AND THE GLORY OF THE LORD RESTED ON MOUNT SINAI, AND THE CLOUD COVERED IT FOR SIX DAYS, AND

HE CALLED TO MOSES ON THE SEVENTH DAY FROM WITHIN THE CLOUD.

(Shemot 24:16)

AND THE CLOUD COVERED THE TENT OF MEETING,

AND THE GLORY OF THE LORD FILLED THE TABERNACLE.

(Shemot 40:34)

The secret of the Tabernacle is that the

Glory which abode upon Mount Sinai

said there, And the glory of the Lord rested

upon Mount

Sinai (Shemot

24:6), and it is further

written, Behold, the Lord our God has shown us His glory and His greatness

(Devarim 5:21), so it is written of the Tabernacle, and

the glory of the Lord filled the Tabernacle (Shemot 40:34). Twice is this verse, and the glory of

the Lord filled the Tabernacle mentioned in connection with the Tabernacle (also 40:35), to correspond with His glory and His

greatness. Thus Israel always had with them in the Tabernacle the

Glory which appeared to them on Mount Sinai.

And when Moses went into the Tabernacle, he would hear the Divine utterance

being spoken to him in the same way as on Mount Sinai. Thus just as it said at the Giving of the

Torah: Out of the heaven He made you to hear His voice, that He might

instruct you; and upon the earth He made you to see His great fire (Devarim

4:36), so it is written of the

Tabernacle, and he heard the voice speaking unto him from above the

ark-cover… from between the two cherubim; and He spoke unto him (Bamidbar

7:89). The expression "speaking

unto him" is mentioned here twice in order to indicate that which the

Rabbis have said in the Tradition that the Voice would come from heaven to

Moses from upon the ark-cover, and from there He spoke with him; for every

Divine utterance with Moses came from heaven during daytime, and was heard from

between the two cherubim, similar to what is said, and you did hear His

words out of the midst of the fire. It is for this reason that the two

cherubim were made of gold. And Scripture so states: where I will meet with

you, to speak there unto you (Shemot 29:42); and it shall be sanctified by My glory (29:43), for there [in the Tabernacle] will be the appointed place for the

Divine utterance, and it will be sanctified by My glory (29:43).

(RaMBaN Shemot 25:2)

The glory of the Lord is to hide the

greatness of his majesty, for it is impossible to achieve the goal [of

describing God's majesty] and less is better than more, as it is written: to

You silence is praise (Psalms 65). However, it honors [human] kings to

investigate the greatness of their majesty, since that is an achievable goal. If

so, he who [praises a human king] less will be counted as if he had achieved

the goal, so it is better to multiply praises than to reduce praise.

(Metzudat David Proverbs 25:2)

House

of Prayer: Open – Closed – Open

Ruthi Lazare

The command to

build the Tabernacle brings the spiritual journey of the People Israel to a new

height. All of the religious emotions of excitement

and agitation find expression; they are cast into a ritual framework that is

bound to regular and defined times and places.

It would seem that

the building of a Tabernacle for God is illogical and certainly at odds with

the monotheistic world-view. The incorporeal God does not need a place in which

to dwell! The various solutions to this quandary are well known: that the

command to build the Tabernacle was post facto rather than a priori and that

it served as a kind of response to the spiritual weakness revealed in the sin

of the Golden Calf. However, it may be that the instructions for the creation

of God's special home express the tension between the desire to

institutionalize and formalize in detail the worship of God and the urge to

include the pre-institutionalized within it.

Immediately

following the instruction that the construction of the Tabernacle must be based

upon the gifts and generosity of the Israelites, a brief, wonderful verse comes

to tell us: They shall make Me a sanctuary, and I

shall dwell in their midst. From here we learn that personal constructive

involvement, generosity, and wisdom are the prerequisites for God's dwelling within

the human heart. The passages treating the Tabernacle and the

chapters relating to the Temple attempt to transform a

system of instructions and a list of building materials, changing them from

matter to spirit, from the profane to the holy. This deed combines mundane details with

metaphysics, facing the tension between materialization and abstraction,

between a feeling of distance and a feeling of closeness to God, between the

divine and the human.

It is possible to

read some of the details that appear in the descriptions of the Tabernacle and

Temple (in the

haftorah from I Kings 8) as constituting an attempt to preserve the

personal and spontaneous aspects of prayer and worship, even within a

sanctified building that is built in a careful and painstaking fashion.

In the days

following the destruction of the Temple (and even in the Second Temple Period), the

question of the essence of the worship of God is translated into a discussion

of "the service of the heart" in prayer. Our Sages debated how prayer

should be fashioned and struggled with the choice between the quality of spontaneous

personal prayer, which they called tahnunim ["supplications"]

as against the importance of organizing and institutionalizing prayer in the

bounds of rules and norms – prayer which they called keva

God's House are in some ways similar to the formulation of one fixed and

obligatory liturgy, as against the personal and unestablished

forms of worship.

Several pairs of

opposites can be juxtaposed: revelation and worship in any time or place as

against ceremonious ritual worship in a specified building dedicated to that

purpose; fixed prayer as against spontaneous prayer; individual vs. communal

prayer; fear and distance as against intimate closeness to God; concretization

vs. abstraction.

The house built for

God may have served the need for greater closeness and for creating the feeling

of intimacy that is not achievable for every person in every place and every

time. The price of this framework is the loss of spontaneity and the weakening

of authentic and immediate expression of religious feeling. The establishment

of common boundaries and rules is certainly a compromise stemming from

recognition of the fact that only a few individuals can do without such

restrictions in order to attain spiritual ascent and the feeling of closeness

to God.

The Sages tried to

define the place of prayer where God could be worshipped. In the Jerusalem

Talmud (Berakhot 37a; 5:5), R. Yohanan describes one who prays at home

as if he were surrounded by an iron wall. This comment embodies the need to

disengage oneself from the profane environment and create a reality of

sacredness within everyday domesticity. There arises from this a sense that

prayer should be disengaged from its environment, that a special place should

be dedicated to it.

Similar to this is

the suggestion to pray "from the depths" (Berakhot

10b), which calls for the

worshipper to gather himself inwards as a precondition for correct prayer, in

the spirit of the verse from Psalms, A prayer for a poor man when he enwraps

himself.

In the

continuation of the Talmudic discussion (in Berakhot 34b) Rav Kahana expresses an even more extreme opinion, saying that "To

me, he who prays in an open field is arrogant."

The above implies

that the proper state of mind for prayer and worship of God is one of

concentration and discipline, of ingathering within a building. These attitudes

jibe with the outlook underlying the construction of the Tabernacle and later

the Temple. It is an approach which forgoes the

worshipper's direct contact with his environment, and, perhaps, even contact

with his own personal, natural emotions.

Later in the discussion

about the structure of the building in which it is proper to pray, an

intermediary option is forwarded, a kind of compromise between closedness and openness: "And R. Hiya

bar Abba said in the name of R. Yohanan: ‘One should

only pray in a building that has windows… facing Jerusalem" (ibid).

R. Hiya prohibits prayer that completely lacks contact with

the outside. The windows are an opening between the inner and the outer,

between the individual and the national (Jerusalem) between periphery and center. Personal

experience must be connected with that which is outside it. Indeed, King

Solomon created special openings in the Temple he built: And he

made transparent, sealed windows for the House (IKings 6:4).

The nature of

these windows is the subject of many and varied interpretations. Some saw them

as a sign that the Temple would shine light outwards but not receive light from

the outside, because it itself was the source of light. As the midrash says regarding the verse from Ezekiel's vision of

the Temple, And sealed windows for the cells and for their doorposts

and windows all around [facing] inward (40:16)

…that they were wide on the outside and narrow on the inside, in order

that they shine light outwards. Know, that when a human builds a house he

makes windows that are narrow on the outside and wide on the inside so that the

light can enter from the outside and illuminate the inside, but Solomon did not

do so when building the Temple. Rather, he made the windows narrow on the inside and wide on the

outside in order that the light go forth from the Temple and illuminate the

outside, as it is said: And he made clear, sealed windows for the House (IKings

6:4), to inform you that it [the

Temple] is all light and does not need their light. (Tanhuma

Beha'alotkha)

R. Yitzhak Abarbanel also offers a technical and ideological solution

to this strange description:

[windows that are] shekufim

seems that Solomon ordered that windows be made of glass and placed in the

House so that light could enter through them, but no one would be able to see

through them… transparent… that are bright and illuminate of their own

accord… and they were sealed rather than open, for they were closed-up, being

made of glass… they are called winderadis

in the walls of large buildings."

It has become

clear that Solomon's windows could not completely cancel the disconnection

between worship of God and the environment, so that the worshipper would be

connected to the reality that lies outside holiness and the spirit. However, in

contrast to the midrashic explanation, Abarbanel describes how the colored windows exploit the

outside light in order to beautify, illuminate, and lend grandeur the space of

the house of prayer.

The Hassidic

revolution in its various hues attempted to cancel the disconnection between

the life of spirit and the life of action. It viewed each everyday act as part

of the worship of God and brought a new spirit to the question of the place of

prayer. The following Hassidic story exemplifies this outlook in connection

with the question of the place of worship:

Once, someone traveled

to spend Yom Kippur with the Ba'al Shem Tov. The day before Yom Kippur Eve, the man traveled all

day and all night in order to hasten the trip. On the morning before Yom Kippur

he found himself one mile away from the town of Mezibov. He said to himself that since he was

already close to the town, and the horse was very tired from traveling all night

long, "I can pray here while the horse pastures." After praying he

became sleepy. He told himself, "What could happen if I sleep here a

couple of hours? The horse will rest from his labors and afterwards I will be

able to travel quickly and certainly reach the town by noon. He lay down in the wagon and fell into a

deep sleep. He awoke to discover that it was twilight of Yom Kippur. He was

very upset, for after taking so much trouble to reach the Ba'al

Shem Tov by Yom Kippur, he would end up spending Yom

Kippur alone in a field adjacent to the town. Recognizing his sin, he cried out

and wept bitterly all through the night and day. When Yom Kippur ended, in his

bitter mood he rode quickly to the Ba'al Shem Tov. The Ba'al Shem Tov laughed at him when he arrived. The thing was that the

man had needed to ascend with the prayer of the folk of the fields, and Heaven

forced him to do so.

True, it does seem

that the Ba'al Shem Tov had

held a prayer service in a building, but that is not enough to negate the great

value of prayer in the field, connected with nature, to the flora and fauna,

and to people who do not find their place in a synagogue, with its sealed

windows. The windows of the praying Hassid emit light, but they also receive

the light coming in from outside. It is proper that a place of worship not be

surrounded by a wall of iron, but rather that its openings allow those inside

to see and to be seen, that they allow dynamism and vitality to enter it from

the outside and also allow light to shine out of the house of prayer onto its

surroundings.

Which windows

should be opened or closed in our day? A hint at an answer can perhaps be

borrowed from Barry Zimmerman, who uses a play on the word hiloni

newly-coined term: "Who is a Yehudi haloni? One whose windows are open and look out upon

other Jews and other possibilities; one who is aware of the existence of other

windows from which he himself is being watched" (In his article, "Avinu Malkeinu"

in the volume Tarbut Yehudi

be'Eyn ha'Se'ara, – a

festschrift honoring Yoske Ahituv

– pg. 762).

Perhaps our house

of prayer can also no longer make due with sheets and hooks, with sockets and

planks alone. Its windows must be widened and its shutters thrown open to other

Jews and additional paths.

Ruthi Lazare

is a Teacher and Educator.

Giving – Equally

and Humbly

Here is

another explanation why the first two contributions (terumot)

are ordered specifically in God's name, whereas the third is not. Wherever

we find humility and submission among mortals, there we find the secret might

of Holy One, who dwells among the oppressed and the meek; but wherever there is

the slightest hint of pride, the Holy One refuses to bestow his name.

Therefore, the first two contributions, which were given equally by all, for The

rich are not to pay more, and the poor are not to pay less, and no one can

boast "My contribution is greater than yours", these God attributed

to himself:

1.       

The first is preceded by And they may

take Me – to my Name. We have already explained, at the

beginning of Parashat Miketz,

and on the verse Every place where I call my

name to be recalled I will come to you and bless you, (Shemot

20:21) – every letter of His great name points to humility.

2.       

The second contribution is termed my contribution.

Similarly, the use to which the contributions were put offers the same

message. Just as all contributions were equal, forestalling any boasting, so

were the boards – all of equal length. They were at the bottom of the entire

edifice, a trodden threshold, the foundations of the

entire building. Those who fashion them shall become like them – just as

the givers were equal in their contributions, none having excuse for pride over

his fellow, so were these boards acquired by the contributions, symbolic of

humility, for humility is the foundation of the building upon which the entire

House of Israel is established. They are called adanim

– which hint at mastery and rule [Trans. note: adan

means board; adon means master],

because whoever makes of himself a trodden threshold below, is appointed master

above, for whoever lowers himself, the Holy One raises him us and makes him the

foundation and support for the entire building, just like these boards which

were foundation and support for all the edifice. And so the nasi

– (highest official) is so called such because he carries the

others, for they all depend on him [Trans. note: The Hebrew for "high

official" and "carry" share a common root].

(Kli Yakar, Shemot, 25:1)

Even the Grandeur of the Temple Worship is

Compromised for the Sake of Humans

And you shall cover it with gold: The Ark was worthy of being made completely

of gold, but [it was only covered with gold] in order that it not be heavy to carry. The rule is that it should be carried

upon the shoulders, as it is written, for the holy service is upon them,

they shall carry it upon their shoulders. Similarly, we find that the altar

was made hollow, out of boards in order that it not be heavy.

(Hizkuni 25:11)

Study as a Sublimated and Updated Substitute

for Concrete Action

Do not let it enter your heads for one

moment, that these descriptions of the Tabernacle and its appurtenances, the

priestly garment and sacrifices, the laws of purity and those dependent on the

soil and all the rest of the ordinances practiced in antiquity have no

relevance for us today in exile. What use, you may well ask, does it serve us to

study them today?

My answer is this: Everything recorded in

the Torah is designed to provide us with a permanent source of inspiration and

Divine wisdom, to perfect our souls therewith. This is the message of the text (Devarim

29:8): You shall preserve

all that you do. Our Sages explained: (Sifrei, Re'eh, Rashi

on Devarim 4:6): You shall preserve – this refers to the Mishnah

(Oral Tradition): You shall do – in its primary sense of actual doing. The

doing consists in the study of the text and deriving of the spiritual lessons

to be learnt there from by student and scholar, whether during the time they

were actually performed or afterwards (when they were no longer in vogue).

Thus our study and explication of the

symbolism of the Tabernacle and its furniture today is as relevant now as it

was then when they were in full use. In the same way the sacrificial rites are

not obsolete even though their actual physical performance is not feasible. For

their spiritual lessons remain fresh. Through them man can learn humility

before God, in accordance with the text (Psalms 51:19): The sacrifices of God are a contrite spirit.

(From

Abarbanel's Commentary, towards the end of parashat Trumah,

as

quoted by Prof. Nehama Leibowitz

in her Studies in Shemot pp. 504-5,

Aryeh Newman, translator)

If

you enjoy Shabbat Shalom, please consider contributing towards its

publication and distribution.

• Hebrew edition distributed in Israel

  $700

• English edition distributed via email $ 100

Issues

may be dedicated in honor of an event, person, simcha,

etc. Requests must be made 3-4 weeks in advance to appear in the Hebrew, 10

days in advance to appear in the English email.

In Israel,

checks made out to Oz VeShalom may be sent to Oz VeShalom-P.O.B. 4433, Jerusalem

91043. Unfortunately there is no Israeli tax-exemption for local donations.

US and British tax-exempt contributions to Oz VeShalom may be made through:

New

Israel Fund,

POB 91588, Washington, DC

20090-1588, USA

New

Israel Fund of Great

Britain, 26 Enford

Street, London W1H 2DD, Great

Britain

PLEASE

NOTE THAT THE NEW ISRAEL

FUND IS NO LONGER ACCEPTING DONATIONS UNDER $100.

PEF

will also channel donations and provide a tax-exemption. Donations should be

sent to P.E.F. Israel Endowment Funds, Inc., 317

Madison Ave., Suite 607, New York,

New York 10017

USA

All

contributions should be marked as donor-advised to Oz ve'Shalom,

the Shabbat Shalom project.

About

us

Oz

Veshalom-Netivot Shalom is a movement dedicated to

the advancement of a civil society in Israel.

It is committed to promoting the ideals of tolerance, pluralism, and justice,

concepts that have always been central to Jewish tradition and law.

Oz

Veshalom-Netivot Shalom shares a deep attachment to

the land of Israel

and it no less views peace as a central religious value. It believes that Jews

have both the religious and the national obligation to support the pursuit of

peace. It maintains that Jewish law clearly requires us to create a fair and

just society, and that co-existence between Jews and Arabs is not an option but

an imperative.

5,000

copies of a 4 page peace oriented commentary on the weekly Torah reading are

written and published by Oz VeShalom/Netivot Shalom

and they are distributed to over 350 synagogues in Israel

and are sent overseas via email. Our web site is www.netivot-shalom.org.il

Oz

Veshalom-Netivot Shalom's

educational forums draw people of different backgrounds, secular and religious,

who are keen to deepen their Jewish knowledge and to hear an alternative

religious standpoint on the subjects of peace and social issues.

Oz

Veshalom-Netivot Shalom fills an ideological vacuum

in Israel's society. Committed both to Jewish tradition and observance,

and to the furthering of peace and coexistence, the movement is in a unique

position to engage in dialogue with the secular left and the religious right,

with Israeli Arabs and with Palestinians.