hebrew
1)

What are the implications of "Pikudei ha'Mishkan"?

1.

Rashi and Rashbam: This Parshah discusses the amounts of gold, silver and copper that the people donated (and enumerates all the Keilim of the Mishkan [Rashi]).

2.

Ramban #1 (citing many commentaries): The Pasuk is telling us that the entire Mishkan and all its Keilim, 1 discussed in Ki Sissa, were placed in the charge of the Levi'im, under the jurisdiction of Isamar. 2

3.

Ramban #2: It refers to the Parshah that follows - to the amounts of gold, silver and copper that the people donated and what they were all used for. 3

4.

Seforno: It refers to all the items discussed in Vayakhel, 4 about which the Torah writes in Bamidbar (4:32-33) "u've'Sheimos 5 Tifk'du es K'lei Mishmeres Masa'am ... be'Yad Isamar".


1

Not including the K'lei Kodesh (the Aron, the Shulchan ... ) which were under the jurisdiction of Elazar (Ramban).

2

See Ramban's objection to this explanation.

3

Which Moshe placed in the hands of Isamar exclusively (Ramban [Refer to 38:24:1:1]).

4

See Sifsei Chachamim.

5

Indicating that each item, and certainly the holy Keilim was worthy of its name, and, unlike the Beis-ha'Mikdash of Shlomoh and its Keilim, was never destroyed - as the Gemara points out in Yoma, 12a (Seforno). Refer also to 38:21:6:1.

2)

Why does the Torah repeat the word "Mishkan"?

1.

Rashi: Bearing in mind the shared root of the words 'Mishkan' and 'Mashkon' (deposit (collateral)), the Pasuk is hinting at the two times that the Beis-ha'Mikdash 1 was taken as collateral (destroyed) due to Yisrael's sins. 2


1

Which is also called 'Mishkan'.

2

See also Ba'al ha'Turim. Moreover, "ha'Mishkan" (plus the five letters) equals four hundred and twenty - the years that the second Beis-ha'Mikdash stood; "Mishkan", four hundred and ten - the years of the first Beis-ha'Mikdash, and "ha'Eidus" - four hundred and seventy-nine - the era of the Mishkan (which was never destroyed [commentaries]).

3)

Why is the Mishkan called "Mishkan ha'Eidus"?

1.

Rashi: Because it served as testimony that Hashem had forgiven Yisrael on the sin of the Golden Calf.

2.

Ramban and Seforno: Because it contained the Luchos ha'Eidus. 1


1

"Mishkan" S'tam refers to the bottom set of curtains, as we learned in Terumah (Ramban).

4)

Seeing as it was the Kohanim who served in the Mishkan, why does the Torah write "Avodas ha'Levi''im"?

1.

Rashi: The Levi'im were charged to carry, to take down and erect the Mishkan during their years in the desert. 1


1

As the Torah will explain in the first chapter in Naso (Rashi).

5)

What was Isamar's official position?

1.

Rashi, Targum Onkelos and Targum Yonasan: He was in charge of instructing each Beis Av their respective tasks for the day. 1


1

The Mishmar of Kohanim that served each week was divided into six Batei Avos, each of which served one weekday.

6)

Why does the Torah make a point of listing all the details regarding the Mishkan?

1.

Seforno: It is listing the four merits of the Mishkan, on account of which the Shechinah rested in it and on account of which, not only was it never destroyed or captured, but it never even required repairs: (a) It housed the Luchos; 1 (b) It was commandeered by Moshe; (c) The Levi'im, led by Isamar, served in it; (d) It was built by Betzalel and his team of Tzadikim. 2


1

Refer to 38:21:3:2.

2

As opposed to the first Beis-ha'Mikdash, in which the Shechinah rested, but which initially required repairs and which was ultimately destroyed - because the workers were from Tzor; whereas the second Beis-ha'Mikdash did not even enjoy the resting of the Shechinah, since it did not contain the Luchos, was commandeered by Koresh, the B'nei Levi did not serve in it (as testified by Ezra in his Sefer, Ezra 8:15), and whose builders included workers from Tzidon and Tzor (as the Pasuk writes there, Ezra 3:7 [Sefono]).

7)

Why does the Torah not discuss th charge of Elazar.

1.

Ramban: Because Elazar was in charge of the travelling arrangements (regarding taking down the Mishkan, transorting it and erecting it when ythey encamped), and the Torah is not concerned with that aspect of the Avodas ha'Levi'im here. 1


1

Refer also to 38:24:1:1.

Chumash: Perek: Pasuk:
Month: Day: Year:
Month: Day: Year:

KIH Logo
D.A.F. Home Page
Sponsorships & Donations Readers' Feedback Mailing Lists Talmud Archives Ask the Kollel Dafyomi Weblinks Dafyomi Calendar Other Yomi calendars