The Midrash opens Parshas Terumah with a mashal: A king had
an only daughter that was about to get married. The king loved his daughter dearly and could not bear to part
with her. He begged her groom, “Please, make a small room in
your home so that I can come and be with you.”
So too, Hashem could not separate himself from the Torah that he wanted to give to us. Therefore, he requested that we build a Mishkan
so that he could be with us.
R’ Chaim Ya’akov Goldvicht, the R”Y of Kerem b’Yavneh
whose yahrzeit is today, pointed out that the mashal does not fit the
nimshal. In the mashal, the princess' marriage brings about her separation from her father, the king. Hashem certainly did not give us the Torah so
that we should separate from him! Why should we need a mishkan to retain that closeness to Hashem after kabbalas haTorah?
The answer may be found in the brachos in Parshas BeChukosai.
“V’nasati mishkani b’sochichem, v’lo tigal nafshi eschem. V’halachti b’sochichem v’hiyisem lachem
l’Elokim.” (VaYikra 27). At first glance
these two pesukim seem to be just poetic repetition of the same idea. The Seforno, however, reads them as two
different concepts: When you have sinned, then my Mishkan will be there with
you, "V'nasati mishkani b'sochichem," so that the Shechina will not be disgusted by you, "V'lo tigal nafshei eschem." However, that is not the ideal. “V’halachti b’sochichem,” the ideal is for
Hashem to dwell amidst Bnei Yisrael without a Mishkan, “V’hiyisem lachem l’Elokim,”in full
appreciation and acceptance.
According to many Rishonim the construction of the Mishkan
was a response to the cheit ha’eigel. This is the idea our Midrash is
reflecting. Bnei Yisrael had moved away
(so to speak) from Hashem through their sins and could not remain on the plateau attained at ma'amad Har Sinai.
Therefore, Hashem asked that we create a Mishkan so that he could still dwell
among us. [see Pri Tzadik of R' Tzadok haKohen, first piece in the parsha for a similar idea.]
>>> Hashem certainly did not give us the Torah
ReplyDeleteso that we should separate from him!
then why build separation into the system, quite
prior to the cheit ha'eigel? for only Moshe would hear the Kol Isha, the daughter's voice, directly...
>>> the ideal is for Hashem to dwell amidst Bnei
Yisrael without a Mishkan
does this ideal foretell Shmuel's objection (Shmuel 1,8:6) to a human king? by limiting Hashem to the Tent, space remained for a melech of flesh & blood; better was Hashem Himself as the operational King, The Field Commander, "in full appreciation and acceptance";
(if Hashem gave us His Torah for kiddushin,) is then this ambiguity of the mishkan
somehow conveyed in the use of 'kicha kicha'?
take the money for the field (Bereishis 23:13),
a moving away of the two parties from one another; a man takes a woman (Devarim 24:1), the parties drawn closer together (though the pasuk then discusses divorce...)
"The Midrash opens Parshas Terumah with a mashal: A king had an only daughter that was about to get married. The king loved his daughter dearly and could not bear to part with her. He begged her, 'Please, make a small room in your home so that I can come and be with you.' So too, Hashem could not separate himself from the Torah that he wanted to give to us. Therefore, he requested that we build a Mishkan so that he could be with us."
ReplyDelete( emphasis mine)
I'm a bit confused: which is the Nimshal of the daughter, "the Torah" or "us"?
Sorry, I muddled the Midrash's language. The daughter is the Torah, we are the groom. I redid that line in the post to try to clarify.
ReplyDeleteI don't understand Rav Goldvicht's question. Indeed, once Hashem gave the Torah to Yisroel he relinquished His ownership over it. It is now ours to learn and to practice according to our understanding. Accordingly, since Hashem still wanted to maintain a Kesher with the Torah He needed to reside amongst us.
ReplyDelete