of Israel! Alternatively, the Torah could have omitted the word לאמור at the end of verse one and simply have continued: "speak to the children of Israel, etc."

תרומה, the setting aside of the money or materials for the construction of the Tabernacle.

ויקחו לי תרומה, “let them take for Me a contribution.” After G’d had spoken to Moses face to face when He gave him the Ten Commandments, and He had already communicated some of the other 613 commandments which form the bedrock of the entire legislation known as Torah, a method comparable to our sages when they admitted proselytes to the Jewish faith and nation, the people in the meantime had accepted even all the laws they had not yet had time to become familiar with. G’d had concluded a covenant with them which confirmed them as His exclusive people for all time to come. He, in turn, would be their exclusive G’d. The time had come then to erect a Sanctuary for this G’d on earth, a structure which symbolized G’d’s presence not only on earth generally, but in the midst of His people. This represented the realization of G’d’s promise in Exodus 19,5 which spelled out the special relationship between G’d and the Jewish people. The principal reason for building this structure was to provide a home for the Shechinah, G’d’s benevolent presence among the people. The Holy Ark within that structure represented the holiest part of it. In connection with it, and after giving detailed instructions as to its size, the materials it was to be made of, and the lid and the cherubs adorning it, G’d had announced ונועדתי לך שם ודברתי אתך מעל הכפורת מבין שני הכרובים אשר על ארון העדות, “there I will set My meetings with you, and I shall speak with you from atop the Cover, from between the two cherubs that are on the Ark of Testimony, etc.” This is why Moses began immediately with the construction of the Holy Ark, followed by the making of the Cover, followed by the Table and the Menorah, all of which are the furnishings of that Tabernacle The fact that G’d did indeed speak to Moses from that location, on the Cover of the Holy Ark, has been confirmed in Numbers

לי means for the sake of My Name. Everything in the world is His, [therefore it cannot mean, “so it will be Mine.”]

ויקחו לי תרומה, “they shall take for Me a contribution;” this portion had been told to Moses during the forty days that Moses was on Mount Sinai, immediately after the revelation at that Mountain, [In other words, before the smashing of the Tablets, and the golden calf episode. Ed.] G–d, at that time, had already told Moses where to erect the Tabernacle, and that it would house the Holy Ark, inside the Holy of Holies, symbolising G–d’s presence on earth. He told him that it would contain the Tablets, and that the Israelites would be encamped around the Tabernacle. This is what is meant in verse eight of our verse where G–d described Himself as residing in the midst of the people, i.e. as if surrounded by angels as He had been in heaven. Concerning this state of affairs, David had said in Psalms 82,6: אמרתי אלוהים אתם ובני עליון כולכם, “I had said: ‘you are the children of G–d all of you children of the Supreme Being.” [David bemoans the demotion of the Jewish people that followed the golden calf episode in the verse following. Ed.]

ויקחו לי תרומה, “they shall take for Me a contribution;” some commentators believe that this paragraph was revealed to Moses during the forty days that he had been on the Mountain immediately following the revelation, and that already at that time, before the sin of the golden calf, he had been instructed to build the Tabernacle, in which the Holy Ark was to be placed that would contain the Tablets.תקחו

תרומה is something set apart (cf. Onkelos); the meaning is: let them set apart from their possessions a voluntary gift in My honour.

מאת כל איש, G’d commanded that the procedure should not be like the imposition of every man’s contribution for the public charity fund which was treated as a tax. Contributions were to be accepted only from volunteers.

Setting aside. Rashi is explaining that here it does not mean “lifting up,” as it does in (29:27): “The shoulder of the terumah-offering.” (Re”m)

I believe that in order to understand this we must refer to Yuma 4, according to which a person is forbidden to relate to another what he has been told by a third party unless he had been specifically permitted or instructed to do so. The Talmud bases this on the phrase: "G'd spoke to Moses לאמור 'to say'." According to this rule the Torah had to employ the line: "speak to the children of Israel," as otherwise Moses would have understood that whereas he was permitted to convey G'd's words to the people he was not duty bound to do so. When you apply this rule you will be able to account for many other instances in the Torah where the word לאמר is followed by דבר, "speak!" Our Rabbis in Yalkut Re-uveni explain the line "speak to the children of Israel" as meaning that Moses was not to appoint members of the mixed multitude to positions of authority over the children of Israel. They understood the word דבר in this instance as derived from דברות ושררה, expressions denoting authority.

את תרומתי, “you are to take (accept) My contribution.” Rashi explains that this contribution consisted of 13 different types of materials. They are the following: gold, silver, copper; blue, purple and crimson yarns; fine linen, goat’s hair, ram skins, skins of techashim, acacia wood; oil for incense and oil for lighting; and the princes were to supply the gemstones for the High Priest’s garments.

ידבנו לבו — The word ידבנו is of the same root as נדבה (the נ in the latter being replaced by the Dagesh in the ד); it is a term denoting “good-will”, apaisement in old French (cf. Rashi on Genesis 33:10 and Leviticus 19:5).

Let them set aside from their possessions a donation. Rashi is answering the question: Since terumah here means “setting aside,” why does it not have a fixed amount, like terumah taken from grain and wine? Therefore Rashi explains that it is “from their possessions,” [not from their fields,] so it has no fixed amount. Alternatively, Rashi is answering the question: If terumah here means “setting aside,” why does the verse not state first what they are to set aside, and then write, “Have them take for Me a terumah-offering”? Thus Rashi adds the words, “From their possessions.” [This answers also a second] question: Does the verse not imply that the terumah should come from their very selves, as it is written, “A terumah-offering from every man”? Therefore Rashi explains, “Let them set aside from their possessions a donation.” This answers everything. “Have them take for Me a terumah-offering” indeed means “set aside,” as Rashi said, “Let them set aside from their possessions.” And we need not say that the terumah comes from their very selves, because it comes from their possessions. Accordingly, “From every man” is not to be read with the preceding phrase, “terumah-offering,” but with the phrase following “Whose heart impels him.” And since we might think that this setting aside is obligatory, Rashi tells us that it is a good-will donation, as implied by, “Whose heart impels him to generosity.” (Re”m)

ויקחו לי, and they shall take for Me, etc." Why is this paragraph introduced by the conjunctive letter ו? Perhaps we can explain this by a statement attributed to our sages in Shekalim 1,3 according to which a person had to pawn some of his possessions in order to to contribute the half shekel for the building of the Tabernacle. We read in the Tanchumah on our portion that actually the Torah speaks here about three different kinds of תרומות, contributions. Two of these contributions consisted of a shekel per head whereas the size of the third contribution varied in size according to the individual's generosity and ability to contribute. One of the fixed contributions was used for the silver sockets holding up the beams of the Tabernacle, the second one was each individual's contribution for the purchase of the animals required for the public offerings, whereas the third contribution was a free-willed gift towards the materials needed for the construction of the Tabernacle. Keeping the above in mind the conjunctive letter ו before the word יקחו suggests a contrast between this donation and the one following which was determined by the individual's generosity, and which was not imposed on each Israelite. The words בני ישראל indicate that the levy was imposed only on the male Israelites, not on the women. Only the males were counted as we we know from Exodus 30,13. Accordingly, the words: מאת כל איש, "from each man," indicate that the levy was of equal size for each person from whom it was taken. Even if a person wished to contribute more than the half-shekel the Torah legislated in פרשת כי תשא, he was not allowed to do so. The extra letter ו also alludes to the fact that something else had preceded the compulsory levy, namely the spirit of generosity mentioned in our verse. When we adopt this method of interpreting the verse, the Torah speaks here of the various kinds of contributions made in connection with the building of the Tabernacle. G'd wished for each one of these three contributions to be made due to a spirit of generosity; a person should not make a contribution until he was in the proper frame of mind.

תקחו את תרומתי YE SHALL TAKE MY HEAVE OFFERING — Our Rabbis said: the expression תרומה is used here three times, being an allusion to three different heave offerings; one is the heave offering which consisted of a beka (half a shekel) a head, and of which the sockets were made, as is set forth in the section אלה פקודי (Exodus 39:26-27); another is the heave offering for the altar — a beka a head that was given to the funds (more lit., “the basket”, in which collections for communal or charitable purposes were made) from which to purchase the communal sacrifices; (see Rashi on Exodus 30:15) and the other one is that implied in the word תרומתי “My heave offering” and referred to by the word כסף in the next verse — the heave offering for the Tabernacle which was a free-will gift from each individual (Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 1:1). Thirteen different articles (cf. Tanchuma) that are mentioned in this section were all required either for the work of the Tabernacle (i. e. the construction of the Tabernacle or making the articles contained therein), or for the priests’ garments, as you will find when you look closely into the matter.

ויקחו לי תרומה מאת כל איש אשר ידבנו לבו תקחו את תרומתי, “and from every person whose heart so moves him you shall accept the gifts for Me.” The plain meaning of the text is that these gifts were dedicated to G’d’s name. The word תרומה means something set aside. In other words, the Israelites were to set aside a voluntary contribution for the building of the Tabernacle each out of his or her own funds. The whole concept of the Tabernacle has to be understood as an internalized version of what transpired during the revelation at Mount Sinai (based on Nachmanides). The very attribute כבוד which rested on Mount Sinai for all to see afterwards was manifest inside the Holy of Holies on the ark between the cherubs on an ongoing basis. The principal difference was that it could no longer be seen. Moses had said in Deut. 5,21 “here the Lord has shown us His majestic Presence כבוד וגדלו,“ and this has been repeated in connection with the Tabernacle twice more. Once in Exodus 40,34: “and the Presence of the Lord filled the Tabernacle.” In the verse immediately following, the Torah also writes that Moses was unable to enter the Tabernacle as the cloud had settled over it and “the Presence of the Lord filled the Tabernacle.” Just as the Torah wrote in connection with the Mount Sinai experience (Deut. 4,36) “From the heavens He let you hear His voice to discipline you; on the earth He let you see His great fire; and from amidst the fire you heard His words,” so a parallel experience is described in connection with the Tabernacle in Numbers 7,89: “he (Moses) would hear the voice addressing him from above the cover that was on top of the Ark of the covenant between the two cherubs; thus He spoke to him.” If, at Mount Sinai, the “nobles” were described as: “they saw the G’d of Israel,” we find something similar in connection with the Tabernacle in that the G’d of Israel “sat” on the cherubs (Samuel II 6,20). This is also what the prophet Ezekiel reported as seeing in his vision (Ezekiel 10,19-20) וכבוד אלו-הי ישראל עליהם מלמעלה, היא החיה אשר ראיתי תחת אלו-הי ישראל בנהר כבר ואדע כי כרובים המה, “and the glory of the G’d of Israel was above them; this was the Chayah which I saw beneath the G’d of Israel at the river Kevar.”

The same root as נדבה . . . It is as if it said ינדבנו , for the נ is represented by the dagesh of the ד .

This verse may also be explained in consonance with Baba Batra 8, according to which monies for charities may be collected by no fewer than two collectors, whereas distribution of such monies requires the presence of three people. This is in order not to allow arbitrary decisions of an a individual as to who should get part of this money and how much. The second person's presence when collecting the funds is in order that the collectors not be suspected of pocketing some of these funds for their own purposes. The Talmud derives this rule from the words: "and they shall take the gift, etc." Interestingly, both Tossaphot and the Ran claim that the presence of two collectors is mandatory when the amounts are fixed, such as a head tax levied for the poor, whereas when the amounts collected are subject to variation, i.e. each donor decides how much to contribute, three people are required to be present during the collection. Actually, according to halachah, even a single expert is empowered to collect a mandatory levy from people as we know from Sanhedrin 5 where the Talmud empowers an expert judge to pronounce judgment. Rabbi Nachman cites himself as an example of a solitary judge handing down decisions in monetary disputes. [Naturally, the litigants had first agreed to submit to the decision of the single expert judge. Ed.] Tossaphot there write that such a single judge can impose his decision on the litigant. If that is so in matters of litigation, it is obviously the case also where only a mere assertion of authority is involved such as in collecting donations, etc. If a situation normally requiring three judges may be handled by a single expert judge, how much more so can a single expert judge deal with matters which even under normal circumstances only require two laymen. This helps us to understand the words: "speak to the children of Israel" in the sense of "exercise authority." G'd empowered Moses to single-handedly exercise authority when it came to collecting funds for the building of the Tabernacle. Moses was empowered to both distribute the funds and the materials to the respective artisans without having to give an accounting and he was also empowered to collect these funds without anyone supervising what he did. This extraordinary power was restricted to Moses. Whenever anyone else engaged in a similar activity, the rule of "they shall take the contribution" applied. When you will examine the Torah's report of what actually happened (Exodus 36,3), you will find that the people took the various materials from Moses (only), seeing he alone had collected same. Moses did so both with the contributions which were of fixed amounts (the shekel "levy") as well as with the free-willed donations which varied in size and value. We now understand the letter ו which preceded the word יקחו as contrasting the extra-ordinary authority G'd had granted Moses at the outset of this portion with the normal procedures..

The expression תרומה is mentioned here three times. . . However, Scripture explains here only the “terumahoffering for the mishkon — the donation of each individual.” Otherwise, [if it does not allude to three different terumah-offerings,] why does it say תרומתי and וזאת התרומה ? Scripture should have written: ויקחו לי תרומה מאת כל איש אשר ידבנו לבו זהב וכסף ונחשת .

מאת כל איש, "from any man, etc." Perhaps the Torah means that if a certain individual was well known to be of a giving and generous nature they would not assess him as to what could be expected of him but they would accept without question whatever such an individual chose to contribute. When such an individual described his contribution as תרומתי, "this is my contribution," they would let it go at that.

The thirteen items mentioned. . . [Question: Are there not fifteen items listed here? The answer is:] Greenish-blue, dark red and crimson are all of wool, just with different dyes [so they count as one]. Another answer: The onyx stones and filling stones were brought by the leaders of the tribes, while Rashi is counting what the public donated.

The Torah also may wish to teach that the term "my gift," cannot be used except when the donor has donated it willingly, generously, with all his heart. This is why the Torah wrote: מאת אשר. If the donor had to be coerced into giving such a gift it does not qualify for the description תרומתי, [a gift truly meant for G'd. Ed.] but is merely referred to as תרומה, "a gift." The Torah alludes to this by writing ויקחו לי תרומה, "they will take a gift for Me."

A careful reading of the text will reveal that we have three expressions indicating three degrees of gifts. The Torah did not need to write מאת כל איש, as it would have sufficed to write מאשר ידבנו, "from anyone willing to donate." Perhaps all these nuances describe the three levels of charitable gifts that are commonly given by Israelites. They are: 1) gifts by the orphans; 2) gifts by women, and 3) gifts by people who are extremely affluent (or extremely poor). We are told in Baba Batra 8 that one does not obligate orphans to give charity even if the money is intended to free Jewish captives. If, however, such contributions by orphans will enhance their standing in the community, it is permitted to collect from them. We are taught in Baba Kama 119 that women are assessed only a nominal amount when charity is collected. The Talmud defines "nominal amount" in accordance with the economic standing of the women in question. Ravina is reported to have accepted golden chains from women in his town as a contribution. His rationale was that the women in Mechuzza (his town) could well afford it, that such a contribution was really something minor as far as they were concerned. As far as the extremely affluent, the third category mentioned is concerned, the Talmud in Baba Batra 8 forbids that such people be assessed a contribution. We read in Taanit 24 that the charity collectors were careful to keep out of sight of destitute people so as not to embarass them into contributing something they could not afford to give away. In our פרשה the Torah alludes to these three categories of people when it uses excess verbiage in describing the donations for the building of the Tabernacle.

According to the Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 1,5, the Tabernacle was a form of atonement for the sin of the golden calf. If so, there was a reason for the Torah to indicate that donations by the aforementioned three categories of people were not mandatory as we might have thought that unless these people also made their contributions they would not enjoy the atonement for their participation in the sin of the golden calf. The extra word את refers to the women; the extra word כל includes the orphans; the words איש אשר ידבנו לבו refer to the poor. It was permitted to accept even a substantial donation from each of these categories. We are also told in Shemot Rabbah 33,8 that Moses queried the Israelites' financial ability to build the Tabernacle. G'd said to him that even the most insignificant (poorest) Israelite was able to build the Tabernacle (donate the funds needed), and that this is why the Torah writes: "from any man who donates with his heart." This is based on the statement in the Tanchuma in connection with the manna where we are told that the descent of the manna was accompanied by a rain of precious stones and pearls. We are also told in Shir Hashirim Rabbah (Song of Songs 1,11) that the least wealthy Israelite took great amounts of loot out of Egypt and even more at the shores of the sea where the Egyptians had drowned. All this proves that the Israelites were wealthy at the time. Accordingly, the Torah wanted to make it plain that the restrictions the sages placed on raising charitable donations from the three categories of people we described earlier apply only to the norm. When people belonging to either of theses categories enjoyed affluence they were certainly expected to contribute in accordance with their means. The ruling that one does not accept (assess) charitable donations from the orphans applies only when the orphans are neither wealthy nor in need of atonement. When they are in need of atonement, such as at the time the donations for the Tabernacle were required, they certainly had to contribute. Not only that, but even if they made a nominally large donation this may have been accounted as an insufficient donation if they were truly wealthy. The donations were rated according each indiviual's financial ability. The same rule applies to the שוע, the wealthy patrician, who, even if he contributed all the materials for the building of the Tabernacle would not make a dent in his wealth. His contribution would not necessarily reflect largesse on his part. The Torah goes on to say תקחו את תרומתי, to tell us that contributions from these three categories of people are acceptable only because they are contributions to the Holy Tabernacle. Contributions for charities are not acceptable from such people.

A moral dimension of the verse may have to do with the attachment of the soul to G'd. Such a relationship may be reinforced by means of a tangible gift towards the construction of the Tabernacle. The collective soul of Israel is termed תרומה. This is based on Jeremiah 2,3: "Israel is holy unto G'd, ראשית תבואתה, the first of His harvest." The word ראשית is often applied to תרומה. Accordingly, acceptance of a tangible gift by the Jewish people achieves that G'd's Presence will dwell in Israel. The words תקחו את תרומתי refer to the שכינה which is called תרומת השם.