God who gave a perfect Torah to his children; The Lord who brings to light all hidden things; Will explain to us the words of wisdom inscribed In the Torah portion That They Take For Me An Offering.

AND THE LORD SPOKE UNTO MOSES. When Moses went up to the top of the mountain¹ God spoke to him regarding the tabernacle. God told Moses that Israel should construct a sanctuary dedicated to God the revered. The Lord would dwell in this tabernacle and speak therein with Moses. Moses would no longer come up on the mountain.²

footnotes: ¹ See Ex. 24:18. ² To communicate with God.

[THAT THEY TAKE FOR ME.] The words ve-yikchu li (that they take for Me)³ is similar to the form surah elai⁴ (turn in to me) (Jud. 4:18). Surah elai means turn from your place and come to me.⁵ Ve-yikchu li has a similar connotation. It means let him⁶ take from what he owns and give it to me.⁷ is short for: that they take from what they own and give to me. The same is true of Fetch me (kechi li), I pray thee, a little water (I Kings 17:10).⁸

footnotes: ³ Literally, that they take to me. Hence I.E.’s comment. ⁴ Literally, turn to me. ⁵ Turn to me is short for turn from your place and come to me. ⁶ The Biblical phrase is in the plural. However, I.E.’s paraphrase is in the singular. ⁷ In other words, that they take for me ⁸ According to I.E. its meaning is: take, I pray thee, some of your water and give it to me (Weiser).

AND THIS IS THE OFFERING. Rabbi Saadiah Gaon says that we do not find silver mentioned in connection with the tabernacle except for the silver of those who were counted.⁹ This being the case, how could Scripture state that the silver was an offering?¹⁰ The Gaon answers that other silver was donated for use in the construction of a silver table,¹¹ since it is highly unlikely that there was no table for preparing things,¹² for cutting, for washing, or for the trumpets and basins.¹³ However, I believe that there is no need for the Gaon’s interpretation. Scripture did not bother to exclude one of the sixteen materials,¹⁴ as fifteen were donated.¹⁵ It is the same with These are the sons of Jacob, that were born to him in Paddanaram (Gen. 35:26).¹⁶ However, Benjamin was born in the land of Canaan. He was not born elsewhere.¹⁷ Furthermore, Scripture states, Thy fathers went down into Egypt with threescore and ten persons (Deut. 10:22). However, the sons of Joseph did not go down to Egypt, for they were born in Egypt.¹⁸ Scripture begins with a precious gift, namely, gold. It concludes with a precious gift, onyx stones, and stones to be set,¹⁹ which only the princes possessed. However, this was not the case with gold, as most of the people had gold. Now, no iron was used in the construction of the tabernacle.²⁰ Scripture tells us regarding the first temple, and there was neither hammer nor axe nor any tool of iron heard in the house, while it was in building (I Kings 6:7).²¹

footnotes: ⁹ Every Israelite, from the age of 20 and up was obligated to give half a shekel of silver when counted. See Ex. 30:11-14. This was used for sockets, hooks, overlays, and bands for the top of the posts. See Ex. 38:25-28. ¹⁰ In view of the fact that the silver used in the tabernacle was not donated but was collected from people who were obligated to give it. ¹¹ In addition to the silver collected for sockets, hooks, overlays, and bands for the top of the posts, silver was donated for use in the construction of a table. ¹² Such as the incense or the wicks for the menorah and the like. Scripture nowhere mentions this table. Hence the Gaon’s comment. ¹³ That is, upon which to place the trumpets and basins. ¹⁴ Scripture enumerates 16 materials donated to the tabernacle (verses 3-7). However, only 15 were donated. One material (silver) was collected. ¹⁵ In other words, it is the style of Scripture to speak of the majority. ¹⁶ The list of Jacob’s sons, which precedes this verse, includes Benjamin. See Gen. 35:24. ¹⁷ That is, Padan-aram. Benjamin is included among those born in Padan-aram because Scripture speaks of the majority of Jacob’s sons. See I.E. on Gen. 35:26. ¹⁸ Thus fewer than 70 souls went down to Egypt. However, here too Scripture speaks of the majority. See I.E. on Gen. 46:23. ¹⁹ Verse 7. ²⁰ It is not mentioned among any of the donated metals. We may thus infer that it was not used in constructing the tabernacle. ²¹ The same applies to the tabernacle.

AND BLUE. Yefet²² says that tekhelet (blue) is a blacklike color. Black is the final²³. Hence the word tekhelet. color, as all colors turn black,²⁴ and no human hands can change black.²⁵ However, we will rely on the sages of the Talmud who said that tekhelet is green wool.²⁶ 4b.

footnotes: ²² A Karaite scholar. ²³ Hebrew, takhlit ²⁴ All colors eventually turn black. ²⁵ Black dyes do not turn into any other color. ²⁶ Wool dyed green. See Yebamot

AND PURPLE. Argaman (purple) is a red-like color. It is referred to as argevan in the Book of Chronicles (II Chron. 2:6) and as arju’an in Arabic. This color is only found in wool or silk.²⁷ refers to silk or wool dyed red.

footnotes: ²⁷ Thus argaman

AND SCARLET. However, Scripture elsewhere reads, sheni ha-tola’at²⁸ (and scarlet). (and the scarlet) (Lev. 14:6). We find the same with mi-tzur ha-challamish (out of the rock of flint) (Deut. 8:15) and chelmish tzur (out of the flinty rock) (Deut. 32:13). Saadiah Gaon rendered tola’at shani as krimez (red).²⁹ is Arabic for deep red. The English word crimson is derived from it. Although tola’at shani is also red, it is not the same color that argaman is.³⁰ Many people identify tola’at shani with silk³¹ because of the word tola’at.³²

footnotes: ²⁸ Our verse reads, ve-tola’at shani ²⁹ Or kermez. Kermez ³⁰ Hence Scripture lists them separately. ³¹ Which is produced by a worm. ³² Which means a worm.

AND FINE LINEN. Shesh refers to linen, which is a type of flax that is found only in Egypt. It comes only in white and is not dyed. We thus read, Of fine linen (shesh) and richly woven work³³. If not a scribal error, then I.E. quoted from memory and erred.from Egypt (Ezek. 27:7).³⁴ comes from Egypt. The Gaon translated shesh as osher in Arabic. This material is in existence until this very day.

footnotes: ³³ Ezekiel reads, with richly woven work ³⁴ We thus see that shesh

AND GOATS’ HAIR. Izzim is to be rendered as goats’ hair.³⁵ literally means goats. Hence I.E.’s comment.

footnotes: ³⁵ Izzim

AND RAMS’ SKINS. Skins from large rams. Such skins are prepared in the land of Al Gudmas³⁶ and are referred to as gudmasi.

footnotes: ³⁶ Located in Libya (Weiser).

AND SEALSKINS. Techashim (seals) refers to a type of animal that was known then,³⁷ as it is written, va-ena’alekh tachash (and shod thee with sealskin) (Ezek. 27:7). It is thus clear that it was already known.³⁸ was known in Ezekiel’s days; otherwise Ezekiel would not have referred to it. I.E. takes issue with the Rabbinic interpretation that the tachash existed only during the time that the tabernacle was constructed. If this was the case, why would Ezekiel refer to it? See Talmud Sabbath 28a. Also see Rashi.

footnotes: ³⁷ In Biblical times. However, we can no longer identify it. ³⁸ That is, the identity of the tachash

AND ACACIA-WOOD. Some of our ancient sages said³⁹ 1:9 and Bereshit Rabba 94:4. Also see Rashi. that the patriarch Jacob planted acacia trees in Egypt, and Israel, upon the command of Moses, brought them out. And every man, with whom was found⁴⁰ acacia-wood…brought it (Ex. 35:24) is proof of this.⁴¹ They possessed acacia as they possessed the blue and the purple.⁴² However, one wonders, why does Scripture say, with whom was found, which means it was used for personal needs.⁴³ is, whoever brought out wood for the purpose of erecting the tabernacle. However, if this was its meaning, then Scripture should have read, whoever brought out (acacia wood) (Krinsky). Hence we must interpret with whom was found according to its plain meaning, i.e., whoever happened to have had acacia wood for his personal needs. Now, if we so interpret it,⁴⁴ as meaning that the acacia wood was used by each individual who brought it out of Egypt for that person’s own use. then we must ask, why did the Israelites take acacia wood out of Egypt? What need did they have for acacia wood?⁴⁵ Furthermore, it is clear that the Egyptians thought that the Israelites were going to offer sacrifices and then return to Egypt. That is why the Egyptians lent the Israelites [gold and silver jewels plus raiment].⁴⁶ How could the Israelites take out many boards, each one of which was ten cubits?⁴⁷ The boards were also accompanied by bars.⁴⁸ In Egypt they passed by the seat of the king. What was their answer to those who asked them why they were carrying acacia wood when they were going on a three-day journey to offer sacrifices? Now we do not know whether our ancestors had a tradition that the Israelites took the acacia wood out of Egypt. If they did, then we will accept their tradition. However, if their statement is based on reasoning, then we must seek another explanation. We suggest that there was a forest of acacia trees next to Mount Sinai. When Israel came to Sinai, Moses told them that they would be spending a long time there. I have already explained⁴⁹ that there was no cloud over them at this time.⁵⁰ Each one of them then made a booth. The princes made court-like structures, each one in accordance with his status. They cut the entire forest down, for they were a large nation. They made booths.⁵¹ Moses did not speak to them regarding the tabernacle until after the Day of Atonement.⁵² This is the meaning of with whom was found (Ex. 35:24).⁵³

footnotes: ³⁹ See Tanchuma ⁴⁰ See note 43. ⁴¹ That Israel had acacia wood in their possession. They could have had this wood in their possession only if they had brought it out of Egypt. ⁴² Which they also brought out of Egypt. See verse 4. ⁴³ According to the rabbis the meaning of with whom was found ⁴⁴ If we interpret the verse with whom was found ⁴⁵ I.E. assumes that the Israelites had no need for acacia wood. This being the case, why did the Israelites take it out of Egypt with them? ⁴⁶ Ex. 12:35. ⁴⁷ The point is that the boards would show that the Israelites had no intention of returning to Egypt. ⁴⁸ This intensifies the problem. How could they take out boards and bars from Egypt? ⁴⁹ See I.E. on Ex. 15:22. ⁵⁰ To shelter them from the elements. ⁵¹ Out of the acacia wood. ⁵² After which he spoke to Israel regarding the construction of the tabernacle. ⁵³ The meaning of which is: with whom was found for his personal needs, the reference being to the wood which they had cut in order to construct their booths.

OIL FOR THE LIGHT. Oil needed for the light in accordance with the requirements of the law.⁵⁴ (Ex. 27:20) (Filwarg). The wise men of this generation say that ve-liktoret ha-sammim (and for the sweet incense)⁵⁵) of the perfumes (ha-sammim). has to be inverted in order to be understood.⁵⁶) of the perfumes” (ha-sammim) makes no sense. Its meaning is, and the perfumes for the incense.⁵⁷ should be interpreted as if written ve-sammim li-ketoret. Now if this is the case, then why didn’t Scripture say, for the anointing oil spices (ve-le-shemen ha-mishchah besamim)?⁵⁸ (spices for the anointing oil.) The point is that since ve-liktoret ha-sammim (and for the sweat incense) is out of order, why isn’t the preceding phrase also out of order? Furthermore, Scripture reads, and the spice, and the oil, for the light (ve’et ha-shamen le-ma’or), and for the anointing oil, and for the sweet incense (ve-liktoret hasammim)⁵⁹ (Ex. 35:28).⁶⁰ I believe that the word spices (besamim)⁶¹. takes in the spices needed for anointing oil and the spices that were mixed with the incense perfumes.⁶² (spices for the anointing oil and spices for the incense of sweet incense). This is also the true tradition.⁶³ 6a.

footnotes: ⁵⁴ In other words, pure olive oil beaten for the light ⁵⁵ Literally, and for the incense (li-ketoret ⁵⁶ For the phrase “and for the incense (li-ketoret ⁵⁷ In other words, ve-liktoret ha-sammim ⁵⁸ Rather than besamim le-shemen ha-mishchah ⁵⁹ Literally, and for the incense of the perfume. ⁶⁰ Here too oil for the light is in order, and incense of the perfume is not. ⁶¹ In the phrase spices for the anointing oil ⁶² In other words, our text is to be understood as if written: be-sammim le-shemen ha-mishchah u-ve-sammim li-ketoret ha-sammim ⁶³ Received by the sages of the Talmud. According to the rabbis the sweet incense contained spices. See Keritot

ONYX STONES. This includes all the stones of the ephod and the one of the breastplate.⁶⁴

footnotes: ⁶⁴ The ephod had two onyx stones (Ex. 28:9) and the breastplate one (Ex. 28:20).

TO BE SET. I will explain later the meaning of me-lu’im (to be set).⁶⁵, one of them to the effect that the stones covered the front of the choshen.

footnotes: ⁶⁵ He never did in his long commentary. However, in his comments on our verse in his short commentary, I.E. quotes three interpretations of the term melu’im

AND LET THEM MAKE ME A SANCTUARY. The tabemacle is called a mikdash (a sanctuary)⁶⁶ because it is the tabernacle⁶⁷ of God the holy.⁶⁸. However, he later refers to the structure as a mishkan. Hence I.E.’s comment.

footnotes: ⁶⁶ In our verse. ⁶⁷ Or dwelling place. ⁶⁸ Scripture tells Moses to construct a mikdash

I SHOW THEE. You will see it with your eye. Unlike the visions of Ezekiel,⁶⁹ which were in prophetic dreams. Scripture adds the emphatic heh and reads ha-mishkan (the tabernacle) after it mentions the term sanctuary.⁷⁰ (the tabernacle) refers to the above-noted sanctuary. I.E.’s point is that Scripture does not command the making of a mishkan. It commands the making of a mikdash. Hence I.E. explains why the term ha-mishkan is used.

footnotes: ⁶⁹ See Ezek. 1:37; 1:40-47. ⁷⁰ The term ha-mishkan

[EVEN SO SHALL YE MAKE IT.] A vav is placed in front of the word ken (even so) in the phrase ve-khen ta’asu⁷¹ thus refers only to the pattern of all the furniture (mentioned right above), but does not refer to the pattern of the tabernacle, since the term ‘making’ was already stated with reference to it, namely, and let them make me a sanctuary” (Chavel). (even so shall ye make it)⁷². Our verse adds an extra vav. The vav indicates that the verse is connected to what comes before. regarding the vessels, for Scripture earlier states, ve-asu li mikdash (And let them make Me a sanctuary) (v. 8).⁷³ is, and you should similarly make the vessels (Weiser). See Rashi and Nahmanides, who offer different interpretations.

footnotes: ⁷¹ Literally, and so shall ye make. “The expression and so shall ye make it ⁷² The context requires “so shall ye do,” that is, ken ta’asu ⁷³ In other words, the meaning of ve-khen ta’asu

AND THEY SHALL MAKE. Scripture begins by saying, And they shall make an ark because it had at first said, And let them make Me a sanctuary (v. 8).⁷⁴ for the ark as it did for the sanctuary. It does so because it is the first vessel to be named. With regard to the making of the other articles of furniture, Scripture states, And thou shalt make (see Ex. 25:23,31; Ex. 26:1,31; Ex. 27:1,9. Hence I.E.’s comment. See Shemot Rabbah 33:3.

footnotes: ⁷⁴ Literally, And they shall make Me a sanctuary. In other words, Scripture employs the same term ve-asu

[TWO CUBITS AND A HALF SHALL BE THE LENGTH THEREOF, AND A CUBIT AND A HALF THE BREADTH THEREOF, AND A CUBIT AND A HALF THE HEIGHT THEREOF.] We do not know if these measurements refer to the outside or to the inside of the ark. Now if the reference is to the outside of the ark,⁷⁵ then the width of the two sides of the ark,⁷⁶ each of which was covered by gold on the inside and the outside, added up to half a cubit,⁷⁷ making the size of the tablets a cubit in width and a cubit in length.⁷⁸ Now if we say that the height of the ark⁷⁹ as referring to the ark plus its legs. Indeed, this is the way I.E. interprets this clause in chapter 9 of his Yesod Morah. See note 80. was also half a cubit thick, then each tablet was extremely heavy.⁸⁰ Perhaps⁸¹ where I.E. says that we do not know the height of the tablets or of the ark. He argues that the height for the ark given in our Torah portion does not relate only to the ark but to the ark plus the legs which he assumes the ark had. I.E. argues thus because he believed that it would be impossible for Moses to hold in his hands tablets of stones which measured a cubed cubit. God gave strength to the hands of Moses, which were “heavy”⁸² to begin with, so that he was able to bring down a tablet of stone in one hand.⁸³ Now Scripture states, tables that were written on both their sides (Ex. 32:15).⁸⁴ Perhaps it was so,⁸⁵ for a tablet is a cube having six sides.⁸⁶ We similarly find it written⁸⁷ that there were three arks.⁸⁸ 72b. “Bezalel made three arks, two of gold, and one of wood…He placed the ark of wood inside the ark of gold, and the ark of gold inside the ark of wood. He covered its upper rim with gold. It was consequently overlaid within and without with gold.” Its weight raises questions.⁸⁹ Furthermore, the width of the ark cover⁹⁰ was a handbreadth⁹¹ 5a. This too would add to the ark’s weight. Additionally, we read in Scripture that the gold which was donated⁹². came to less than one thousand and four hundred parts of the gold which king David left.⁹³ [David] have prepared for the house of the Lord a hundred thousand talents of gold. I.E. questions whether Moses had enough gold available to construct two arks of gold of the size described in our chapter. Observe, the cherubim were made of olive wood.⁹⁴ The incense altar was also not completely made of gold.⁹⁵ If we look at it logically, then it appears that the ark was covered with gold for appearance sake⁹⁶ and that very little gold actually went into the covering.⁹⁷ Were not the boards, the bars, the table, and the incense altar all covered with gold? Nothing except for the menorah was made entirely of gold. Now once they made an ark out of gold, what need was there for wood?⁹⁸ The fact that Solomon covered the porch and the house with gold demonstrates how the covering was actually done.⁹⁹

footnotes: ⁷⁵ Both the length and width. ⁷⁶ That is, the two sides making up the width of the ark and the two sides making up the length of the ark. ⁷⁷ In other words, the half a cubit spoken of in our verse refers to the combined width of any two facing sides of the ark. ⁷⁸ If the combined width of any two facing sides of the ark came to half a cubit, then the inside of the ark measured one cubit in width and two in length. Each one of the two tablets which filled the inside of the ark was thus a cubit long and a cubit wide. ⁷⁹ That is, that the combined thickness of the top cover and the bottom of the ark was also a half cubit. I.E. comments thus, for it is possible to interpret and a cubit and a half shall be its height ⁸⁰ A stone measuring a cubed cubit is very heavy. ⁸¹ I.E. uses the term “perhaps” because it is possible that the tablets were not a cubed cubit. See chapter 9 of the Yesod Morah ⁸² Tired. See Ex. 17:12 and I.E.’s comment on it. ⁸³ That is, in each one of his hands. ⁸⁴ I.E. now states his true position, that is, that the tablets were very thin. See note 81. ⁸⁵ It is possible that the tablets were engraved on only two sides. ⁸⁶ Hence Scripture points out that the Decalogue was written on only two of its sides. ⁸⁷ In the Talmud. ⁸⁸ Yoma ⁸⁹ According to the Bible the ark was carried by four men. I.E. questions the ability of four men to carry a piece of furniture constructed of three arks, two of which were made of solid gold. ⁹⁰ That is, the ark’s covering. ⁹¹ According to Rabbinic opinion. See Sukkah ⁹² By the Israelites for the construction of the tabernacle. See Ex. 38:24: All the gold that was used for the work in all the work of the sanctuary, even the gold of the offering, was twenty and nine talents, and seven hundred and thirty shekels ⁹³ For Solomon to use in constructing the temple. See I Chron. 22:14: Now, behold…I ⁹⁴ The reference is to the cherubim made by Solomon. See I Kings 6:23-28. The point is that Solomon had much more gold available than Moses did. Nevertheless, he made the cherubim out of olive wood overlaid with gold. ⁹⁵ It was made of wood overlaid with gold. See Ex. 30:1-5. Hence it is possible that the ark was also constructed in this fashion. ⁹⁶ So that it would look as if it was completely made of gold. ⁹⁷ Hence the ark was not overly heavy. It should be noted that with the tablets inside, it still was of considerable weight. ⁹⁸ The wooden ark. ⁹⁹ So Filwarg. The point is, Solomon could not have thickly covered the walls of the temple with a thick layer of gold. He must have covered it with a very thin layer. We thus see that when one covers wood with gold, one does so very lightly.

A CROWN OF GOLD. The word zer (crown) comes from the same root as the word zareta (you crowned) in, You crowned my going about and my lying down (Ps. 139:3).¹⁰⁰

footnotes: ¹⁰⁰ Translated according to I.E. See I.E. on Ps. 139:3.

THE FOUR FEET THEREOF. I searched all of Scripture and did not find the word pa’am (foot) used in the sense of corner.¹⁰¹ (feet thereof) zivyateh (its corners). So do Rashi and many others. Hence I.E.’s comment. It is always employed in the sense of a foot. We thus read: Even the feet of the poor, and the steps (pa’ame) of the needy (Is. 26:6); And shall make His footsteps (pe’amav) a way (Ps. 85:14); How beautiful are thy steps (fe’amayikh) (Cant. 7:2). There are many other instances. I was therefore forced to explain that the ark had feet,¹⁰² is, its feet. for it would be disrespectful for the ark to sit on the ground.¹⁰³ Furthermore, what reason is there for Scripture to place a connective vav before the word u-shete (and two) when dealing with the two rings of gold (v. 12)? If the reference was to the rings already mentioned,¹⁰⁴ then Scripture should have read, shete taba’ot (two rings), as that is the proper syntax if the Torah wants to indicate that it is dealing with the four gold rings previously noted.¹⁰⁵ (pa’amotov); and two rings (u-shete ta’abotav) shall be on one side of it, and two rings on the other side of it. I.E. argues that and two rings shall be on one side of it, and two rings on the other side of it does not refer to the four rings mentioned in the first part of the clause. If it did, our verse would read: And thou shalt cast four rings of gold for it, and put them in the four feet thereof (pa’amotav): two rings shall be on one side of it, and two rings on the other side of it. There were thus eight rings on the ark. See Nahmonides who quotes I.E.’s interpretation and strongly disagreees with him. One of the wise men of our generation understood this.¹⁰⁶ He says that the staves were placed in the ark in the rings that were on its feet. He further says that they would remove the staves from the lower rings and place them in the upper rings when it was necessary to carry the ark. It is similarly written, and shall set the staves thereof (Num. 4:6).¹⁰⁷ indicates that the staves were moved from time to time; i.e., they were placed in the top rings when the ark was about to be carried and were removed from the top rings and placed on the lower rings when the ark rested. However, I believe that the staves were never removed once they were placed in the upper rings, for Scripture states, they shall not be taken from it (v. 15). As to And shall set the staves thereof (Num. 4:6), it means that the priests shall place the staves upon the shoulders of the Kohathites.¹⁰⁸ When the ark was placed in the Holy of Holies¹⁰⁹. it was necessary to place it near the wall¹¹⁰ so that the cherubim¹¹¹ would cover the ark and its staves.¹¹² The end of each one of the staves therefore¹¹³ extended.¹¹⁴ This is what Scripture refers to when it states, And the staves were so long (I Kings 8:8).¹¹⁵ The four lower rings¹¹⁶ thus¹¹⁷ served, as is the case with chests,¹¹⁸ for beauty and elegance.¹¹⁹

footnotes: ¹⁰¹ Onkelos renders, pa’amotav ¹⁰² For the meaning of pa’amotav ¹⁰³ Hence it rested on feet. ¹⁰⁴ In the first half of the verse. ¹⁰⁵ Verse 12 reads: And thou shalt cast four rings of gold for it, and put them in the four feet thereof ¹⁰⁶ That the second part of verse 12 does not elaborate upon the first part. ¹⁰⁷ According to this scholar, and shall set the staves thereof ¹⁰⁸ Not that the staves were at times placed in the upper rings and at other times in the lower rings. See note 105. ¹⁰⁹ Hebrew, devir ¹¹⁰ Right against the western wall of the sanctuary built by King Solomon (Meijler). ¹¹¹ That is, the wings of the cherubim. ¹¹² See I Kings 8:7. ¹¹³ Since the ark was right against the wall, the staves which normally protruded at that end were pushed out toward the opposite end. ¹¹⁴ Eastward from the ark. Nevertheless, they were not removed from the ark even though they no longer served any purpose. ¹¹⁵ That is, once the ark was placed against the wall, the staves extended for a greater distance than they had before (Meijler). I.E. comments on the staves in Solomon’s temple to show that the staves were never removed from the ark. ¹¹⁶ Which were placed on the feet of the chest. ¹¹⁷ I.E. explained earlier that once the staves were put in the upper rings, they were not removed from them. Hence he now explains that the lower rings only had an ornamental purpose. ¹¹⁸ Expensive chests have ornaments on them. ¹¹⁹ They did not serve as holders for the staves. They served as ornaments.

IN THE RINGS OF THE ARK. In the rings that are on the sides of the ark.¹²⁰ is short for: in the rings that are on the sides of the ark.

footnotes: ¹²⁰ See verse 13. In other words, in the rings of the ark

AND THOU SHALT PUT. The tablets and the testimony¹²¹. are one and the same.¹²² They were, as it were, a marriage contract.¹²³ They were the tablets of testimony.¹²⁴ And he took and put the testimony into the ark (Ex. 40:20) is perfect proof of this.¹²⁵ Furthermore, Moses did not write the scroll of the Torah.¹²⁶ The scroll of the Torah was placed by the priests next to the outer side of the ark of the covenant.¹²⁷ It is additionally written, There was nothing in the ark save the two tables of stone (I Kings 8:9). There is a difference of opinion concerning this.¹²⁸ 14b. Also see Rashi on Deut. 31:26. One may raise the following question. Scripture reports that God told Moses (v. 16), And thou shalt put into the ark the tables¹²⁹ in place of tablets. I.E. is paraphrasing. which I shall give thee. The Torah then tells us, And He gave unto Moses, when He had made an end of speaking with him…the two tables of the testimony (Ex. 31:18). Now Moses broke these tablets. Moses thus did not fulfill the command of God.¹³⁰ It is possible to give the following answer. Perhaps this is the reason why our sages said that the broken tablets were placed in the ark.¹³¹ 14b. Scripture¹³² does not contradict their words, for both the first and the second tablets were tablets of the covenant.¹³³ It is also possible to answer that Scripture (v. 16) speaks only about the second tablets. The statement which I shall give thee does not contradict this.¹³⁴, this appears to apply only to the first set of tablets. For Scripture also says concerning the second tablets, And the Lord gave them unto me (Deut. 10:4). Furthermore, note that we do not find that God told Moses that he should make an ark and place the first set of tablets there. For God knew that Moses would break them.¹³⁵ It was only concerning the tablets that Moses hewed¹³⁶ that God said, and make thee an ark of wood (Deut. 10:1). Now our sages said that and make thee an ark of wood does not refer to the ark made by Bezalel.¹³⁷ 8:3; Shekalim 6:5. Also see Rashi on Deut. 10:1. The rabbis took literally and make thee an ark of wood. That is, the ark was to be made only from wood. Hence it could not refer to the ark made by Bezalel, which was overlaid with gold. Bezalel’s ark is the ark dealt with in our chapter. This is correct. However, if we follow the plain meaning of the text, then it does not appear to me to be far-fetched to interpret the text¹³⁸ as referring to the ark which Bezalel constructed. Scripture similarly reads, And they shall make an ark of acacia-wood (v. 10).¹³⁹ There is no reason to ask, where were these tablets placed before the tabernacle was constructed?¹⁴⁰ For there is no need to mention this.¹⁴¹ What forced me to offer this explanation¹⁴² was the fact that Moses says, and [I] put the tables in the ark which I had made (Deut. 10:5). Now if we assume that Moses relates the account as it happened,¹⁴³ even though we do not know the reason why he should mention this,¹⁴⁴ what shall we do with what follows, namely, as the Lord commanded me (Deut. 10:5).¹⁴⁵ This is proof that Scripture speaks of the tablets which Moses placed in the ark of the covenant.¹⁴⁶ [Moses tells us that] these tablets are there¹⁴⁷ until this very day (Ibid.).¹⁴⁸ This is the meaning of and there they are unto this very day (I Kings 8:8).¹⁴⁹ This¹⁵⁰ [I] put the tables in the ark which I had made (Deut. 10:5). is also a sign and a witness that there was no Torah scroll in the ark, for Moses first put the tablets in the ark.¹⁵¹ He then placed the ark cover with the cherubim over the ark. Now God’s glory dwelled upon the cherubim. Scripture explicitly reads, Thou art enthroned upon the cherubim (Ps. 80:2). This being the case, how could Moses place a Torah scroll inside the ark in the fortieth year without first removing the ark cover with the cherubim from on top of the ark?¹⁵² There is no need for all of this.¹⁵³

footnotes: ¹²¹ Hebrew, edut ¹²² I.E. comments thus because some identify the testimony with the Torah. See Rashi, “The Testimony refers to the Torah, which is a testimony between Me and you that I have commanded you the commandments that are written in it.” ¹²³ A marriage contract serves as a testimony that a marriage took place. ¹²⁴ That is why Scripture refers to the tablets as tablets of the covenant. See Deut. 9:9-11. It does so because the tablets recall God’s covenant with Israel. A marriage contract similarly recalls the covenant of marriage. ¹²⁵ For it was the tablets that were placed in the ark. ¹²⁶ That is, Moses had not yet written the book of the Torah. He wrote it shortly before his death. Hence the term testimony cannot refer to the Torah. ¹²⁷ See Deut. 31:26. ¹²⁸ The tablets placed in the ark. Some rabbis believe that only the second pair of tablets was placed in the ark. Others believe that the first pair of tablets, which Moses broke, was also placed in the ark. See Baba Batra ¹²⁹ Verse 16 has testimony ¹³⁰ The question arises: How could Moses, the servant of God, disobey His command? ¹³¹ See Baba Batra ¹³² Verse 16 seems to speak of only one set of tablets. ¹³³ Thus verse 16 also refers to the first tablets. ¹³⁴ For prima facie ¹³⁵ Hence God, who is omniscient, could not have been speaking of the first tablets in verse 16. ¹³⁶ That is, the second tablets. ¹³⁷ See Jerusalem Talmud Sotah ¹³⁸ Deut. 10:1. ¹³⁹ We thus see that Bezalel’s ark is also referred to as a wooden ark. ¹⁴⁰ If the ark spoken of in our chapter is identified with the wooden ark spoken of in Deut. 10:1. ¹⁴¹ This information has no consequence. There is no reason for Scripture to explain where the tablets were kept until the tabernacle and its furniture were constructed. We can assume that the tablets were placed in a proper container in a suitable place. ¹⁴² That the ark spoken of in Deut 10:1 is to be identified with the ark made by Bezalel. ¹⁴³ That is, that we interpret Deut. 10:1,5 as meaning that Moses himself made an ark for the tablets and that this ark is not the one that Bezalel made (Krinsky). ¹⁴⁴ That Moses made a wooden ark to temporarily store the tablets. ¹⁴⁵ The only ark which we find God commanding Moses to make was the ark Bezalel made. Hence the reference must be to Bezalel’s ark. ¹⁴⁶ That is, that Scripture speaks of the ark of the covenant made by Bezalel. See note 112. ¹⁴⁷ In the ark. ¹⁴⁸ That is, they were permanently placed in the ark. The reference can only be to the ark made by Bezalel. ¹⁴⁹ That the tablets are in the very first ark in which Moses placed them. ¹⁵⁰ And ¹⁵¹ Deut. 10:5. ¹⁵² I.E. assumed that once the ark was closed, Moses would not open it because God’s glory was upon it. ¹⁵³ If we reject the opinion that a Torah was in the ark.

AND THOU SHALT MAKE AN ARK-COVER. The word kapporet means a cover. Yefet says that the word le-khapper (to make atonement) in to make atonement for him (Lev. 1:4) is similar. Its meaning is similar to whose sin is covered¹⁵⁴ means to cover, i.e., to cover someone’s sins. (Ps. 32:1).¹⁵⁵ However, I believe that the word le-khapper (to make atonement for him) (Lev. 1:4) is similar in meaning to the form kofer (ransom). Now this is clearly stated,¹⁵⁶ in le-khapper alav (to make atonement for him) is similar to kofer (ransom). for Scripture states, then shall they give every man a ransom (kofer) for his soul unto the Lord (Ex. 30:12). Scripture then goes on to say, le-khapper al nafshotekhem¹⁵⁷ is similar to le-khapper al nafshotekhem because both speak of people. (to make atonement for your souls) (Ex. 30:15).¹⁵⁸ Scripture does not mention the thickness of the ark cover.¹⁵⁹

footnotes: ¹⁵⁴ In other words, le-khapper ¹⁵⁵ Translated literally. ¹⁵⁶ That le-khapper ¹⁵⁷ Le-khapper alav ¹⁵⁸ According to I.E. this should be rendered, to offer a ransom for your souls. ¹⁵⁹ See I.E.’s comment on verse 10 and the notes thereto.

AND THOU SHALT MAKE TWO CHERUBIM. Our sages said that the cherubim looked like two youths. They said that the kaf in keruvim is a preposition and the word keruvim (cherubim) means the same as the Aramaic word ke-ravia (like youths).¹⁶⁰ 55b; Hagigah 13b. See I.E. on Gen. 3:22 and the notes thereto. Now if they had a tradition that the cherubim were youth-like images, then what they said was true. They interpreted the word in a manner that would recall the tradition.¹⁶¹ does not really mean like youths. However, the sages interpreted the word that way in order to recall their tradition. They did the same with the word chanukkah.¹⁶² is made up of the words chanu kaf heh [they rested on the 25th (of Kislev)]. This is obviously not the real meaning of the word chanukkah. The rabbis interpreted it that way so that people do not forget that Chanukkah falls on the 25th of Kislev. The kaf in the word keruv (cherub) is a root letter,¹⁶³ as the word hakeruvim (the cherubim) in And the cherubim shall (v. 20) proves.¹⁶⁴ of keruvim was a preposition then Scripture would not read ha-keruvim, for the definite article is not prefixed to a preposition. The heh of ha-keruvim indicates the definite article. It is not an interrogative heh¹⁶⁵ is, the cherubim. like the heh in ha-kemakkat (or is he slain) in Or is he slain according to the slaughter of them that were slain by Him (Is. 27:7).¹⁶⁶ before a prepositional kaf. Thus if the heh of ha-keruvim was an interrogative heh, there would be no proof that the kaf of keruvim is a root letter. Now when I searched for the meaning of the word keruvim (cherubim) I found that it refers to various forms. Compare, Thou wast the far-covering cherub (keruv) (Ezek. 28:14).¹⁶⁷ Ezekiel said that each one of the beasts which he beheld¹⁶⁸ had four faces (Ezek. 1:6). One of these faces was the face of an ox (Ezek. 1:10). However, elsewhere he describes this very creature as having the face of a cherub in place of the face of an ox (Ezek. 10:14). Its meaning¹⁶⁹ is that the creature had the image that Ezekiel had mentioned earlier.¹⁷⁰ (Ezek. 10:14), Ezekiel means it had the already mentioned image, namely, the image mentioned in Ezek. 1:6; i.e., it had the face of an ox. We thus see that the term cherub refers to an image. At the end Ezekiel says, This is the living creature that I saw under the God of Israel by the river Chebar; and I knew that they were cherubim (Ezek. 10:20). Ezekiel thus called the four creatures cherubim. The kaf in the word keruvim thus is a root letter.

footnotes: ¹⁶⁰ Sukkah ¹⁶¹ The point is that the word keruvim ¹⁶² The rabbis said that the word chanukkah ¹⁶³ Not a preposition meaning like. ¹⁶⁴ If the kaf ¹⁶⁵ The meaning of ha-keruvim ¹⁶⁶ I.E. comments thus because it is possible to place an interrogative heh ¹⁶⁷ That is, a bird with large wings. We thus see that a cherub can refer to a bird-like image. ¹⁶⁸ When he saw the vision of the chariot. ¹⁶⁹ The meaning of Ezek. 10:14. ¹⁷⁰ The face of an ox. In other words, By the face of the cherub

OF BEATEN WORK. Mikshah (of beaten work) means equal. The word mikshah (the same size) in And instead of hair trimmed to the same size (ma’aseh mikshah) baldness¹⁷¹ (Is. 3:24)is similar. Ma’aseh (trimmed)¹⁷² has the same meaning as asah (trimmed) in nor trimmed his beard (II Sam. 19:25).¹⁷³ usually means work of. Hence I.E.’s comment. Its meaning¹⁷⁴ (of beaten work shalt thou make them). is that each cherub was equally distant from the edge of the ark cover.

footnotes: ¹⁷¹ Translated according to I.E. ¹⁷² In Is. 3:24. ¹⁷³ The word ma’aseh ¹⁷⁴ The meaning of mikshah ta’aseh otam

CHERUB. Observe! The cherubs were positioned¹⁷⁵ on the long side of the ark.¹⁷⁶ The staves were therefore placed to the width of the ark.¹⁷⁷ (I Kings 8:8). This could only have happened if the staves were placed along the width of the ark. For the long side of the ark was placed in a north-south direction in the sanctuary (so that both cherubim would face the Holy of Holies) while the curtain that separated the temple proper from the sanctuary was on the eastern wall of the sanctuary (Meijler). There is someone who disagrees and says that side refers only to the long side.¹⁷⁸ He offers proof from and for the second side of the tabernacle (Ex. 26:20).¹⁷⁹ However, and five bars for the boards of the side of the tabernacle (Ex. 26:27), which is right next to the verse that he quotes, destroys his proof.¹⁸⁰ The cherubim which were upon the two edges of the ark were made out of the ark cover itself

footnotes: ¹⁷⁵ In their face-to-face position. ¹⁷⁶ Scripture tells us that the cherubim were placed at the two ends of the ark cover. According to I.E. the term end implies the long end (Meijler). ¹⁷⁷ The Book of Kings tells us, And the staves were so long that the ends of the staves were seen from the holy place, even before the Sanctuary ¹⁷⁸ Scripture tells us that the staves were on the side of the ark (v. 12). Hence according to this scholar the staves, contra I.E., could not have been placed along the width of the ark. ¹⁷⁹ The verse speaks of the length of the tabernacle. ¹⁸⁰ For this verse speaks of the width of the tabernacle.

AND THE CHERUBIM SHALL. Yefet says that the meaning of toward the ark-cover shall the faces of the cherubim be means that the cherubim shall face the center of the ark cover. However, I believe that the faces of the cherubim did not stand erect,¹⁸¹ implies that the cherubim directly faced each other. but rather inclined a bit towards the ark cover.¹⁸² does not mean that the cherubim shall face straight down to the ark cover as Yefet says. It means that the faces of the cherubim shall incline toward the ark cover.

footnotes: ¹⁸¹ Prima facie, With their faces one to another ¹⁸² In other words, toward the ark-cover shall the faces of the cherubim be

AND IN THE ARK. This is in keeping with Hebrew syntax.¹⁸³ Moses had already put the testimonies into the ark.¹⁸⁴ He was told: afterwards¹⁸⁵ place the ark cover [over the ark].¹⁸⁶

footnotes: ¹⁸³ To list first what comes last, for the tablets were placed in the ark before the cover was put on it. However, our verse tells of the latter before it tells of the former. ¹⁸⁴ Before he put the ark cover over the ark. ¹⁸⁵ After you place the testimonies in the ark. ¹⁸⁶ In other words, our verse is to be understood as follows: And thou shalt put the ark cover over the ark; but before this, in the ark thou shalt put the testimonies which I shall give you.

AND THERE I WILL MEET WITH THEE. I do not understand in what way this verse contradicts And the Lord called unto Moses, and spoke unto him out of the tent of meeting, saying (Lev. 1:1).¹⁸⁷ (Ex. 25:22). However, another verse reads, and spoke unto him out of the tent of meeting, (that is, the tabernacle outside of the curtain) saying (Lev. 1:1). We thus find two verses contradicting each other. A third verse comes and reconciles them; viz*., And when Moses went into the tent of meeting…then he heard the Voice speaking unto him from above the ark-cover* (Num. 7:29). Moses entered the tabernacle and when he came to the entrance a Voice descended from heaven toward (the place) between the cherubim, and from thence it went forth and was heard by Moses in the tent of meeting.” For the phrase tent of meeting takes in the tabernacle and everything in it.¹⁸⁸ There is no need for a clarifying¹⁸⁹ verse.¹⁹⁰

footnotes: ¹⁸⁷ According to Rashi our verse contradicts Lev. 1:1. See Rashi on verse 22: “[Scripture states] And I will speak with thee from above the ark-cover ¹⁸⁸ Hence it also refers to the Holy of Holies where the ark was. ¹⁸⁹ Or reconciling. ¹⁹⁰ See note 184.

[OF ALL THINGS WHICH I WILL GIVE THEE IN COMMANDMENT UNTO THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL.] The word et¹⁹¹ has no translatable meaning. It serves to connect a verb with the direct object. In this case, it connects ve-dibbarti (and I will speak) with what follows et. in and (ve-et) of all things which I will give thee in commandment has a vav placed before it¹⁹² before the word et. We might also note that Rashi’s Torah scrolls also read ve-et. Rashi considered this vav superfluous. for the following reason.¹⁹³ our verse reads: and I will speak with thee from above the ark-cover, from between the two cherubim which are upon the ark of the testimony, of all things which I will give thee in commandment unto the children of Israel. With the vav, our verse reads: and I will speak with thee from above the ark-cover, from between the two cherubim which are upon the ark of testimony, and of all things which I will give thee in commandment unto the children of Israel. Hence I.E.’s comment. The word ve-dibbarti (and I will speak) is to be read as if written twice.¹⁹⁴ Our verse is to be read as if written: and I will speak with thee from above the ark cover, from between the two cherubim. Scripture does not mention what will be spoken.¹⁹⁵ did not have a vav before it. In the latter case, part 2 of the verse would go on to explain what God spoke to Moses about. Its meaning is, I will speak with you in order to inform you of My secret and to answer your questions.¹⁹⁶ And I will speak to you of all the things which I will give thee in commandment unto the children of Israel.¹⁹⁷. We have reason to ask, why did God mention the ark first¹⁹⁸ when Scripture reads, the pattern of the tabernacle, and the pattern of all the furniture thereof (v. 9).¹⁹⁹ The answer is that it is linguistic style to explain the last item with which one has closed.²⁰⁰ Compare, And I gave unto Isaac Jacob and Esau; and I gave unto Esau mount Seir (Josh. 24:4).²⁰¹ God therefore began with an explanation of the tabernacle’s furniture.²⁰² God started with the most important piece of furniture²⁰³ and then went on to the explain the table and the menorah. After this, God said, Moreover thou shalt make the tabernacle (Ex. 26:1). Now when Moses gathered the congregation he spoke to them about the tabernacle and the tent first.²⁰⁴ Then he told them about the ark. There was no need for anyone to teach Moses.²⁰⁵ There is reason to wonder why God didn’t mention the altar of incense.²⁰⁶ The answer by way of parable is:²⁰⁷ (v. 8). Hence it had to be suitably furnished. God’s glory did not depart [from the tabernacle].²⁰⁸ The ark was therefore in the form of a throne.²⁰⁹ Observe, a menorah and a prepared table [were placed in the sanctuary].²¹⁰ God did not mention the altar of incense until He first mentioned the altar of the burnt offering, because God wanted to issue the command, You shall offer no…burnt-offering, nor meal-offering; and ye shall pour no drink-offering thereon (Ex. 30:9).²¹¹ Moses mentioned the incense altar to the children of Israel following the menorah.²¹² The incense altar was similarly constructed after the menorah.²¹³

footnotes: ¹⁹¹ The word et ¹⁹² Our versions of the Torah do not have a vav ¹⁹³ Without the vav ¹⁹⁴ I.E.’s point is that our verse is to be read as follows: and I will speak with thee from above the ark-cover, from between the two cherubim which are upon the ark of testimony, and I will further speak to you of all things which I will give thee in commandment unto the children of Israel. ¹⁹⁵ In other words, part 2 of the verse does not tell us what part 1 of the verse refers to. This would not be the case if the word et ¹⁹⁶ In other words, part 1 deals with a private dialogue between God and Moses. ¹⁹⁷ In other words, part 1 deals with a private dialogue between God and Moses. Part 2 deals with the commandment which Moses was to transmit to Israel. Hence the connective vav ¹⁹⁸ That is, why is the ark the first sacred item which Moses was commanded to make? ¹⁹⁹ The tabernacle is mentioned first. Thus God should have told Moses to first construct a tabernacle and then to make the furniture which was to be placed therein. ²⁰⁰ A sentence. ²⁰¹ Scripture mentions Jacob before Esau. We would thus expect for Scripture to deal with Jacob before Esau. However, it goes on to deal with Esau. We thus see that Scripture elaborates first on what it dealt with last. ²⁰² Because that is what is mentioned last in verse 9. ²⁰³ The ark. ²⁰⁴ See Ex. 35:1; 11. ²⁰⁵ As to how to construct the tabernacle. Krinsky claims that the reference is to the Midrash, which says that Bezalel took issue with Moses over what order to follow in constructing the tabernacle. ²⁰⁶ In our Torah portion. It is mentioned in Ex. 35:15. However, it should also have been mentioned here along with the other furniture that was placed inside the tabernacle. ²⁰⁷ I.E.’s point is that the tabernacle may be compared to a king’s palace. Indeed, Scripture states that the tabernacle served as a dwelling place for God, let them make Me a sanctuary, that I may dwell among them ²⁰⁸ In other words, the tabernacle served, as it were, as God’s dwelling place. ²⁰⁹ For God, who dwelt there. ²¹⁰ They served to furnish God’s house. A table and a lamp were the typical furnishings of a house. See II Kings 4:10, “Let us make…a little chamber on the roof; and let us set…there…a table…and a candlestick.”. ²¹¹ He couldn’t issue this command without first dealing with burnt offerings, meal offerings, or drink offerings. These offerings were brought to the altar which stood in the courtyard of the tabernacle. Hence Scripture delayed the command to make an incense altar. ²¹² When he relayed God’s command to Israel regarding the construction of the tabernacle. For the incense altar was stationed in the same section of the tabernacle as the menorah, namely, in the Holy of Holies. See Ex. 35:15. ²¹³ See Ex. 37:25.

AND THOU SHALT MAKE. There is no doubt that the dimensions mentioned in our verse refer to the thickness of the table²¹⁴ plus the height of its legs.²¹⁵

footnotes: ²¹⁴ That is, the table top. ²¹⁵ The cubit and a half given as the height of the table included the legs as well as the table itself.

AND THOU SHALT MAKE. The border was on top²¹⁶ as is the case with tables.

footnotes: ²¹⁶ On the table top.

AND THOU SHALT MAKE A GOLDEN CROWN. Scripture now explains that the crown which was mentioned earlier should be around the borders.

AND THOU SHALT MAKE…FOUR RINGS…AND PUT THE RINGS IN THE FOUR CORNERS. East, west, north, and south.²¹⁷

footnotes: ²¹⁷ That is, on the east, west, north, and south corners of the table.

CLOSE BY THE BORDER. Scripture mentions the place where the rings were to be placed.

THAT THE TABLE MAY BE BORNE WITH THEM. Venissa (may be borne) is a nifal. Ve-nissa is similar to ve-nikkah (be quit) in then shall he that smote him be quit (Ex. 21:19). For nissa²¹⁸. and nikkah²¹⁹. have a dagesh in them to make up for the dropped first root letter.²²⁰ in nissa and nikkah are nuns of the nifal conjugation.

footnotes: ²¹⁸ The root of which is nun, sin, alef ²¹⁹ The root of which is nun, kof, heh ²²⁰ For the nuns

AND THOU SHALT MAKE. What the rabbis said is known.²²¹ 97a) said that “ke’arotav (its dishes) are the molds; kapotav (its pans) are dishes (of frankincense); kesotav (its jars) the props; menakki’otav (its bowls) the rods; asher yussakh ba-hen (wherewith to pour) wherewith the bread was covered.” Also see Rashi. Contra to what Krinsky, Meijler, and others write, it appears that I.E. does not accept the Rabbinic interpretation. In fact, in the short commentary he renders kesotav as cups (kosot).

footnotes: ²²¹ The rabbis (Menachot

[WHEREWITH TO POUR OUT.] The phrase wherewith to pour out refers to the jars thereof (kesotav).²²² are jars used in pouring. It does not relate to and the bowls thereof, which immediately precedes it.²²³ The following is similar: Moses and Aaron among His priests, And Samuel among them (Ps. 99:6). Scripture then goes on to say, He spoke unto them in the pillar of cloud (Ps. 99:7). The latter refers to Moses and Aaron, not to Samuel.²²⁴ The fact that Scripture says with regard to the making of the vessels, the jars thereof (ha-kesot) wherewith to pour out (Ex. 37:16) proves that wherewith to pour out²²⁵ refers to the jars thereof. So does and the jars (kesot) wherewith to pour out (Num. 4:7). The word nasakh (pour) has many meanings. We thus read, They shall not pour out wine-offerings (nesekh) to the Lord (Hos. 9:4);²²⁶) to the Lord. I.E. either paraphrased or quoted from memory and erred. The image perchance, which the craftsman hath melted (nasakh) (Is. 40:19); and Truly it is I that have established (nasakhti) My king (Ps. 2:6).²²⁷ (pour out) in our verse. Yussakh is the pu’al form of nasakh. It is noteworthy that none of the meanings that I.E. quotes for this word fit in with the Rabbinic interpretation of yussakh. As it will be recalled, the rabbis interpreted yussakh to mean was covered. See note 221. Rabbi Nathan,²²⁸. the author of the Arukh,²²⁹ says that kesavot (jars) are rods,²³⁰ (jars) were “semitubular-shaped rods placed three in a row upon each of the twelve loaves of showbread, so as to separate one from the other and allow air to pass through them to save them from becoming moldy” (Cohen). as that is how they are referred to in Arabic.²³¹.” However, the one who told this to him did not know the Arabic language and spoke it laughably. Rods in Arabic are referred to as katzab, which is spelled with a tzadi and a bet.²³², the singular of kesavot, is spelled kof, sin, vav, heh. There is an error²³³ (error). Filwarg would like to emend to shinu (a difference). However, he has no manuscript evidence to back up his emendation. S.Y. Rapaport does not believe that I.E. would have uttered such a word. In keeping with his theory that the long commentary was composed by students of I.E. from notes taken at their master’s lectures, he claims that the students misunderstood what I.E. said (See Toledot Rabbenu Natan, S.Y. Rapaport, p. 30). Unlike Filwarg and Rapaport, Nahmanides had no doubts that I.E. uttered these words. He comments, “Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra wrote: ‘There is an error in Chronicles…’ The error, however, is in Rabbi Abraham’s words (not in the Book of Chronicles)” (Chavel translation). Nahmanides goes on to say that I Chron 28:17 does not speak only of the utensils made for the table but also of other utensils made for the altar. It should be noted that I.E. goes on to reconcile I Chron. 28:17 and our verse. However, Nahmanides did not accept his interpretation. in the Book of Chronicles.²³⁴ Chronicles mentions basins in place of dishes, bowls in place of pans. It mentions jars as Scripture does here. In place of the bowls it mentions forks.²³⁵ They were all made of gold for use at the table. It is possible that David commanded that other utensils be placed upon the tables which Solomon would make.²³⁶ However, the table placed in the tabernacle differed.²³⁷

footnotes: ²²² According to I.E., kesavot ²²³ For they were not used for pouring. ²²⁴ For God did not speak to Samuel in the pillar of cloud. We thus see that a clause does not always refer to what immediately precedes it. ²²⁵ In our verse. ²²⁶ The Hebrew text literally reads: They shall not pour out wine (yayyin ²²⁷ I.E. comments thus because of the word yussakh ²²⁸ Rabbi Ben Yehiel of Rome (c. 1035-1106). This comment is not found in our editions of the Arukh ²²⁹ A dictionary of the Talmud and Midrashim. ²³⁰ See Rashi. According to Rashi the kesavot ²³¹ Similarly Rashi: “In the Arabic language anything hollow is called kaso ²³² Whereas kasvah ²³³ Many commentaries were bothered by the use of the term shibbush ²³⁴ The list of utensils made for the table as recorded in I Chron. 28:17 does not match the list in our verse. ²³⁵ I Chron. 28:17 reads, “And the fleshhooks (forks), and the basins, and the jars of pure gold and…the golden bowls.” ²³⁶ The Book of Chronicles tells us that Solomon made 10 tables (II Chron. 4:8). I.E. suggests that these tables had different utensils than the table made by Moses. ²³⁷ It had different utensils. It is also possible that I.E. was of the opinion that the construction of the table placed in the tabernacle differed from the ones made by Solomon. Hence, its utensils differed.

AND THOU SHALT SET UP UPON THE TABLE SHOWBREAD. According to the plain meaning of the text, the bread was called showbread²³⁸. because of the explanation which follows it.²³⁹ (lekhem ha-panim) before Me alway. According to I.E. this indicates that lekhem ha-panim means bread that is placed before [God]. In other words, according to I.E., the word panim is similar to the word li-fene. That which the sages said is also true,²⁴⁰ (literally, bread of faces) because it was baked in a mold with the two sides open. Hence the bread was said to have two faces or surfaces directed to the two sides of the sanctuary (Cohen). See Menachot 94b and Soncino’s notes there. Also see Rashi on verses 29 and 30. as the ka’arot (dishes) were molds.²⁴¹ 94a and Rashi on verse 29.

footnotes: ²³⁸ Lekhem ha-panim ²³⁹ Scripture goes on to say that the showbread ²⁴⁰ According to the sages the bread was called lekhem ha-panim ²⁴¹ In which the showbread was made. See note 195. Also see Menachot

AND THOU SHALT MAKE A CANDLESTICK. I have seen copies of Scripture which the wise men of Tiberias have examined. Behold, I found the word te’aseh (be made) spelled with a yod.²⁴² Fifteen of their wise men²⁴³). The Ben Asher and Ben Naphtali families were active there. In fact, Maimonides recommended the Torah Scroll written by Aaron ben Asher in 930 C.E. as a model for all Torah scrolls. swore that they checked every word, vowel, full and deficient spelling, three times. I did not find this to be the case with the books of Scripture in Spain, France, and on the other side of the sea.²⁴⁴ Our sages said that the additional yod in te’aseh alludes to the ten²⁴⁵ is numerically equivalent to 10. candlesticks which Solomon would make. Let me generalize. If there is a yod in te’aseh, then te’aseh is irregular.²⁴⁶ is normally spelled without a yod. The Midrash tells us that the menorah made itself.²⁴⁷ 8; Be-halotekha 3. Also see Rashi. The meaning of this midrash is that all who saw the menorah marveled and asked, “How could a human being make it?”²⁴⁸ Look! Scripture states, and he²⁴⁹ made candlesticks²⁵⁰ and so he made the candlestick (Num. 8:4).²⁵¹ Behold, Scripture writes, On a griddle it shall be made (te’aseh) with oil;²⁵² does not imply made by itself. No one can interpret Lev. 6:14 as meaning that the meal offering made itself. when it is soaked, thou shalt bring it in (Lev. 6:14). Observe, the word miksheh (of beaten work) here has the same meaning as the word miksheh which is written in connection with the cherubim.²⁵³

footnotes: ²⁴² In the Tiberian copies of the Torah. It is also so spelled in our versions. ²⁴³ Tiberian scholars. The scholars of Tiberias were known for their work in preserving the text of Scripture (massorah ²⁴⁴ England (Weiser). ²⁴⁵ Yod ²⁴⁶ For the word te’aseh ²⁴⁷ Tanchuma, Shemini ²⁴⁸ In other words, people said that a work of art like the menorah had to be a supernatural creation. ²⁴⁹ Bezalel. ²⁵⁰ The reference is probably to Ex. 37:17. However, there the reading is: And he made the candlestick. Either I.E. misquoted from memory or we have a scribal error. ²⁵¹ We thus see that the menorah was made by Moses. ²⁵² We thus see that te’aseh ²⁵³ See I.E. on verse 18.

EVEN ITS BASE AND ITS SHAFT. This is the body of the menorah.

AND THERE SHALL BE SIX BRANCHES. Kanim (branches)²⁵⁴ refers to a round, long, and hollow object.²⁵⁵

footnotes: ²⁵⁴ Literally, reeds. Hence I.E.’s comments. ²⁵⁵ That is, a tube.

THREE CUPS. The Gaon says that meshukkadim (almond blossoms) means in the shape of almonds. However, the word meshukkadim really is related to the word li-shekod (attached)²⁵⁶ in Attached daily at my gates (Prov. 8:34).²⁵⁷

footnotes: ²⁵⁶ Cohen. The three cups were attached to each other. ²⁵⁷ Translated according to I.E.

PURE GOLD. Refined gold without any impurities.

AND SEE. The making of the menorah required wisdom. One had to have intellectual perception²⁵⁸. to know how to make all these utensils²⁵⁹ out of one talent of gold.

footnotes: ²⁵⁸ Hence the phrase And see ²⁵⁹ The menorah and its accoutrements.

[WHICH IS BEING SHOWN.] The word moreh (being shown)²⁶⁰ is a hofal. is irregular.²⁶¹ normally is, for nothing happens to the person to whom an object is shown. Hence Scripture should have read ro’eh ba-har, rather than morah ba-har. This is Krinsky’s interpretation. For another interpretation see Weiser. It is not employed in the same way that the word mushlakh (be thrown) (II Sam. 20:21) is,²⁶² (rosho) shall be thrown (mushlakh) to thee over the wall. In this verse mushlakh refers to the object being thrown, viz., his head. for the verb ra’ah (saw) does not come in the pa’ul.²⁶³ is the passive kal form. All kal transitive verbs come in the pa’ul, i.e., katav/katuv, akhal/akhul, shavar/shavur. However, ra’ah does not have a pa’ul form. Only the term nireh (seen)²⁶⁴ participle form. According to I.E. the word nireh does not imply that anything is happening to the object being seen, whereas the pa’ul form does. is employed.²⁶⁵ is not employed. This is so because one who sees is not acting on anything. He merely perceives an image. Those who are versed in the sciences will understand this.²⁶⁶ I wish to lay down a fundamental principle to you before I speak on the tabernacle, which also²⁶⁷ was made out of curtains [decorated] with cherubim.²⁶⁸

footnotes: ²⁶⁰ Moreh ²⁶¹ It is not employed in the way that a hofal ²⁶² II Sam. 20:21 reads, Behold, his head ²⁶³ The pa’ul ²⁶⁴ The nifal ²⁶⁵ However, the pa’ul ²⁶⁶ That the eye is merely a receptor. ²⁶⁷ In addition to the ark. ²⁶⁸ See Ex. 26:1. I.E.’s point is that the tabernacle, like the ark, was adorned with cherubim.

Abraham the author says: All that exists, exists in one of the following two ways. One, it exists as a body that has length, width, and depth. The aforementioned results in six sides. From the length of an object comes front and back, from its width right and left, and from its height²⁶⁹ up and down. There are also incorporeal beings, namely, God’s holy angels and man’s soul. These two types of beings²⁷⁰ were created by God alone. It is not in the power of any created being to create a corporeal being. It is certainly beyond the power of any being to create an incorporeal being, for incorporeal beings are more important than corporeal beings.²⁷¹ It is also beyond the power of any created being to totally annihilate another being ²⁷² There is something which comes very close to existence and is tied to existence but does not exist independently.²⁷³ This thing is called form.²⁷⁴, ed. by Dagobert D. Runes, Littlefield, Adams and Co., 1959). Form also comes in two ways. One type of form is permanent and does not pass away, namely, the form of the holy angels and the wisdom which is in the soul.²⁷⁵ Form is also found in corporeal elements. The heat of fire and the wetness of water are examples. The accidents²⁷⁶). are the second way in which form manifests itself. The accidents are not permanent. They come and go. They change. They turn and disappear. Man is able to produce accidents.²⁷⁷ It is impossible for the glorious God to have a permanent or unchanging²⁷⁸ image or picture because God created the essence of all things.²⁷⁹ Now, all forms are either permanent or accidents.²⁸⁰ Let me give you one example.²⁸¹ The moon is eclipsed²⁸² when the earth’s shadow enters between the moon and the sun at the head or tail of the dragon.²⁸³ I will give you another example.²⁸⁴ We know that the power of the soul is all over the body. However, there are places in the human body such as the eyes or the nose that are more sensitive than others because of the nerves that go out from the brain. The bones and liver are devoid of sensation. Now the heart is more receptive to the power of the soul than are all other organs of the body. Many organs therefore serve it. Similarly with the glorious God. We know that God’s glory fills the world. However, there are places where God’s power is more manifest than in other places. This is so for the following two reasons. Divine manifestation varies in accordance with the natural makeup of the recipient and in accordance with the upper power that is above the receiver.²⁸⁵. Therefore, the place of the holy temple [Mount Moriah] was chosen.²⁸⁶ If God will give you wisdom, then you will understand the secret of the ark, the ark covering, and the cherubim which spread their wings.²⁸⁷ You will also understand the secret of the objects which were placed outside of the curtain,²⁸⁸ namely, the menorah, the incense altar, and the table.²⁸⁹ You will also comprehend the secret of the objects placed outside of the opening of the tabernacle, namely, the altar of the burnt offering and its utensils and the basin and its base. These objects served to honor God. I gave you these hints because there are many people in our generations who think they are wise. Perhaps they will mock my words. He who knows the secret of his soul and the makeup of his body is able to understand the workings of the upper world. This is so because man is a microcosm. Man was the last thing created by God when he created the earth. Let this serve as a sign: He began with the largest²⁹⁰ and finished with the youngest²⁹¹ (Gen. 44:12).²⁹² Saadiah Gaon notes that there are eighteen objects in the tabernacle which serves as the intermediary world.²⁹³ The same number of objects is found in the upper word²⁹⁴ and also in the microcosm.²⁹⁵ Here is a general rule. Each cherub was made to receive power from above. It was also made so that the intelligent will learn.²⁹⁶ There is no need to go on.

footnotes: ²⁶⁹ Referred to earlier by I.E. ²⁷⁰ Corporeal and incorporeal beings. ²⁷¹ Hence if it is beyond the power of any created being to create a corporeal being, it is certainly beyond its power to create an incorporeal being. ²⁷² One can destroy a physical object but one cannot annihilate the matter out of which it is made. ²⁷³ According to medieval philosophy, ideas and concepts have a life of their own. Thus wet, hot, hard, soft exist as entities in themselves even though in the physical world they are never found isolated from some corporeal element. ²⁷⁴ “The intelligible structure, characters constituting a substance or species of substances, as distinguished from the matter in which these characters are embodied” (Dictionary of Philosophy ²⁷⁵ As noted above, medieval philosophy taught that ideas have a disembodied existence. ²⁷⁶ Accident “has no independent and self-sufficient existence, but exists only in another being, a substance or another accident. Accidents may change, disappear or be added, while substance remains the same” D. Runes, (Dictionary of Philosophy ²⁷⁷ To create and to do things which are “accidents.” For example, wood is a substance. Man cannot create wood. However, man can make a table. A table is an accident. The form of the wood is the wood’s essence, that is, the properties that make wood. ²⁷⁸ As those who believe in God’s corporeality conceive him. ²⁷⁹ It is thus illogical to assume that God has the form of any of his creatures (Weiser). ²⁸⁰ Hence God cannot have any form. ²⁸¹ By which we can understand the significance of the tabernacle. For other interpretations see Krinsky and Netter. ²⁸² The moon receives its light from the sun. However, there are places where it does not receive the sun’s light. There are similarly places on earth where God’s power is more manifest than in others. ²⁸³ The point at which the orbit of the sun and moon intersect (Meijler). ²⁸⁴ The role of the tabernacle. See note 281. ²⁸⁵ Some people and some places on earth are created in such a way that they are more open to God’s revelation than other people or places are. See I.E. on Gen. 28:16. This is also the opinion of Rabbi Judah ha-Levi. See Book II of the Kuzari ²⁸⁶ Because it is under God’s special presence and open to it. ²⁸⁷ The ark and the cherubim which were placed in the Holy of Holies represent God’s throne (Meijler). It is also possible that I.E. believed that the ark was constructed in such a way that it drew power from above and thus served to channel God’s word to Moses. See I.E. on Ex. 31:18. ²⁸⁸ In the tabernacle proper. ²⁸⁹ They served, as it were, as furniture in God’s house (Meijler). It is also possible that I.E. held that in some mystical way they provided the physical conditions which made divine manifestation possible. See end of I.E.’s comment. ²⁹⁰ The macrocosm. ²⁹¹ The microcosm. God first created the universe. He created man last of all. See I.E. on Gen. 1:26 and the notes thereto. ²⁹² Translated according to I.E. ²⁹³ The world of the spheres. This world mediates between man and the upper world. This is precisely what the tabernacle did. See I.E. on Ex. 3:15 and the notes thereto. ²⁹⁴ The world of the angels. See I.E. on Ex. 3:15 and the notes thereto. ²⁹⁵ In man. ²⁹⁶ Man can develop his soul and receive intellectual power from on high (Krinsky).