parshat vayakhel pekudei Answers

VaYakhel-Pekudei 5716

Alef.

When the Tora describes the quality of the artisans as possessing “wisdom” that HaShem has placed in their hearts and allows them to produce “acts of thoughtfulness”, 

שמות פרק לו

ב) ויקרא משה אל בצלאל ואל אהליאב ואל כל איש חכם לב אשר נתן יקוק חכמה בלבו כל אשר נשאו לבו לקרבה אל המלאכה לעשת אתה:

ח) ויעשו כל חכם לב בעשי המלאכה את המשכן עשר יריעת שש משזר ותכלת וארגמן ותולעת שני כרבים מעשה חשב עשה אתם:

lest one think that this refers exclusively to their artisanship and craftsmanship, R. Hirsch suggests that their thoughtfulness includes the ability to have spiritual Kavanot with which to invest the articles that they are fabricating. Since these articles are symbols of various spiritual ideas (see the Gilyanot for Teruma and Tetzave in which some of the approaches of the Abrabanel are discussed regarding these objects), symbols are only as meaningful as the intent with which they are invested. It would be pointless for onlookers to recognize symbolism when the fabricators were not thinking of similar themes during the process of manufacture. The analogy that R. Hirsch references is the creation of a Sefer Tora whereby the Kashrut of the Sefer is a function of the Kavana of the scribe, particularly when it comes to the Names of God. The Tora can be beautifully written, but if intent on the part of the scribe is lacking, let alone if it is a negative Kavana as in the case of a heretic, then the Sefer is devoid of holiness and cannot be used to fulfill any Mitzvot.

(R. Hirsch’s approach raises the question of the validity of the various interpretations of the Keilim of the Mishkan. If the manufacturers were thinking one particular thought, and it was not the same as some of the suggestions for the symbolic meanings of the Keilim, will they then be invalidated? A Sefer Tora would appear to have to adhere to a more objective standard, i.e., the overall belief system of the scribe as well as his understanding of the words that he is writing, particularly when it comes to the Names of God. But the Keilim of the Mishkan do not appear to readily reflect a similar standard. צריך עיון.) 

Beit.

1. The paradox is that if someone already possesses understanding/wisdom, then what does it mean when God “Gives” them wisdom/understanding?

The passage in Berachot 55a is readily understandable with respect to the fact that wisdom/understanding is not “all or nothing” but rather however much one knows, he can always know more; however much one can analyze, his analytic ability can be enhanced; even if a person has the potential for wisdom, that potential can be expanded and actualized. The more subtle meaning would imply להבדיל a la the oracle of Delphi that informed Socrates that he was the wisest of men, with the latter eventually coming to the realization that his superior wisdom manifested itself in his awareness of the limits of his wisdom (see Plato’s Apology), it is the truly wise who are the most open to learning new things because, on the one hand, they are well-aware of their limitations, and on the other, they are always curious to expand their knowledge and skill base.

2. It is possible that the earlier passage does not go into as much detail regarding the qualities with which God had Endowed these individuals as the later passage:

שמות פרק כח

(ג) ואתה תדבר אל כל חכמי לב אשר מלאתיו רוח חכמה ועשו את בגדי אהרן לקדשו לכהנו לי: 

שמות פרק לא

(ב) ראה קראתי בשם בצלאל בן אורי בן חור למטה יהודה:

(ג) ואמלא אתו רוח אלקים בחכמה ובתבונה ובדעת ובכל מלאכה:

ד) (לחשב מחשבת לעשות בזהב ובכסף ובנחשת:

(ה) ובחרשת אבן למלאת ובחרשת עץ לעשות בכל מלאכה:

(ו) ואני הנה נתתי אתו את אהליאב בן אחיסמך למטה דן ובלב כל חכם לב נתתי חכמה ועשו את כל אשר צויתך:

And even though it could be contended that the detail of what God Inspired within the individual applies exclusively to Betzalel as opposed to all those who assisted him, it could be equally contended that what applied to Betzalel applied to the others, at least to some degree.  

Gimel.

Based upon MaLBIM’s distinction between “הרגיש בלבו תשוקה” (one feels within his heart a yearning/longing) and “והרגיש שיוכל לקרב” (one feels that he has the ability to draw close/come forward), then “נשיאת הלב” corresponds to being drawn to the task, while “נדיבת הלב” parallels a sense of self-confidence that the individual is capable of carrying out the task. Only a combination of these two qualities would allow for someone to identify himself as a candidate for fabricating the elements of the Mishkan, particularly in light of MaLBIM’s comment that given the Jews’ activities in Egypt as manual labors involved in construction, they had no track record or experience with regard to working with wood, precious metals, dyes, fabrics or leather. However if there was interest, self-confidence and Divine Inspiration, it became possible for these inexperienced individuals to carry out their complex tasks.  

Daled.

1. Underlined words/phrases:

a. אוהל מועד שהוא של משה—a place was needed where all of the material contributed for the construction of the Mishkan could be securely stored. Prior to the construction of the Mishkan, when Moshe came down from Sinai with the second Tablets, a separate tent was set aside for his needs, and it was within this tent that the material was collected and stored. See Shemot 33:7.

   b. העם—the members of the Jewish people who were donating their possessions for the sake of the construction of the Tabernacle.

    c. בנדבתם—the donations were made willingly rather than under duress or as a result of an obligation.

d. האומנים בנאמנותם—the craftsmen, despite working with so much valuable material, were honest and did not enrich themselves from what they were working with.

    e. הנגיד עליהם—a reference to Moshe who rather than allowing the people to continue to contribute needlessly, announced when no more donations were needed.

2. Words and phrases that are underlined suggest sterling qualities among the Jewish people:

שמות פרק לה

(כא) ויבאו כל איש אשר נשאו לבו וכל אשר נדבה רוחו אתו הביאו את תרומת יקוק למלאכת אהל מועד ולכל עבדתו ולבגדי הקדש:

(כב) ויבאו האנשים על הנשים כל נדיב לב הביאו חח ונזם וטבעת וכומז כל כלי זהב וכל איש אשר הניף תנופת זהב ליקוק:..

(כה) וכל אשה חכמת לב בידיה טוו ויביאו מטוה את התכלת ואת הארגמן את תולעת השני ואת השש:

(כו) וכל הנשים אשר נשא לבן אתנה בחכמה טוו את העזים:...

(כט) כל איש ואשה אשר נדב לבם אתם להביא לכל המלאכה אשר צוה יקוק לעשות ביד משה הביאו בני ישראל נדבה ליקוק: פ 

שמות פרק לו

(א) ועשה בצלאל ואהליאב וכל איש חכם לב אשר נתן יקוק חכמה ותבונה בהמה לדעת לעשת את כל מלאכת עבדת הקדש לכל אשר צוה יקוק:

(ב) ויקרא משה אל בצלאל ואל אהליאב ואל כל איש חכם לב אשר נתן יקוק חכמה בלבו כל אשר נשאו לבו לקרבה אל המלאכה לעשת אתה:

(ג) ויקחו מלפני משה את כל התרומה אשר הביאו בני ישראל למלאכת עבדת הקדש לעשת אתה והם הביאו אליו עוד נדבה בבקר בבקר:…

(ח) ויעשו כל חכם לב בעשי המלאכה את המשכן עשר יריעת שש משזר ותכלת וארגמן ותולעת שני כרבים מעשה חשב עשה אתם:

In the Alon HaDeracha, Nechama places emphasis upon the repeated use of the verb “LeHavi”. It seems to me that if one does not know the intention behind the “bringing”, it is difficult to consider giving alone praiseworthy. While it is certainly more admirable to contribute than not to contribute, the intent behind the contribution is also of significance.