The Meaning of the Mishkan's Parts and Structure

The Structure of the Mishkan - The Meaning of the Form of the Structure and the Relationship Between Its Parts

INTRODUCTION

 

            This lecture differs from the previous lectures in its underlying assumption. In general, we have tried to learn from the Scriptural verses themselves, or from the words of Chazal or the commentators, which provide those verses with exegetical and spiritual meaning.

 

            In this lecture, we will deal with the meaning of the structure of the Mishkan and of the feeling felt by one who entered into it. The assumption underlying this lecture is that despite the fact that we do not find an explicit description of this feeling or of any influence whatsoever that the Mishkan had on anyone, every detail of the structure that represents the resting of the Shekhina in this world has precise and intentional God-given meaning.

 

This approach applies to the materials and their varied uses in different places; to the shape, colors, dimensions, directions, and location of the vessels; and to the proportions and the relationship between the structure's various components.

 

In the vast majority of cases, the Torah itself does not explain these meanings, but occasionally Chazal or the commentators do address them.

 

In this lecture, our perspective is architectural and engineering-related.[1] In this sense, we will veer from our usual approach and we try to understand what the structure, shape, and location of the vessels might have meant to the observer.

 

This is not a necessary interpretation in any sense. It is a possible interpretation, but in my opinion, it adds another layer to our attitude towards the structure of the Mishkan and its meanings.

 

Recall that in terms of the area from the altar and westward, this speculation is only meaningful for the priests who serve in the Mishkan; only the eastern portion of the courtyard is meaningful for the ordinary Israelite. On the other hand, there is symbolic spiritual meaning to the structure, the relationship between the various vessels, and the dimensions and the proportions beyond the feelings of the individual contemplating and experiencing the Mishkan.[2]

 

THE SCREEN OF THE GATE OF THE COURTYARD

 

            Let us try to contemplate the structure of the Mishkan through the eyes of one entering the Mishkan, going from outside inwards:

 

            The eastern side of the courtyard is comprised of three parts:

And the breadth of the court on the east side eastward shall be fifty cubits. The hangings of one side of the gate shall be fifteen cubits: their pillars three, and their sockets three. And on the other side shall be hangings of fifteen cubits: their pillars three, and their sockets three. And for the gate of the court shall be a screen of twenty cubits, of blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine twined linen, wrought with embroidery: and their pillars shall be four, and their sockets four. (Shemot 27:13-16)

 

            There is a clear difference in the materials used for the screen of the gate of the courtyard and those used for the hangings of the courtyard. The screen of the courtyard was made of blue, purple, scarlet, and fine twined linen, whereas the hangings of the courtyard are altogether different in their materials, their shapes, and their colors. It is only natural, then, that a person's eyes would focus on the screen of the courtyard, which, according to its materials, alludes to the most sanctified site to which it leads – the parokhet and the Holy of Holies.

 

            The Torah does not describe in detail the precise relationship between the screen of the gate of the courtyard and the sections adjacent to it to the north and to the south. Did they all stand in a line, or did the screen of the gate of the courtyard stand slightly to the east?

 

The Baraita De-Melekhet Ha-Mishkan (chap. 8) states as follows:

 

The gate of the courtyard had a screen, but you do not know how far the hangings were from the opening of the courtyard. [We learn this] when it says: "And the hangings of the courtyard, and the screen for the door of the gate of the court, which is by the Mishkan, and by the altar round about" (Bemidbar 4:26). Just as from the Mishkan to the altar was ten cubits, so too from the hangings to the opening of the courtyard there were ten cubits.

 

This viewpoint is different than that of R. Yose in Zevachim (59b-60a), who says that the screen and its pillars stood in a straight line with the hangings of the Mishkan.

 

Let us try to understand the significance of the fact that the hangings of the courtyards stood along one line, while the screen of the gate of the courtyard stood ten cubits to the east. The author of "Ma'aseh Choshev" comments as follows:[3]

 

And in that area between the screen of the gate of the courtyard and the hangings on the eastern side of the courtyard, Moshe, Aharon and his sons would encamp and set up their tents.

 

And support for this is the fact that the verse calls the hangings in the east "ketefot" (sides), literally, "shoulders," which run along the breadth of the courtyard, and the gate of the courtyard which is a continuation and its pillars were like the head and the neck, and afterwards started the breadth of the courtyard and the hangings on the two sides, and between the hangings and the screen there were ten cubits.

 

            The author of "Ma'aseh Choshev" makes two interesting points:

 

• In the area to the east, between the hangings of the courtyard and the screen of the gate of the courtyard, Moshe, Aharon and his sons would encamp and set up their tents.

 

• The term "katef" (lit., shoulder) assumes that there is a head, and the screen is like a head and a neck.

 

In any event, according to this approach, the gap between the screen and the hangings of the courtyard served as an entrance area. This necessitates entry into the courtyard from either the north or the south, rather than direct entry from the east, something that did not require lifting or moving the screen every time somebody wished to enter the courtyard.

 

Entry from the north and south, and not from the east, is not direct entry, but rather indirect entry, and it channels the person entering into the inner courtyard. This manner of entry has several spiritual meanings:

 

First of all, this indirect entry creates a feeling of humility, and also the need to look inwards from the screen towards the west, in the direction of the courtyard and the structure of the Mishkan. A person who begins his entry is half inside and half outside, and he wants to know what is to be found on the other side of the screen.

 

In addition, this creates a certain preparation that obligates a person to contemplate on the outside, even though he is not yet inside.[4] Seeing the entrance prepares a person for his entry into the sanctified zone. This reality creates a certain gradation both in entry and in exit. Entry into the sanctified zone is by stages, and similarly exit from the sanctified area into the mundane world is by stages.

 

In practice, until the person removes his eyes from the screen and turns right or left, he retains the feeling that he is still inside the structure, even though he is already east of the eastern hangings of the courtyard, though west of the screen of the gate of the courtyard. In this sense, the screen is similar to a mirror and he is still considered in the courtyard. Even when a person leaves, his eyes remain trained on the Holy (this in contrast to walking out backwards).[5]

 

Another point that should be noted relates to the Mishkan's influence over what is found outside of it. If indeed the screen was shifted eastward, this created a feeling of connection between the Mishkan and what was found outside it. With the Mishkan constructed in this manner, the inside of the Mishkan was connected in some degree to the mundane world outside the Mishkan. This point touches upon the broader question regarding the relationship between the world of the holy and the mundane world, between the Mishkan and that which is outside of it.

 

THE COURTYARD

 

            The rectangular courtyard was 50 X 100 cubits (Shemot 27:9-19) – a rectangular space that focuses our attention on that most important structure located in the western portion of the rectangle.

 

            As is well known, the Torah does not spell out the location of the structure of the Mishkan in relation to the courtyard as a whole. Baraita De-Melekhet Ha-Mishkan, chapter 3, states as follows:

 

From the hangings on the southern side to the Tent were twenty cubits, and the Tent was ten cubits, and from the Tent to the hangings on the northern side were twenty cubits. Thus, you learn that its breadth was fifty cubits. From the hangings on the western side until the Tent were twenty cubits, and the Tent was thirty cubits, and from the Tent until the hangings on the eastern side were fifty cubits. Thus, you learn that its length was a hundred cubits, as it is stated: "The length of the courtyard shall be a hundred cubits, and the breadth fifty everywhere" (Shemot 27:18).

 

R. Yose says: What is the meaning of "fifty everywhere"? This is before the Tent. Thus, you learn that its length was a hundred cubits and its breadth was fifty cubits.

 

            In light of the description of the structure emerging from the Baraita, it seems that the feeling of a person advancing westward was that the centrality of the Mishkan was growing increasingly larger. It follows from the Baraita that the structure was centered toward the west, and that a person entering and advancing westward was advancing to the center of the structure. Despite the fact that the hangings of the courtyard were higher and more encompassing, the main structure was the Mishkan itself.

 

There is a proportional relationship between the length and breadth of the courtyard and the length and breadth of the Heikhal. In this sense there is a similarity between the courtyard as a whole and that part of the courtyard containing the Mishkan, on the one hand, and the Heikhal and the Holy of Holies. In both cases, the transition is from a rectangle to a square, as will be clarified in the next chapter. The eastern part of the courtyard was empty until one reached the area of the burnt-offering altar.

 

In this context, it should be noted that the east-to-west axis of entry is the primary direction, having great significance with respect to the light and its first appearance in the east.[6]

 

THE LOCATION OF THE RAMP AND THE ALTAR

 

Without a doubt, the altar was the most prominent feature in the eastern half of the courtyard. Here too, the Torah does not spell out the altar's precise location in the courtyard, but merely notes:

 

And he put the altar of burnt-offering by the entrance of the tabernacle of the Tent of Meeting. (Shemot 40:29)

 

            In addition to the Tannaitic disagreement regarding the precise location of the altar on the north-south axis,[7] the Baraita states:

 

The burnt-offering altar was set in the middle of the courtyard, the ramp to its south, the laver to its west, the slaughtering area to its north, and all of Israel to its east. As it is stated: "And all the congregation drew near and stood before the Lord" (Vayikra 9:5). (Melekhet Ha-Mishkan, chap. 11)

 

            The length and breadth of the altar was five cubits. When the Baraita states that the altar was set in the middle of the courtyard, it refers to the north-south axis. From east to west, the altar was ten cubits east of the entrance to the Ohel Mo'ed, and thirty-five cubits from the gate of the courtyard.

 

            Accordingly, there remained a very sizable area (thirty-five cubits) from the gate of the courtyard to the altar. This is especially true in light of the fact that the altar was situated in a north-south direction, perpendicular to the primary axis of entry from the screen of the gate of the courtyard to the Mishkan.

 

            It seems that the location and direction of the altar has additional significance as well. The altar and the ramp[8] create a barrier that demand a certain gradation on the part of the person entering the courtyard (which is somewhat similar to what we said regarding the screen of the gate of the courtyard). The entry is not direct, but roundabout – in order to reach the area between the altar and the Ulam, one must go around the altar from the north or the south.[9]

 

            This creates a square ten cubits by ten cubits, paralleling the Holy of Holies to the west of the Heikhal. The difference is that the former is entirely on the outside – west of the altar – whereas the former is entirely on the inside – west of the veil that separates between the Holy and the Holy of Holies.[10]

 

            Thus, it turns out that the Heikhal is bounded on the east by an open area of ten by ten cubits between the Mishkan and the altar and by a roofed inner area on the west to the west of the veil.

 

            The outer square is an imaginary space created for the person entering or exiting the Heikhal. For the person entering the Heikhal, this creates a certain preparation for the sanctity of the Heikhal, whereas for the person exiting the Heikhal, it prepares him for leaving the most sanctified of places to a less sanctified place.

 

THE LAVER

 

            The location of the brass laver is spelled out in the Torah:

 

You shall also make a laver of brass, and its pedestal also of brass, for washing: and you shall put it between the Ohel Mo'ed and the altar, and you shall put water in it… When they go into the Ohel Mo'ed, they shall wash with water, that they die not; or when they come near to the altar to minister, to burn offering made by fire to the Lord. (Shemot 30:18-20)

 

            In the Rabbinic sources that describe the Mishkan, there is no more precise description of the location of the laver, except for the fact that it stands to the south of the entrance to the Mishkan.[11]

 

            The priests are commanded to wash their hands and feet both in order to minister at the altar and to enter the Ohel Mo'ed, and therefore the laver's location between the altar and the Ohel Mo'ed makes it possible to conduct the purification process in a most natural way prior to service in both places. In this sense, the location of the laver in the middle towards the south constitutes a most fitting preparation for both places.

 

            The primary objective of the laver, which serves as the site of the purification of the ministering priest, emphasizes the need for purification and sanctification as a condition both for service at the altar and for service in the Ohel Mo'ed.

 

            In addition to all the preparations made by the priest before he arrives in the courtyard – both the immersion of his entire body and the laws governing the reverence that he must show when he walks in the courtyard and the like - there is an additional act of purification that takes place in the courtyard itself. This certainly creates a deep sense of sanctification for the ministering priest. Therefore, the location of the laver and its pedestal between the altar and the Ohel Mo'ed on the southern side of the courtyard creates the sense of preparation that is appropriate for sanctification in the courtyard in anticipation of the service.

 

THE HOLY

 

            The Holy was a rectangle of 20 by 10 cubits. As was noted above, it is interesting that the ratio of the Holy's length to its width (20:10) is identical to the ratio of the courtyard's length to its width (100:50).[12]

 

            An interesting point regarding the Holy is the location of the pillars of the screen at the entrance of the Ohel Mo'ed. The Torah states:

And you shall make for the screen five pillars of shittim wood, and overlay them with gold, and their hooks shall be of gold: and you shall cast five sockets of brass for them. (Shemot 26:37)

 

            The number and location of pillars does not appear to allow for direct entry into the Holy. Once again, this may emphasize the humility that is necessary when entering the Holy.[13]

 

            It is interesting in this context that the veil separating between the Holy and the Holy of Holies hung upon only four pillars, whereas the screen of the entrance of the Ohel Mo'ed was supported by five pillars. This might mean that in order to enter into the Holy, one must enter from the side, in a more humble manner, and not directly facing the Holy, whereas when one is already in the Holy, entry into the Holy of Holies may be more direct.[14] Alternatively, this difference might stem from the fact that entry into the most perfect chamber, containing the most perfect thing, demands a more direct entry.[15]

 

From the entrance to the Heikhal, the rectangle of the Holy leads to the square of the Holy of Holies. Entry along the lengthwise axis, in this case east-west, focuses attention on the Holy of Holies. Here too the direction of entry inwards leads directly to the most sanctified chamber, to the Holy of Holies.

 

The arrangement of the vessels in the Heikhal is also significant. The location of the candlestick in the south and the table in the north also emphasizes the axis of entry from east to west. The incense altar is located slightly behind them for those coming from the Holy of Holies, and in the middle of the axis opposite the ark, the kaporet, and the keruvim.

 

THE HOLY OF HOLIES

 

            The Holy of Holies was a square in a rectangle, precisely half the size of the Holy.[16] What is the significance of these proportions?

 

            It may be suggested that the inner chamber is the chamber designated for the resting of God's Shekhina, and in this sense it is an intimate place that was not meant to be open to those serving in the Mishkan.[17] The outer chamber, the Holy, on the other hand, was twice as long because it was meant to be open to those serving there. The fact that the place is meant to serve both the king and his subjects demands that it be twice as long as the place designated exclusively for the king.[18]

 

            Another noteworthy point is the square shape of the Holy of Holies – the simple and perfect shape of a cube.[19]

 

            The ark was not square; were it square, we might have searched for sanctity in the ark itself. Since it is not a square, we do not search for sanctity in the ark itself, but in the structure of the chamber, which is a perfect square, or in what is above it, (perhaps in this case from between the two keruvim or above them), or in the place upon which the ark rests, the even ha-shetiya.

 

BEHIND THE HOLY OF HOLIES

 

            From the entrance of the courtyard, the structure of the Mishkan itself conceals the rear area between the west side of the Mishkan and the hangings of the courtyard. This expanse parallels in a certain sense the area at the entrance to the Holy (between the altar and the Heikhal), and creates a certain symmetry between the area to the east of the Holy (between the altar and the Holy) and the expanse to the west of the Holy of Holies. In other words, the rectangular structure, the rearmost part of which is a square, is bounded on the east and on the west by squares.

 

            In our explanation, we have assumed that the Torah not only speaks in the language of man, but God the construction of the Mikdash in all its fine details are intended so that every person will relate in the proper manner to the structure that represents the Shekhina's presence in the world through his contemplation of the structure.

 

LIGHT AND DARK

 

            An interesting dimension that certainly influenced the feelings of those who served in the Mishkan is what they saw when they entered into it. The courtyard was, of course, open, but when they entered into the Holy, what exactly did they see?

 

            On the face of it, in the Holy itself, the light of the menora illuminated the table. This is the understanding of the Rashbam and the Chizkuni in their commentary to Shemot 25:31, where it is written: "And the menora over against the table" (Shemot 26:35).

 

            This light is renewed every day in the morning and in the evening when the menora is dressed and the incense is burned on the incense altar. Both of these are fixed and continual services, and it is therefore reasonable to assume that there was a certain light in the Holy that illuminated the chamber, so that one who entered the Holy entered a lit area.

 

            In contrast, in the Holy of Holies, other than the burning coals found in the pan when the High Priest entered, there was no light whatsoever. In the most sanctified place, where the ark, the kaporet, and the keruvim stood during the First Temple period - in the place from which the world was created, and from which the creation of light apparently began - there was total darkness.

 

            From the natural light in the outer courtyard, through the light of the menora in the Holy, and to the darkness in the Holy of Holies, the High Priest travelled from the clearest and most manifest reality to the most hidden reality.

 

            The ministering priest gradually entered, as it were, from a place that was exposed, illuminated, and material, into a slightly hidden place where only the light of the menora illuminated the table, and from there into the most hidden and least revealed place – the infinite, where God met Moshe between the two keruvim. The Holy of Holies is not a chamber connected to seeing, but rather to hearing the voice of God. At the point of contact with the infinite, as it were, it is possible to hear, but not to see. Hearing is, in its very essence, connected to spiritual phenomena, while seeing is primarily connected to perception of the material world.[20]

 

            R. Israel Ariel relates to this issue, comparing the darkness in the Mishkan to the light of Creation and defining the matter as follows:

 

The point to which the entire Mishkan is directed, room after room, is a point of mystery. The Holy of Holies is a penetration of the heavenly darkness to be anchored in the world and its images… and to show reality itself that it is the foundation around which everything revolves.

Therefore, the Holy of Holies is the most interesting, for in truth the mystery is not empty, there is no greater richness than its richness, only that it is hidden and concealed, and he who merits to purify and sanctify himself merits to glimpse inside.

 

THE MATERIAL AND THE SPIRITUAL

 

            Another perspective from which to consider entry into the Mishkan is the transition from materiality to spirituality. On the face of it, the deeper one enters from outside, from the courtyard to the Holy of Holies, there is a transition from the most material existence to the most spiritual one.

 

            In the courtyard, on the outer altar, the blood of the sacrificial offerings is sprinkled. In a certain sense, what takes place there is the destruction of the material world through man's submission to God after confessing his sins and placing his hands on the animal. There, the most material process takes place – the slaughter of the animal and the burning of its organs.

 

            In the Heikhal, a more delicate service is performed – the lighting of the lamps, the burning of the incense, and the resting of the showbread (corresponding to the senses of sight, smell, and taste). Only the blood of the inner sin-offerings is sprinkled on the golden altar.

 

            In the Holy of Holies, as was already noted, the essence of man's activity is listening, and the vessels located there are not vessels of service. Thus, the High Priest enters the Holy of Holies on Yom Kippur to burn incense and sprinkle the blood of the bullock and the goat to achieve atonement for all of Israel.

 

            This account reflects human activity - that which falls upon man to do and that which happens in the course of advancing deeper into the Mishkan with respect to his actions. In contrast, if we consider the structure of the Mishkan, its vessels, and the materials of which it is made, we observe the following two points:

 

1) Entry into the structure, room after room, creates fear and distance and a sense of respect for the entry itself. The mishna in Keilim 1:6 and on, which describes the ten levels of sanctity, describes a process, in which the deeper one enters, entry becomes more and more restricted, with regards to those who may enter and their required sanctity and purity:

 

·         On the Temple Mount, entry is barred to a zav, a zava, a menstruant woman, and a woman following childbirth.

 

·         In the chel, entry is barred to gentiles and those who came into contact with a corpse.

 

·         In the women's courtyard, entry is barred to those who immersed from their impurity, but have not yet brought their atoning sacrifices.

 

·         In the priestly courtyard, entry is barred to Israelites, except for when their presence is necessary so that they may lay their hands on the head of a sacrifice or to slaughter or wave an offering.

 

·         Between the Ulam and the altar, entry is barred to priests who have physical blemishes or are not properly groomed.

 

·         In the Holy, entry is barred to priests who haven't properly sanctified their hands and feet.

 

·         In the Holy of Holies, entry is only permitted to the High Priest on Yom Kippur while performing the service.

 

The deeper one enters into the Mishkan, more and more people are barred entry (gentiles past the chel, Israelites past the Israelite courtyard, priests past the Holy); in addition, impurity bars entry (zav, zava, menstruant, and a woman after childbirth from the Temple Mount, a person who came into contact with a corpse from the chel, a person who immersed, but is still waiting for nightfall from the women's courtyard).

 

Even the priests themselves can only enter in accordance with their sanctity. Priests with physical blemishes or who are not groomed are barred entry past the altar; those who have not sanctified their hands and feet may not enter the Heikhal.

 

From here we see that the sanctity of the place creates barriers and distinctions between different people and even among the priests themselves in accordance with their sanctity. This situation demands caution, fear, purity, sanctity, and proper preparations the deeper one enters into the Mishkan.

 

2) On the other hand, with respect to the structure and the vessels, in a certain sense the deeper one enters, the Shekhina's presence is expressed in an increasingly physical way.  The further one enters, the more the keruvim are found - both embroidered on the parokhet and in the Holy of Holies. The keruvim themselves are made of pure gold, and their appearance becomes more and more physical (also in comparison to the vessels in the Heikhal – the candlestick, the table and the golden altar) until they become actual images that express the presence of the Shekhina.

 

            In this sense, it is precisely the sanctity expressed in the Mishkan and in the Mikdash that has a real hold on the material world and is not separate from it. It is precisely the material and physical world that gives expression to the presence of the Shekhina, and the physical reality gives expression and contains within it the spiritual reality.

 

            In this context, let us mention Midrash Tehilim 68, which states: "From where did Sinai come? R. Yose said: It was detached from Mount Moriya like challa from dough from the place where the patriarch Yitzchak was bound." Since Mount Sinai is like challa separated from dough, the sanctity of the event that took place there did not leave an impression in the material world. Mount Moriya is the dough itself - in other words, the revelation of the Divine in the material world.

 

This midrash sharpens a point by way of contrasting parallelism between Mount Sinai and Mount Moriya, and it touches upon the issue of the sanctity of place. We wish to argue that in a certain sense, the supreme Divine revelation takes place precisely in the material world, and so too in the structure of the Mishkan and afterwards in the Mikdash.

 

The more we advance into the structure, the materials are more precious; we move from the brass in the courtyard, by way of the silver sockets in the Mishkan, to the gold of the inner vessels.

 

The beauty and the grandeur increase the deeper one enters, alluding to the Divine presence. Thus, paradoxically, it is precisely the grandest and most material vessels that allow for the revelation of the presence of the Shekhina.

 

Thus, from man's perspective, the most materialistic activity takes place outside, and the deeper one enters, the more the experience is spiritual and delicate. On the other hand, with respect to the structure of the Mishkan and its vessels, the deeper one enters, God's presence is expressed in a more open and physical way.[21]

 

(Translated by David Strauss)

 

, full_html