subscribe.gif (2332 bytes)

by Zvi Akiva Fleisher

Back to This Week's Parsha | Previous Issues

For sponsorships and advertising opportunities, send e-mail to:SHOLOM613@AOL.COM



Ch. 28, v. 1: "L'Chahano li" - To induct him into priesthood for Me - The suffix pronoun Vov in "l'ChahanO" seems superfluous. We likewise find this word in verses 3 and 4. The 3 extra letters Vov have the numerical total value of 18, to allude to the 18 people who served as Kohein Godol in the first Beis Hamikdosh. (Rabbeinu Bachyei)

Alternatively, these 3 letters Vov allude to the 3 Kohanim G'dolim who each served in the Mishkon/Mikdosh for 40 years. They were Aharon, Eli, and Shimon haTzadik. "Li" has the numerical value of 40. (Rabbeinu Chaim Paltiel) He does not explain the significance of the letter Vov.

Ch. 28, v. 1: "Nodov v'Avihu Elozor v'Isomor" - Why bother mentioning them by name since the verse has already told us that Aharon's sons are to likewise be inducted into the priesthood?

1) To exclude Pinchos (whom we might have thought was included in the word "bonov" by virtue of the dictum "bnei vonim k'vonim) (Tur)

2) To teach us that they did not become Kohanim by lineage only (Abarbanel) 3) We might have thought that not all 4 of his sons were included, only the

most worthy. These words teach us that they were all equally worthy. (Imrei Noam)

4) To exclude Moshe's sons (even though Moshe had the status of Kohein at the time of the dedication) (Rabbeinu Chaim Paltiel)

5) To indicate that they were very prominent as Kohanim - Indeed, they executed the majority of the services in the Mishkon. (Rabbeinu Chaim Paltiel)

6) We find no connecting letter Vov between Nodov/Avihu and Elozor/Isomor. This alludes to Nodov and Avihu's very short-lived K'hunoh. (Nirreh li)

Ch. 28, v. 3: "El kol chachmei leiv" - To all wise of heart - We do not find this expression by the command to create the Mishkon components. This is because Moshe was shown a prophetic vision of the Sanctuary building, "U'r'ei vaa'sei b'tavnisom asher atoh mo'reh bohor" (25:40). The picture of the priestly vestments, which were not shown to them, required special wisdom. (Rabbi Yehudoh Chosid)

Ch. 28, v. 3: "Chachmei leiv asher" - Wise of heart whom - The numerical value of these words is 611, the same as the word Torah. Perhaps this teaches us that the wisdom required of the priestly garment craftsmen is based on their knowledge of the Torah. (Nirreh li)

Ch. 28, v. 4: "V'ei'leh habgodim" - And these are the garments - The verse lists six of the eight garments, leaving out the pants and the forehead plate. This is because verse 2 predicates this list as items that are for honour and glory. The pants were made for basic modesty, and the forehead plate is left out because is was solid gold and not cloth. (Ro'kei'ach)

Alternatively, because these two items do not require craftsmen who are "chachmei leiv." (Tur)

Another answer: The verse only lists items that are required as a statute, a decree from Hashem, but the pants were required to cover shameful areas of the body (28:42) and the forehead plate to bring atonement for sins in the Mikdosh service (28:38). (Tosfos Hasho'leim)

Although the gemara Z'vochim 88b says that each garment brought atonement for one sin or another, this is not mentioned in the Torah overtly.

Ch. 28, v. 15: "Choshen" - Rabbi Avrohom ben hoRambam says that the source for this word is "chosh," - hurries. This is because one who asks a question of the Urim v'Tumim contained in the "choshen" receives an immediate response.

Ch. 28, v. 21: "V'ho'avonim .. shteim esrei" - And the stones .. twelve - The books of geological knowledge state that there are only twelve root stone types, and the rest are sub-variations. (Rabbeinu Bachyei)

Ch. 28, v. 21: "Pituchei chosom" - Engraved as a seal - This is the requirement to have the letters etched into the stone without removing any of the stone. This was miraculously done with the use of a most unusual creature, called "shamir."

Exactly how did the "shamir" do its work? Wherever the "shamir" would touch its nail, the area would sink in, as per the verse "b'tziporen shamir charushoh" (Yirmiyohu 17:1). (Mo'ore Ho'a'feiloh)

Ch. 28, v. 32: "V'hoyoh fi rosho b'socho" - And the hem of its opening on top shall be bent inwards - This is Rashi's understanding of these words. Chizkuni says that "b'socho" means in its middle, as we find "v'eitz hachaim b'soch hagan," which Targum Onkelos translates as "in the middle of the garden." The opening shall be made in the centre both vertically and horizontally.

Ch. 28, v. 32: "Lo yiko'rei'a" - It shall not be ripped - Rashi explains that this is a continuum of the previous words. Make a strong doubled over hem so that the opening should not rip. Rashi adds that this is not simply advice. Rather, it is a negative command, "Do not rip it." Chizkuni explains that this is a specific requirement of how to create the opening. At the time of weaving the garment do it in such a manner that you leave an opening for the Kohein Godol's head. Do not make a solid sheet and then cut an opening.

Ch. 28, v. 33: "Ufaamonei zohov b'sochom soviv" - And golden bells in them all around - Rashi says that this means to place golden bells and cloth pomegranates in an alternating manner all around. Thus each gold bell has a pomegranate before it and after it. This is "b'sochom soviv." Ramban disagrees and says that each cloth pomegranate had a gold bell placed inside it.

The Sfas Emes in his commentary on the gemara Z'vochim 88b notes that the gemara seems to clearly state the opinion of the Ramban. "He brings 72 bells which contain 72 clappers and hangs them BO'HEN," in THEM. The use of the plural word clearly shows that they are hung in a plurality of items, and there is but one "eifode." BO'HEN must clearly mean "in the pomegranates. However, the position of Rashi is readily clarified, based on the text of the Shitoh M'kubetzes on the folio. His text is not BO'HEN, but rather BO, in IT, the "eifode."

Ch. 28, v. 38: "V'hoyoh al mitzcho tomid" - And it shall be on his forehead continuously - Rashi says that this either means that there is a continuous atonement even when the Kohein Godol does not wear the "tzitz," or that this is an exhortation to continuously be aware of the fact that he is wearing it (similar to wearing tefillin). Chizkuni says that this is a command to always wear the "tzitz" while he is wearing the turban, "mitzne'fes."

Ch. 28, v. 42: "Mich'n'sei vod" - Trousers of linen - This garment is called "mich'n'sayim" because other garments are placed upon or around different parts of the body, but one "enters" his trousers with his feet. (Rabbi Avrohom ben hoRambam)

The "ayim" suffix is used because there is a pair of leggings, one for each leg. (Michlal Yofi)

The English language follows this idea, a PAIR of pants.

Ch. 29, v. 1: "V'zeh hadovor asher taa'seh lo'hem" - And this is the matter that you shall do for them - The word "hadovor" seems superfluous. We do not find it when the verse introduces other dedication procedures. Our verse is introducing the sacrificial component in sanctifying the Kohanim. "V'zeh hadovor" teaches us that not only can we affect the spirituality accomplished by bringing sacrifices by actually offering them, but we can also do the same through reading and learning the laws of the sacrifices, as per the verses, "K'chu imochem d'vorim" and "Unshalmoh forim sfo'seinu" (Hoshei'a 14:3). "V'zeh hadovor" = "v'zeh hadibur." (Rabbeinu Bachyei)

Ch. 30, v. 3: "V'tzipiso oso zohov tohore" - And you shall clad it with pure gold - The last page of the gemara Chagigoh says that the thickness of the gold covering was but that of a dinar coin. Tosfos brings the Medrash Tanchuma, which relates that Moshe asked Hashem how the wooden under-frame of the golden altar would withstand the fire that burns continually on top. Hashem responded, "This is the norm with My fire from above. It is a fire that consumes fire and does not destroy, as is written, 'V'hasneh ei'nenu ukol' (Shmos 3:2)." Moshe knew that the fire on the golden altar came from above and he also was eyewitness to the celestial fire not consuming the thorn-bush. If so, why was he concerned? As well, what is added in Hashem's response with "it is a fire that consumes fire"?

Although the fire on the golden altar came from the heavens, there is a requirement to bring earthly, physical fire (gemara Eiruvin 63a). Moshe wondered how the earthly fire would not burn the wooden under-frame. To this Hashem answered that His heavenly fire both eats fire, i.e. it consumes the physical fire that was brought, and it also does not destroy. (Likutei Shoshanim)



See also Oroh V'Simchoh - Meshech Chochmoh on the Weekly Parsha and Chasidic Insights

Back to This Week's Parsha | Previous Issues

This article is provided as part of Shema Yisrael Torah Network
Permission is granted to redistribute electronically or on paper,
provided that this notice is included intact.

For information on subscriptions, archives, and
other Shema Yisrael Classes,
send mail to
Jerusalem, Israel