Hello again. We just learned that making and untying knots in the construction of the Mishkan took place when making the nets to catch the Chilazon fish.
We couldn't figure out where there could have been an accumulation of water in the Midbar. ( did someone walk to the Mediterranean? ) If anyone discusses it, it would be appreciated.
Thank You,
Jeno Gal, Toronto
(a) A similar question may be asked from the Gemara (Shabbos 49b) that says "they sowed (for the Mishkan the ingredients needed for preparing Techeles - Rashi), therefore we may not sow, they plowed etc." Did they sow and plow in the desert?
In truth, the Torah tells us explicitly that all of the wool dyed with Techeles and Argaman etc. was collected in a matter of days from the time that Moshe announced the building of the Mishkan. Obviously, it was not sown and harvested in that two day period. Similarly, it does not seem logical to suggest that the Jews hunted Chilazon and prepared the wool and dyed it so quickly.
(b) The IGLEI TAL discusses this in his introduction (#1:26). He explains the above Gemara with the help of a Midrash (Shmos Rabah end of #33) which tells us that Yakov warned his descendants to prepare the items needed for the Mishkan before leaving Egypt. Thus, they indeed planted and plowed and hunted Chilazon for the Mishkan - in Egypt! Based on this, the Iglei Tal concludes that we can learn Meleches Shabbos even from work that was done for the purpose of building a Mishkan before Moshe actually commanded them to build it (in Parashas Vayakhel).
The Iglei Tal posits, though, that according to Rav Hai, Rabeinu Chananel and the Yerushalmi, we learn Meleches Shabbos only from what was actually done in the desert for the Mishkan, since the Torah prohibited us from doing it on Shabbos at the beginning of Vayakhel (ibid 1:6,8, 27). They must explain, differently from Rashi, that the sowing and plowing etc. was done after the Mishkan was built for the preparation of Korbanos.
I may point out that the Yerushalmi indeed suggests another source for the Melachah of tying. It was not from the nets tied for hunting the Chilazon, but from the tent-pegs that were tied to the Yeri'os of the Mishkan every time the Mishkan was moved, or from the weavers that tied loose ends of strings in the Yeri'os (Yerushalmi Shabbos 7:2) . This indeed occurred after the commandment to build the Mishkan.
Best wishes,
Mordecai Kornfeld
I just came across a Teshuvos Radbaz 2:685) which implies that the Jews indeed went to trap Chilazon in the "nearby" (so he writes) Red Sea (Yam Suf) after receiving the Torah, prior to building the Mishkan - as you suggested in your question.
Best regards, Mordecai Kornfeld
Dear Rabbi Kornfeld,
Continuing the discussion that the prohibited labors were learnt from the contruction of the mishkan, I wonder why no melochos are learnt from the manufacture of the gold, silver and copper keilim and the wood Keroshim.
Specifically, the extraction of metal ore requires a hole to be dug and the ore extracted to be then refined into metal. The gemora says that digging a hole for the sake of the hole is a melocho (boneh) while digging a hole because one needs the dirt is not considered a melocho d'oryso since it is a melocho sha'aino ztericho legufo. In mining for metals, a hole is dug in the ground for the purpose of extracting the contents. Had the melochos been derived from the manufacture of the keilim, then surely the diiging of a hole for the purpose of the dirt would be considered a melocho d'oryso! Why are these processes involving the metal and wood keilim used in the mishkan ignored by the mishna on 73a?
Yitzchok Klein, Brooklyn, NY
That is an excellent question, Yitzchok.
I think the answer is that Chazal only considered an act that was done in the Mishkan to be a Melachah if it accomplished something significant in its own right (Shabbos 96b; b'Mishkan, Chashiva). Digging out ore from the ground may not be considered a significant act in its own right, since it does not accomplish much than moving rocks or ore from one place to another. (Similarly, carrying an object from one Reshus to another would not be considered a Melachah even though it was done in the Mishkan, since no significant change takes place in the object that is carried, see Tosfos Shabbos 2a DH Pashat).
Any other Melachos that are done in the process of making metal from ore are presumably included in the list of 49 Melachos.
Best wishes,
Mordecai Kornfeld