Chamishoh Mi Yo'dei'a

subscribe.gif (2332 bytes)

by Zvi Akiva Fleisher

Back to This Week's Parsha | Previous Issues

Please send your answers and comments to: SHOLOM613@AOL.COM


1) Ch. 30, v. 18: "V'ossiso kior n'choshes" - Why is the command to create this vessel for the Mishkon placed here and not in parshas Trumoh along with the other vessels?

2) Ch. 31, v. 13: "V'ATOH t'da'beir el bnei Yisroel leimore ACH es ShabbsoSAI tishmoru" - Why do we have the seemingly superfluous word V'ATOH, as we know that Hashem is commanding Moshe? What is the intention of predicating the command to safeguard the Shabbos with the word ACH, a word that connotes limitation (gemara Yerushalmi Brochos 9:7). What is meant by the suffix at the end of the word "ShabbsoSAI," MY Shabbosos?

3) Ch. 31, v. 16: "LA'ASOSE es haShabbos" - How does one MAKE the Shabbos?

4) Ch. 32, 12: "Shuv meicharone a'pecho v'hino'cheim al horo'oh l'a'mecho" - Why do we add "Hashem Elokei Yisroel" to the beginning of these words in our Monday and Thursday "tachanun" prayers?

5) Ch. 33, v. 12: SHLISHI - "Va'yomer Moshe" - Our parshas contains 139 verses. The first two "aliyos" contain 92 verses, two-thirds of the parsha's total number of verses. Why is this so disproportionate?

Answer to questions on parshas T'tza'veh:

1) Starting from parshas Shmos onwards, Moshe's name is mentioned in every parsha (consider Nitzovim and Va'yeilech as one) except in our parsha. Why?

1) The Tosfos Hasholeim says that since Moshe said (32:32), "m'cheini noh misif'r'cho asher kosavto," his words had the effect of having his name erased from a parsha in which it would have otherwise appeared. The reason that parshas T'tza'veh was chosen is that Moshe says, "asher kosavto," which You have WRITTEN," so it must be before parshas Ki Siso. T'tza'veh is the last parsha which had already been written.

2) Because of "m'cheini" as above. T'tza'veh was chosen so as to delay erasing Moshe's name as long as possible, a full circle around the calendar until our parsha.

3) The GR"A says that Hashem foresaw that Moshe would die on the seventh of Ador. This date almost always falls out during the week of Parshas T'tza'veh. Since Moshe left this world during parshas T'tza'veh, his name is left out.

4) The GR"A also says that although Moshe's name doesn't appear overtly in our parsha, it is present covertly. The total number of verses in our parsha is 101. The hidden portion of the letters of Moshe's name (milluy), indicating his hidden presence, adds up to 101. Mem is spelled Mem-Mem. The hidden letter equals 40. Shin is spelled Shin-Yud-Nun. The hidden letters equal 60. Hei is spelled Hei-Alef. The hidden letter equals 1. The hidden part equals 101.

5) The Rebbe R' Heshel points out that the "mesorres siman" of 101 verses in our parsha is "Michoel." Moshe prayed that Hashem personally should lead the bnei Yisroel (33:15,16). The medrash on Yehoshua 5:14 says that Moshe's prayer helped to push off Hashem's statement that an angel would lead them (23:20) until the Angel Michoel appeared to Yehoshua (5:14) saying, "Now I have come." We see that Moshe kept the Angel Michoel from directly guiding the bnei Yisroel. Since Moshe's name is not mentioned in our parsha, Michoel found an opportunity to have his presence in this parsha in a shadow form, by being the "mesorres siman" of the total number of its verses. The above medrash on sefer Yehoshua disagrees with the Tikunei Zohar brought in Rashi 23:21 that the angel was M-T-T-R-N. However, the Baal Haturim also says that the angel was Michoel, pointing out that when Hashem said that He would send an intermediary (32:34), "hinei MALOCHI yeileich l'fo'necho," the letters of the word "MALOCHI" spell "MICHOEL."

2) Ch. 28, v. 2: "V'ossiso vigdei kodesh l'Aharon ochicho l'chovode ul'sif'o'res" - And you shall make the garments for your brother Aharon for honour and grandeur - Compare this with the next verse, which gives a different reason for making the garments, "V'atoh t'da'beir el kol chachmei leiv .. V'ossu es bigdei Aharon l'kadsho l'chahano li." The earlier verse says that the garments are to be made for the honour and grandeur of Aharon, while the next verse says that it is for his sanctification and to allow him to serve as a priest. Which is the correct reason?

The Ksav Sofer answers that our verse is giving us the reason for the garments vis a vis the common man in the street. The primary importance for him is to lend an air of importance to the Kohein. Verse 3 refers to the "chachmei leiv," the wiser and more elevated among the nation. For them the primary purpose of making Aharon's garments is to sanctify him.

3) Ch. 28, v. 5: "V'heim yikchu" - And they shall take - Since these words obviously refer back to their antecedent the "chachmei leiv" of verse 3, why doesn't the verse simply say "v'yikchu"?

This is because the gemara B.B. 9a says that we do not ask for an accounting of dispersing of funds from 2 officers. The gemara says that there is an allusion to this in M'lochim 2:12:16, "Ki ve'emunoh heim osim." Even though we see that there are at least 2 collectors from the word "yikchu," our verse stresses "V'HEIM yikchu," THEY in the plural form, indicative of TWO collectors, to show that because there are 2 people collecting they can be trusted. (The Holy Alshich)

4) Ch. 28, v. 20: "B'milu'osom" - The gemara Sotoh 48b derives from this word that the stones must be complete. This was done by having a worm called "shamir" pass over writing on the stones. As the worm moved along it caused the stones to split open, creating letters to be formed while not removing any of the actual stones. We do not find the word "b'milu'osom" by the 2 stones on the "eifode" straps. Upon them we also have the names of the twelve tribes. Was the "shamir" used as well, or was it permitted to etch into them, leaving them incomplete?

The Ramban posits that there is no requirement to have the names of the twelve tribes etched into the stones in a manner that does not remove any material from the stones, i.e. by using the "shamir." However, Rashi on the gemara Sotoh 48b d.h. "avonim halolu" says that this ruling applies to the stones of the "eifode" as well. These words of Rashi require clarification since we only find "b'milu'osom" by the "choshen" stones.

5) Ch. 28, v. 28: "V'lo yizach hachoshen mei'al ho'eifode" - This is one of the 613 mitzvos of the Torah, to not have the choshen breastplate separate from the eifode garment (gemara Yoma 72a). What lessons can be learned from this prohibition?

Four symbolic interpretations are offered:

1) The gemara Arochin 16a says that the Kohein's wearing of the choshen atones for improper judgements of money matters, and the wearing of the eifode atones for the sin of idol worship. These two sins are associated with each other as stated in the gemara Sanhedrin 7b, "Whoever appoints an inappropriate judge is considered to have planted a tree of idol worship near the altar. Therefore the Torah says that these two items which the Kohein Godol wears should not be separated one from the other, to give us a constant reminder that these two sins are of equal paramount importance. (Chasam Sofer)

2) The choshen is to be placed on the HEART of the Kohein Godol. The word eifode in our verse is spelled lacking the letter Vov, leaving us with Alef-Fei-Dalet which equals 85, also the numeric value of "Peh," a MOUTH, spelled Pei-Hei. The prohibition to separate the two teaches us that one should not speak words from his mouth which are not the true feelings of his heart, "ein piv v'libo shovim," but rather have the two always joined, "piv v'libo shovim" (See Rashi on Breishis 37:4 d.h. v'lo yochlu dabro l'sholom). (Degel Macha'neh Efrayim)

3) Worshipping false gods comes from distortion of straight thinking as explained by Rabbeinu Nisim Gaon in his preface to his commentary on Shas, that the main aspect of the sin of idol worship is mental. Similarly, improper ruling of money matters is a form of mental distortion. They are the same types of sin, only that one is a sin against Hashem and the other against one's fellow man. The Torah wants to stress the similarity of these two sins, thus requiring that they not be separated. (MVRHRH"G Rabbi Yaakov Kamenecki in Emes L'Yaakov)

4) When one distorts the halochos of money matters in his favour, it is a lack of full faith in Hashem. Full trust in Hashem's deciding the set income for each person would not allow a person to act in such a manner. This sin is rooted in denial of Hashem's powers, feeling that one has the ability to gain through his own cunning, in essence a form of avodoh zoroh. The coupling of the sin of distortion of judgement of money matters with the sin of idol worship teaches us that when one seeks atonement for the former, he also needs atonement for the latter. (Rabbi Moshe Feinstein in Dorash Moshe)



See also Sedrah Selections, 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