5783/2023

In the beginning of Parashat Vayakhel the Torah describes the

following scene. It’s the day after Yom Kippur (see Rashi), Moshe has come down from Har Sinai with the 2nd set of Luchot, the Chet Ha’Eigel drama is finally behind us, and we are now ready to return to building the Mishkan. However, for some reason when Moshe gathers the people, instead of jumping into the Mishkan’s details, he begins with the command not to violate Shabbat. Why was that necessary? After all, we’ve already learnt about Shabbat a few times in Sefer Shemot so why repeat it here?

When trying to understand why a mitzvah is repeated in the Torah the following two questions are worth considering. Firstly, are there any additional details that have not been mentioned before? Second, how might the context where the repetition takes place help us in understanding the topic at hand. In our case, the prohibition against doing Melacha on Shabbat is followed by a new detail. Unlike in previous Parshiot where the Torah presents the broad prohibition against doing melacha without specifying the details of such melachot, here the Torah does specify an act ”,א־ ְת ַב ֲערוּ ֵאשׁ ְבּכ ֹל מ ֹ ְשׁב ֹ ֵתי ֶכם ְבּיוֹם ַה ַשּׁ ָבּת” that is forbidden on shabbos “Don’t kindle a flame in all your dwellings on Shabbat”(Shemot 35, 3). Why, out of all the 39 melachot, does the Torah mention Havara explicitly and why is it mentioned specifically in the context of Parashat Vayakhel?

A number of halachic explanations are offered as to why Havara needed to be mentioned explicitly. For example, the Gemara records a fundamental debate between R’ Natan and R’ Yose as to whether we treat Havara as a typical melacha or as a less severe שבת prohibition. Additionally, Ramban, quoting the Mechilta, suggests that, unlike Yom Tov where Havara is allowed for food preparations, the Pasuk here is clarifying that it is forbidden on Shabbat. Either way, we still need to ask why the Torah waited until now to make these points when it could have done so earlier.

The answer begins by noting another strange aspect of the prohibition against Havara. Unlike the general prohibition against doing melacha, the Torah states that kindling a flame may not be done “ְבּכ ֹל מ ֹ ְשׁב ֹ ֵתי ֶכם ,” “in all of your dwellings”. What does this phrase come to teach us? Are there places where we can light a fire that the Torah has to specify that we may not in our “dwellings”?

The Midrash, quoted by Klei Yakar, explains that the phrase ”ְבּכ ֹל מ ֹ ְשׁב ֹ ֵתי ֶכם ” is coming to teach that although the prohibition of Havara applies in our communities, it does not exist in the mishkan when performing the Avoda. In other words, the phrase “ְבּכ ֹל מ ֹ ְשׁב ֹ ֵתי ֶכם “ is needed to contrast the Mishkan with all other places, and perhaps that contrast could not have been said before we were commanded to build the mishkan. The contrast between the mishkan and our own homes regarding prohibition of Havara may have a deeper message, especially when this prohibition comes right the Cheit Ha’Egel.

Many Mefarshim such as Ramban and the Kuzari explains that the motivation behind the Cheit Ha’Eigel was not to replace Hashem but to replace Moshe. Until now the people had viewed Moshe as more than just a leader but as an intermediary between them and Hashem. When the people thought that Moshe was gone, they became desperate to find an alternative way of serving Hashem as they felt that direct communication with Hashem was beyond them and they needed a tangible and physical way of connecting. As much as those intentions seem positive, the problem is that the Torah explicitly forbids the creation of such images, regardless of the intentions. As Beis Halevi explains, the message we all need to learn from the Cheit Ha’Eigel is that despite our intentions, the service of Hashem has to be done on his terms, not our own. For this reason, when we repeat the many details of the mishkan in this week’s Parasha, the Torah adds the phrase, As Hashem Commanded” highlighting this very“ ”כאשר צוה ה“ point.

א־ ְת ַב ֲערוּ” I think that this is precisely the message that comes to teach us as well. While we may have a “ ֵאשׁ ְבּכֹל מֹ ְשׁבֹ ֵתי ֶכם passion and desire for spirituality, as symbolized by fire, the Torah tells us that we maynotlightthatfireְבּכֹלמֹ ְשׁבֵֹתי ֶכם ,inany place or way which we desire. Rather, that fire and passion need to be channeled through the Mishkan by using its light to guide us. And just as the Aron Kodesh is at its center, Torah needs to be at the heart and center of our lives by guiding our decisions, unlike those of the Chet Ha’Eigel who relied too much on their own sense of spirituality. In no way should we as

a people lose our fire and passion to connect with Hashem but we must do so on his terms not our own.