Parshat Truma

And this is the donation that you shall take from them:

Gold and silver and bronze, and indigo and purple and crimson,

And linen and goat hair, and reddened ram skins

And ocher-dyed skins and acacia wood.

(Shemot 25:3-4)

 

And acacia trees - Some of our ancients claimed that our father Jacob planted them and the Israel took them from Egypt on Moshe's command, and the proof is 'acacia wood, such as the indigo and the purple'. One wonders, why does it say 'and with whomever was found' [meaning] for his [personal] need [...] why did they take along acacia trees, what need had they for them? To add to the question, the Egyptians thought that they were going to worship and that they would return afterwards, and therefore they lent them. How then could the Israelites take out so many boards, 10 cubits each, and also latches and they passed through the royal site of Egypt? And what was their answer when asked why they are taking acacia trees when going away three days to worship?

We know not whether these ancients had a tradition that Israel took the acacia trees out of Egypt - in which case we accept their authority. But if it was conjecture, a different solution must be found. We suggest that near Mt. Sinai was a forest of acacia trees. When they arrived there, he told them that they would be staying for a long time and, as I explained, they would have no cloud above them. So everyone made booths, and the princes built kinds of enclosures, each according to his station, and, because they were so many, they felled the entire forest and made booths, and Moshe spoke to them regarding the Sanctuary only after the Day of Atonement, and this explains 'and with whomever was found'.

 (Ibn Ezra (The long version) on Shemot 25:5)

 

And this is the donation - It would seem that all [materials mentioned] before the end of the list of donations is superfluous, because we see all the materials mentioned here [appear later] in the chapter on the Sanctuary. And we know what was needed for each task. But [mention of the materials here] comes to teach us the manner of estimation and requisition the Lord demanded, that it not be according to the financial wealth of each one, which would result in 'and money answers everything' [...] But the estimates were to take into consideration what each person had on hand of each of these materials, and the person who had none of these materials, even if he was a wealthy person, was exempted.

(Haamek Davar, Shemot 25:3)

 

 

The parochet, its cherubim and its weavings

Dalia Marx

The Mishkan's accouterments that the Israelites were ordered to fashion included the parochet - the curtain - described as follows:

And you shall make a parochet of blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine twined linen; with cherubim the work of the skilful artisan shall it be made. And you shall hang it upon four pillars of acacia overlaid with gold, their hooks being of gold, upon four sockets of silver. And you shall hang up the parochet under the clasps, and shall bring in thither within the parochet the ark of the testimony; and the parochet shall divide unto you between the Holy and the Holy of Holies. (Exod 26:31-33, and slightlydifferently Exod 36:8).

During the Second Temple period, the parochet was one of the most impressive accoutrements of the Sanctuary. Josephus Flavius, the historian of priestly descent who had seen the Temple in both its glory and its devastation, describes the artistry of the parochet's weaving: "The composition of materials was not chosen without pre-planning, it was made in the image of the universe. It seems that the crimson alludes to fire, the linen to earth, the indigo to air, the purple to the sea... the fabric's embroidery describes heaven and all its hosts, except for the animals (Wars IV, 5). According to this description, the curtain represented the entire universe with all its elements - fire, earth, air and water, with the embroidery depicting the heavens and their hosts. In this matter (at least) Flavius's description is at odds with the Torah which has cherubim alone on the curtain ("with cherubim the work of the skilful artisan shall it be made")

The curtain, whose purpose was to separate between "the Holy and Holy of Holies" was not made of long-lasting, enduring textiles, but from degradable materials. Indeed, the Mishna relates that the wear and tear necessitated production of two parochot every year (Shekalim 8, 5). The Torah details not only the precious materials used in the weaving of the curtain, but also the way they should be woven - "the work of the skilful artisan shall it be made", and even the image depicted upon it, the "cherubim". The cherubim are heavenly winged beings, described in the Bible in various contexts and different portrayals.

The parochet screening the Holy of Holies, the ark and the two cherubim above the cover, also depicted, according to the Torah's description, images of cherubim. It presented a two-dimensional version of what lay inside the Holy of Holies. But in the Second Temple, when the ark and its cherubim were hidden, what did the parochet with its cherubim screen? The curtain and its cherubim concealed the absence of the ark and the cherubim from the Holy of Holies. The picture on the cloth represented that which it was intended to conceal, but actually it hid the void behind it. And the parochet itself was hidden from the eyes of the people.

 

"Work of a skilled artisan"

The Talmud records a controversy regarding the quality of work required for the crafting of the curtain and its cherubim:

One text says: "embroiderer's work" (Shemot 26:36), but a different text says: "work of a skilled artisan" (ibid. 31) - a single face. "Work of a skilled artisan" - two faces. [A controversy between] R.Yudah and R. Nehemia, one says: "Embroiderer's work" a lion on this side and a lion on the other side. "Work of a skilled artisan", a lion on one side, the other side empty. The other says: "Embroiderer's work", a lion on one side, the other side empty". "Work of a skilled artisan", a lion on one side and a vulture on the other. (Yerushalmi Shekalim I 2, 51b)

It is conceivable that the two texts are referring to different curtains¹. It is still possible, however, to learn how our Sages understood the change in terminology. The anonymous view in the Yerushalmi identifies "embroiderer's work" with "a single face", meaning a single figure, whereas "work of a skilled artisan" is "two faces", i.e. the embroidered images on each side of the fabric are different. According to R. Nehemiah, whose view seems consonant with that of the anonymous Yerushalmi sage, "work of a skilled artisan" is so sophisticated that each side presents a different image ("a lion on this side, a vulture on the other"). Even if the festival pilgrims were allowed to see the parochet on the festivals, as described in Amoraic sources, they could see only the external side. The interior side could be seen only by the High Priest and only on Yom Hakippurim.

From the above we may deduce that the embroidery on the Temple parochet was not just expert and complex work, but that it also contained a dimension of mystery. The mystery was revealed only - in addition to the High Priest - to those involved in the production of the curtain.

 

The Weaving (Thinking?) Maidens 

Who wove the curtain? In Israel, as in other cultures, textile-related work, including spinning, weaving and embroidery was considered female work. A number of verses in "Eshet Hayyil" - "Woman of Valor" (Proverbs 31) portray the ideal woman as one who works with wool and linen, spinning and weaving. Tractate Negaim, when describing the body positions in which people are to stand before the priest who examines their blemishes, says that they must stand as they do in their day-to-day activity, the man "as one who hoes and picks olives" and the woman as - among other depictions - "as one working dough, as one nursing and as a weaver" (Negaim 2, 4)

The Torah informs us that the women were responsible for production of fabrics for sacred ritual use: "And every woman wise-hearted with her hands spun [...] And all the women whose hearts moved them with wisdom spun the goat hair" (Shemot 35:25-26). Talmudic literature also relates that women were employed in the Temple for weaving the parochet. The Tosephta lists among the artisans who were on the Temple's payroll "and women weaving the parochet (Shekalim 2, 6). From the following source in the Talmud Yerushalmi, we see that there was no doubt that the women were the curtain-weavers; the only remaining question was from which article of the Temple budget the women were to be recompensed:

Shmu'el said: Women who weave the Temple parochet draw their wages from the contribution of the chamber. Rav Huna [said]: From the contribution to Temple upkeep. What are they disputing? Shmu'el understood [the women's function as equivalent] to a sacrifice, and Huna understood [it as equivalent] to a structure (ySheq 4:3, 48a).

These sources show that women played an active part in the Temple and its service. The weaving of the parochet was their work. Other sources indicate that the curtain-weavers were in particular young maidens. In the Apocryphal composition II Baruch (or - Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch), the author² bewails the approaching destruction of Jerusalem. He orders the priest to fling the keys of the Temple heavenward, for they could no longer protect the Temple, and to say: "You watch over Your house, for we have failed to watch over it". Immediately following, in a female parallel to the priests, he turns to the weaving maidens and orders:

And you, virgins who spin fine linen,

And silk with gold of Ophir,   

Make haste and take all things,

And cast them into the fire,

So that it may carry them to Him who made them.

And the flame sends them to Him who created them,

So that the enemies do not take possession of them. (II Baruch 10:19)³

A commentary on Tractate Tamid, positioned on the printed page where Rashi's commentary is ordinarily found (and is therefore referred to by some as 'pseudo-Rashi') claims that the weavers were young virgins: "Maidens who had not yet menstruated worked on it [the parochet] because they wanted that it be made in purity" (Bavli Tamid 29b).

 

Boundaries and Intimacy

The parochet represents worlds of opposites: Its weaving required the slow and delicate work of the maidens, but the curtain itself was very heavy; according to the Mishna, three hundred priests were needed in order to immerse it (Shekalim 8, 8). It symbolizes purity but is easily defiled. It symbolizes the entire cosmos - so implies Josephus - but it is constricted to the Jewish nation's most intimate and set apart place.

In other cultures, too, virgins wove the ritual fabrics. Prof. Shaul Lieberman compares the weavers of the parochet to the girls who wove the ritual dress of Athena (peplos) in ancient Greece, all between the ages of seven and eleven. What can explain the choice of young pre-puberty girls to weave for the holy service in different cultures? The simple answer is that their thin fingers were suitable to the delicate work. Classic commentators mentioned that employment of the young girls averted the danger of defilement with menstrual impurity (tum'at niddah), but there may be deeper reasons.

Perhaps we can identify a symbolic connection between the parochet and the state of virginity - both embody clear separation, a boundary forbidden to all, permitted only to those duly appointed and at the correct time. Perhaps for this reason, the Temple's desecration by Titus, its destructor, is described in terms of a brutal rape. His breaking into the Temple is thus described: "And he took a sword and slashed the curtain" (Bavli, Gittin 56b). The Bavli continues and relates: "Miraculously, blood spurted out". The conqueror thought that he had killed himself, and perhaps this is the Talmud's euphemistic way of saying that he thought that he had killed Him whose Temple it is. The torn curtain is the symbol of the Temple whose fate was sealed.

 

Parochet and Minor Sanctuary

The parochet did not disappear with the destruction of the Temple. On the contrary, its symbolic representation is found in tens of thousands of synagogues throughout the ages. It is one of the ritual objects of the synagogue whose purpose is to remember and commemorate the Temple. If in ancient Israel it could be seen only on special occasions by festival pilgrims, today it is present and seen by all who enter the house of prayer.

The synagogue parochet is usually made of expensive and fine materials and is donated to the synagogue to commemorate a special individual or communal events. Embroidered upon it are Biblical and liturgical verses, decorations, symbols, and personal dedications. Styles differ and each parochet tells a personal and individual story, but all teach us that the holy can be created only through slow, restrained and loving work.

The parochet is a constant reminder that the synagogue is a minor temple, a mikdash me'at (a lesser temple) in the absence of the Temple. The very existence of the institution of the synagogue and its vitality constitute an irrefutable response to the attempts of Titus and all his successors to destroy Judaism.

1. Shmot 26:36 speaks of a "masach" - a screen - for the Tent of Assembly, whereas verse 31 (quoted above) speaks of a parochet which separates between the Holy and the Holy of Holies.

2. II Baruch or "The Apocalypse of Baruch" is attributed to Baruch son of Neria, the prophet Jeremiah's scribe, but it was probably composed after the destruction of the Second Temple.

3. It is interesting to note that in parallel versions of the priests flinging the Temple keys heavenward which appear in Talmudic literature (Bavli Taanit 29a; Yerushalmi Shekalim 1 3, 50a) there is no mention of the parochet weavers.

Dr. Dalia Marx teaches liturgy and midrash at the Hebrew Union College in Jerusalem. Her book on feminist critique of the Talmud (in English) will soon appear.

 

 

And they shall make me a sanctuary and I will dwell among them...

"Certainly at the heart of the matter of holiness and the sanctuary and His resting His presence stands Man." So does R. Chayim of Volozhin begin his exposition on God's command to construct a sanctuary... R.Chayim (1749-1821) wrote in a rabbinical style not easily translatable into English, and therefore I take the liberty of summarizing rather than translating.  If man sanctifies himself properly through the observance of all the mitzvoth Then he himself is the actual sanctuary and within himself is the Lord, blessed be His name, as is written (Jeremiah 7) 'The Temple of the Lord, the Temple of the Lord, the Temple of the Lord are these [buildings]' but as they taught 'And I shall dwell in them' - Scripture does not say 'in it [in the Sanctuary]', but rather 'in them' - in the people. The tzadikkim, through actions which are desired by Him, are themselves the true sanctuary of God. The physical sanctuary is external, and it has important educational value. The Torah wishes to tell us, do not think that the end goal of God's intent is the creation of the external sanctuary, but "know you that the goal of my will in forming the sanctuary and all its utensils is but to hint to you that you study it and then make yourselves, through your proper behavior as the form of the sanctuary and its utensils, suitable for Me to actually rest My presence in you.           The sanctuary's existence is dependent upon our walking in His paths. When the nation's internal sanctuary becomes corrupt, the Temple cannot help, and the foundations are destroyed.

(R. Hayyim of Volozhin - Sefer Nefesh Hachayim - Gate 1 - Chap.4)

               

If you follow my laws (Vayikrah 26:3)... I will establish My abode in your midst (26: 11). If we meditate upon these verses, two things will become clear to us as absolute certainties:

1. The meaning of that I may dwell among them goes way beyond the mere indwelling of the Shekhinah in the Tabernacle. In reality, it refers to God's immanent closeness among us with the fulfillment of the covenant between Him and Israel, which is revealed when His protection and blessing influence the flowering of life for the individual and collective.

2. That being said, God does not allow His Shekhinah, His protection, or His blessing to rest upon us by the building of the Tabernacle and its painstaking maintenance, but rather, by the sanctification of every aspect of our private and public lives for the sake of keeping His commandments. This was not demonstrated only by the historical events of the destruction of the Sanctuary at Shilo, and of the two Temples in Jerusalem; Scripture itself speaks of it clearly and with explicit warnings... In any case, Scripture proclaims that I may dwell among them will occur in the wake of let them make Me a sanctuary. Therefore, the sanctuary is but an expression of the more general role whose fulfillment is the condition for the indwelling of the Shekhinah in Israel to be assured.

(R. Samson Raphael Hirsch on Shemot 25: 3-8)

 

 

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.

4,500 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.

Shabbat Shalom is available on our website: www.netivot-shalom.org.il

For responses and arranging to write for Shabbat Shalom: pleiser@netvision.net.il