Relating the Mishkan's Structure to Its Vessels (III)
The Relationship Between the Structure of the Mishkan and the Vessels (III)
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE CURTAINS AND THE BOARDS
In our previous lectures, we discussed the relationship between the structure of the Mishkan and its vessels, and we discussed at length the difference between the command given to Moshe and that given by Betzalel. In this lecture, we will continue with this topic, and in particular we will deal with the relationship between the boards and the curtains and between the structure and the vessels.
Quite surprisingly, we learn from the account of Betzalel's fashioning of the Mishkan (Shemot 36) that the curtains of the Mishkan were prepared first, and only afterwards the boards. This is also true regarding the order in which Moshe set up the Mishkan:
And it came to pass in the first month in the second year, on the first day of the month, that the Mishkan was erected. And Moshe erected the Mishkan, and fastened its sockets, and set up its boards, and put in its bars, and reared up its pillars. And he spread the tent over the Mishkan, and put the covering of the tent above upon it; as the Lord commanded Moshe. (Shemot 40:17-19)
Most of the commentators understood the order of events as follows: The first thing that was set up was the inner curtain – the Mishkan; after that, the structure itself (the boards, the sockets, the bars and the pillars); and after that the upper coverings (the "tents" – the tent of goats' hair and on top of that, "the covering of the tent above upon it" – the covering of rams' skins dyed red and the covering of tachash skins[1]).
Why was the Mishkan built in this order?
Why was the Mishkan built in this order? Why was the inner curtain set up first, and then the boards, the pillars, the sockets and the bars, and finally the coverings of goats' hair, rams' skins dyed red and tachash skins? Surely engineering logic dictates that first the structure should be set in place – the sockets, the boards, the bars and the pillars – and only afterwards the various coverings – the inner curtain, on top of that the tent of goats' hair, and on top of that the rams' skins dyed red and the tachash skins! Why then was the order reversed?
There are two possible answers to this question:
1) First, the fact that the Mishkan was put up in a different manner teaches that it was not engineering logic that decided how the Mishkan was to be built, but rather spiritual meaning.
2) In addition, this order sharpens the essential difference between the Mishkan – the inner curtain – and the other curtains. The Mishkan is the innermost and most important curtain, whereas the other coverings serve as a tent and external cover for the inner curtain.
THE ORDER OF IMPORTANCE
In the framework of a discussion regarding the principle that "we ascend in sanctity," the gemara in Menachot says:
From where do we learn that we do not bring down [what is holy]? R. [Yehuda Ha-Nasi] said: From the verse that states: "And Moshe erected the Mishkan, and fastened its sockets, and set up its boards, and put in its bars, and reared up its pillars" (Shemot 40:18). (Menachot 99a)
Rashi writes (ad loc.):
First, "And Moshe erected the Mishkan," namely, the curtains. For he first spread out the curtains, and he did not take them down when he put up the pillars and the sockets, but rather he held the curtains up with his hand until he set up the entire Mishkan.
It follows from these words of the gemara that the curtains are holier than the structure itself. They therefore did not take them down, but rather left them hanging in the air.
The Ibn Ezra writes:
"And Moshe erected the Mishkan" – That is, the curtains, with wooden posts and cords, and afterwards he arranged the boards and placed the sockets and pillars.
So too the Seforno:
"And Moshe erected the Mishkan” – The ten curtains of artistic work which were called the Mishkan were set up before the boards were erected, and they were held up either by human hands or by way of a miracle, as the Sages, of blessed memory, said. They were made and brought to Moshe in this order, because those ten curtains were the essence of the building of the Mishkan, and the rest of what went into that building – namely, the sockets, and the boards, and the bars, and the pillars, and the tent – were to support the Mishkan and to cover it.
The Netziv in his commentary to the verse, "And he coupled the curtains" (Shemot 36:13), explains as follows:
Chazal read this verse precisely – that Betzalel himself coupled these curtains before the rest of the Mishkan was put up, and he stood the curtains on poles, or the like, so that they should stand for the time being in order to bring in the vessels, so that they should not stand in public view outside, as this does not accord with the dignity of the holy vessels. This was not the case with the covering of goats' hair, which he did not couple himself until Moshe did so.
According to Rashi, Ibn Ezra, and Seforno, we are dealing here with an interesting phenomenon. With respect to both the structure and the vessels, we begin with the most important element, and then move on to the other elements. Since the most important element in the structure is the Mishkan – i.e., the inner curtain – we start with it, and afterwards we set up the sockets, the boards, the bars and the pillars, and after that we turn to the other coverings, the tent of goats' hair, the rams' skins dyed red, and the tachash skins. The same is true about the vessels. The most important vessel is the ark, and with that we begin; we then continue with the other vessels from west to east, from the Holy of Holies through the Heikhal, the table, the candlestick and the incense altar, and finally to the courtyard, the burnt-offering altar, and the laver.
As we have seen, the question of which of the two should be given priority, the structure or the vessels, was the subject of a disagreement between Betzalel and Moshe (Berakhot 55a). The gist of Betzalel's argument was: "As a rule a man first builds a house and then brings vessels into it; but you say, Make me an ark and vessels and a Mishkan. Where shall I put the vessels that I am to make?" Based on this argument, the structure was put up before the vessels. Here too we can raise a question patterned after that of Betzalel: As a rule, man first puts up the boards and then spreads out a curtain over them; but you tell me first to make the inner curtain, and afterwards the structure, and in the end the other coverings, of goats' hair, of rams' skins dyed red, and tachash skins! What is the practical logic underlying this order?
The answer according to the Seforno is that the inner curtain is the most important element of the Mishkan, and therefore is given precedence, even though this will create a difficult practical problem in the construction stage. Whereas with respect to the vessels and structure, the position of Betzalel was adopted, and the walls were built first and only afterwards the vessels, with respect to the structure itself, the curtains were built before the walls, despite the practical problem that this entailed.
Based on this understanding, we can understand another point regarding the discussion conducted between Moshe and Betzalel about what to build first, the structure or the vessels. In light of the importance of the curtains, we can better understand Moshe's position that the vessels can be built first, and then at a later stage the entire structure, just as the inner curtain, the curtain of linen, and blue, and purple, and scarlet, is erected before all other parts of the structure.
It may be that the inner curtain is the first thing to be set up, because more than anything else it expresses the very resting of the Shekhina in the structure. This is in full accord with the splendor of the materials of which the curtains are made, as well as the golden clasps that connect them, which symbolize the sun and the connection to heaven.
THE POSITION OF THE NETZIV
The Netziv in Ha'amek She'ela disagrees with the commentators cited above, and cites as support the words of the Tosafot (Shabbat 28a, s.v. vayifrosh), who understand that the order of the events was different. According to his understanding, that which is stated at the beginning, "And Moshe erected the Mishkan" – is not a reference to the curtains, but to the structure (the sockets, the boards, the bars, and the pillars). After the structure was put up, the tent was spread over it, the reference being to two tents: the curtains of the Mishkan and the cover of goats' hair. He says as follows:
"And Moshe erected the Mishkan" – In Shabbat (28a), the gemara brings a proof that the linen curtains are called a "tent" from this verse (v. 19): "And he spread the tent over the Mishkan"… According to the plain sense of the text, this is clear from Scripture itself, as the Tosafot write there: "For the order of erection is that he first set the sockets, and then the boards, and after the boards, it is written: 'And he spread the tent.' Thus, it is evident that the reference is to the tent of twisted linen." What this means is that it is impossible to explain, "And Moshe erected the Mishkan" – that this refers to the curtains of linen, and afterwards, "And he fastened its sockets, and set up its boards," "And he spread the tent" – that this refers to the covering of goats' hair, for how could he have put up the linen curtains before the boards were set in their place.
Harchev Davar: Rashi there, s.v. mishkan karui mishkan, writes: "Like the ten curtains of twisted linen. And the Mishkan is called a tent, as it is written: 'And the Mishkan of the Tent of Meeting.'" This implies that he understands that the main proof is not from our verse, but rather from the verse, "And the Mishkan of the Tent of Meeting." Also the Tosafot (end of the aforementioned passage) conclude that perhaps the gemara is relying on that verse. And therefore they thought to explain, "And Moshe erected the Mishkan," as a reference to the linen curtains, before the boards. And in fact Rashi (Menachot 99a, s.v. va-yakam) explains that "And Moshe erected the Mishkan," refers to the linen curtains. And so too explains the Seforno… But it is very difficult to set up the boards under the curtains, and why should Moshe have done this? Rather, the truth is like the explanation of the Tosafot, and for this reason the gemara did not bring the earlier verses to teach that "curtains" are called "Mishkan." (Shemot 40:18)
The Netziv refers us here to his commentary to Shemot 36, where he adds another exegetical approach to the understanding of the disagreement between Betzalel and Moshe in his attempt to understand the relationship between the structure and the curtains:
According to the gemara's argument (Yoma 33a that that which is preparatory takes precedence - so too in the Mishkan, the vessels could not be used without the preparation of the walls of the Mishkan. It was not like in the Mikdash, about which R. Yehoshua said (Shevu'ot 16a): "I heard that sacrifices may be brought even when there is no
The Netziv argues that the vessels could not be used without the walls of the Mishkan, and in this respect, there is a difference between the Mishkan and the Mikdash. Regarding the Mikdash, the gemara states: "I heard that sacrifices may be brought even when there is no
It turns out, according to the Netziv, that there is another reason to build the Mishkan first and only afterwards the vessels – for if not, there would be no way to sanctify the place.
Let us summarize the various views regarding the order in which the Mishkan was erected:
1) According to several commentators, first the inner curtain was spread out, after that the structure was set up, and only after that were the other coverings spread out above. This order creates a practical problem – how did they set up the inner curtain before building the structure? – and several resolutions have been suggested.[2] This separation between the inner curtain and the other coverings, with the structure of the Mishkan between them, is not found in the other contexts in which the Mishkan is mentioned.
2) As opposed to these commentators, the Netziv explains on the basis of Tosafot that the word "Mishkan" refers not to the inner curtain, but to the structure as a whole. According to him, the structure was erected first, and afterwards all of the curtains and coverings.
This dispute may be seen as a variation of the basic disagreement between Moshe and Betzalel as to what was built first – the structure or the vessels. Here, the fundamental question is the internal relationship between the structure and the inner curtain.
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE STRUCTURE AND THE VESSELS IN THE HEIKHAL AND IN THE COURTYARD
In the chapter dealing with the erection of the Mishkan (Shemot 40), we find a significant difference between the Heikhal and the courtyard with respect to the relationship between the structure and the vessels:
And the Lord spoke to Moshe, saying, “On the first day of the first month shall you set up the Mishkan of the Ohel Mo'ed. And you shall put in it the ark of the Testimony, and hang the veil before the ark. And you shall bring in the table, and set in order the things that are to be set in order upon it; and you shall bring in the candlestick and light its lamps. And you shall set the altar of gold for incense before the
From these verses, it is evident that the erection of the Mishkan – that is, the structure – preceded the vessels, in accordance with the simple understanding of Betzalel in his discussion with Moshe in the gemara in Berakhot.
In the continuation, however, the Torah states with respect to the courtyard:
And you shall set the altar of the burnt offering before the door of the Mishkan of the Ohel Mo'ed. And you shall set the laver between the Ohel Mo'ed and the altar, and shall put water in it. And you shall set up the court round about, and hang up the screen at the court gate. (ibid. 6-8)
Surprisingly, the placement of the burnt-offering altar and the laver precedes the setting up of the courtyard. What is the significance of this difference?
The Netziv, consistent with his explanation of the relationship between the structure and the vessels, explains as follows:
Now regarding the vessels in the Heikhali, God put the walls before the vessels, which is not the case regarding the vessels in the courtyard. This is because with respect to the vessels in the Heikhal, it is the walls that sanctify them, and even the outer altar is sanctified by the door of the Ohel Mo'ed. For this reason, the walls came first. This is not like the Mikdash, regarding which we maintain that sacrifices may be brought even without the Mikdash (Zevachim 62a), for there it is because the place was already sanctified with the First Temple, which is not the case regarding the Mishkan. But the courtyard is not connected to the sanctity of the altar, and for this reason the altar was made first as it is more sanctified.
According to the Netziv, there is a fundamental distinction between the Heikhal and the courtyard with respect to the relationship between the structure and the vessels. In the Heikhal, it is the walls that sanctify the structure, and the structure must therefore come before the vessels. Regarding the courtyard, on the other hand, the sanctity of the altar does not stem from its standing within the walls of the courtyard, but from its standing near the door of the Ohel Mo'ed – that is, from its proximity to the structure itself. Similarly, the laver precedes the erection of the courtyard, as it plays a preparatory role with respect to the altar. Since the vessels are more sanctified than the walls, the placement of the vessels precedes the setting up of the courtyard; the walls play no role in the sanctification of the place.
The Netziv infers this principle from the account in Shemot 39 of how the Mishkan and its vessels were brought to Moshe. The Torah first mentions the structure and only afterwards the vessels that are brought into the structure:
And they brought the Mishkan to Moshe, the Ohel, and all its vessels, its clasps, its boards, its bars, and its pillars, and its sockets and the covering of rams' skins dyed red, and the covering of tachash skins, and the veil of the screen, and the Ark of the Testimony, and the showbread, the pure candlestick, with its lamps, the lamps to be set in order, and all its vessels, and the oil of light, and the golden altar, and the anointing oil, and the incense of spices, and the screen for the door of the Ohel. (Shemot 39:33-37)
When, however, we come to the courtyard, the vessels are mentioned before the structure:
The brass altar, and its grate of brass, its poles, and all its vessels, and its sockets, and the screen for the court gate, its cords, and its pegs, and all the vessels of the service of the Mishkan. (ibid. vv. 39-40)
Here too the Netziv comments:
"The brass altar" – The courtyard's vessels were brought before it walls, unlike the Mishkan. That is to say, Betzalel's thinking corresponded to that of God, for also in the order of the erection, the placement of the altar comes before the setting up of the curtains, unlike the Mishkan. (ibid. 39:39)
On the face of it, the order in which the structure of the Mishkan and its vessels were brought to Moshe was determined by Betzalel. The Netziv notes that in as much as Betzalel stood in "the shadow of God (be-tzel El), his thinking corresponded to the actual order according to which God commanded Moshe to erect the Mishkan.
This distinction lends support to the division of the structure of the Mishkan that distinguishes between the structure itself and the courtyard. It is most interesting that the location of the altar relates first and foremost to the structure of the Mishkan, "the door of the Ohel Mo'ed," and not to the expanse and walls of the courtyard.
Similarly, according to this understanding, further consideration must be given to the question of how the outer altar (the burnt-offering altar), the laver, and the expanse of the courtyard are sanctified.
An examination of the various references to the structure of the Mishkan and its vessels reveals two very interesting points:
1) The usual order is as follows: The structure of the Mishkan, the vessels from inside outwards, i.e., from west to east, from the ark, to the table, the candlestick, the incense altar, the burnt-offering altar, and the laver, and finally the courtyard. That is to say, the structure of the Mishkan precedes all the vessels, and the vessels – including the vessels found in the courtyard – come before the courtyard.
2) Usually, the location of the altar is not described in relation to the courtyard, but rather it is located at the door of the Mishkan of the Ohel Mo'ed. Similarly, the location of the laver is not given in relation to the courtyard, but rather it is described as standing between the Ohel Mo'ed and the altar. Afterwards, the Torah describes the courtyard as being set up round about.
Let us try to prove this assertion:
In Moshe's command to the people of
In the description of the making of the Mishkan (Shemot 36:8 and on), the order is: the curtains, the boards, the ark, the table, the candlestick, the incense altar, the burnt-offering altar, the laver, and the courtyard.
The Mishkan is brought to Moshe (Shemot 39:33 and on) in the following order: the tent, its vessels, the structure (the boards, the bars, the pillars and the sockets, the covering of rams' skins dyed red and the covering of tachash skins, the vessels, the ark, the table, the candlestick, the golden altar, the brass altar, the laver, and the hangings of the courtyard.
In God's command to Moshe regarding the erection of the Mishkan (Shemot 40:6 and on), the order is: the Mishkan, the ark, the table, the candlestick, the golden altar, the burnt-offering altar, the laver, and the courtyard, and so too in the erection itself (Shemot 40:18 and on).
Regarding the location of the altar and the laver we find as follows. In God's command to Moshe regarding the erection of the Mishkan, it says:
And you shall set the altar of the burnt offering before the door of the Mishkan of the Ohel Mo'ed. And you shall set the laver between the Ohel Mo'ed and the altar, and shall put water in it. And you shall set up the court round about, and hang up the screen at the court gate. (Shemot 40:6-8)
But in the account of the erection itself, the Torah says:
And he put the altar of burnt-offering by the door of the Mishkan of the Ohel Mo'ed, and offered upon it the burnt-offering and the meal-offering, as the Lord commanded Moshe. And he set the laver between the Ohel Mo'ed and the altar, and put water there, for washing… And he erected the court round about the Mishkan and the altar; and set up the screen of the court gate. So Moshe finished the work. (Shemot 40:29-33)
We see, then, that the altar is located in relation to the structure of the Mishkan in front of the door of the Mishkan, and that the laver is located between the Ohel Mo'ed and the altar.
The court is defined as built around the vessels:
· Nowhere does it say that just as the table, the candlestick, and the incense altar are put in the Ohel Mo'ed, so too the burnt-offering altar and the laver are put in the courtyard.
· The court surrounds the Mishkan and the altar, and thus it includes them in its confines.
What does this mean? In addition to what was proposed by the Netziv, it may be suggested that the Torah wishes to describe all of the vessels as a single entity, and they are therefore mentioned in a single continuum, and so the courtyard is mentioned only at the end.
In any event, it turns out that there is a difference between the structure of the Mishkani, which precedes the account of the vessels contained within it – the altar, the table, the candlestick and the incense altar – and the courtyard, whose erection is described after the account of the vessels contained within it – the burnt-offering altar and the laver. In parallel, the relationship between the structure and the vessels in the Heikhal is different from the relationship between the hangings of the courtyard and the vessels in it.
(Translated by David Strauss)
[1] There is a Tannaitic disagreement in the gemara (Shabbat 28a) between R. Yehuda and R. Nechemya regarding the upper covering – the rams' skins dyed red and the tachash skins – in terms of whether they constitute a single cover or two covers. This verse supports the view that they are a single cover.
[2] The Seforno suggests that the curtain was held up either by human hands or by way of a miracle.
, full_html
This website is constantly being improved. We would appreciate hearing from you. Questions and comments on the classes are welcome, as is help in tagging, categorizing, and creating brief summaries of the classes. Thank you for being part of the Torat Har Etzion community!