On the day of the first month, on the first of the month, you shall erect the Mishkan, the Tent of Meeting. (40:2)
The opening word “bayom” (on the day) in verse two seems redundant, for it proceeds to state “on the first of the month”! What is this word adding?
The Meaning of the Word “Day”
The Meshech Chochmah explains that the word “day” can have one of two meanings:
A. It can denote a day in the week or month. In such a case, this will include both the daytime and nighttime portions of that day, e.g. “the day of Shabbos” includes Friday night
B. It can denote the daytime portion of a day, as opposed to the night.
In our case, by adding the word “day”, Hashem was indicating not only the date when the Mishkan was to be erected, but also emphasizing that this was to take place specifically during the day. This is in accord with the principle derived in the Gemara that the building of the Mikdash does not take place at night.
1 Shavuos 15b.
An Alternative Source?
The Meshech Chochmah concludes his comment with the words, “שני דשבועות ועיין פרק מקרא אחרינא – and see the second perek of Shavuos [where it derives this] from a different verse.” With this reference, he is alerting us to the fact that the Gemara upon which his explanation of our verse is based provides a different source for the idea of not building the Mikdash at night:
מנין שאֹין בנין בית הֶמקִדש בלילהֶ? שנאֹמרִ “וֹביוֹם הֶקִים אֹת הֶמשכן”
From where do we know that we do not build the Beis Hamikdash at night? As it says, “and on the day of the setting up of the Mishkan.”
In truth, with this concluding observation, the Meshech Chochmah could be seen as raising a question: Why, in fact, did the Gemara derive the idea that we may not build the Mikdash at night from the verse in Bamidbar and not from our verse? Indeed, there is room to say that our verse would be a preferable source, for three reasons:
- It is earlier in the Torah, and we generally use the first available verse as a source.
- The word “day” in our verse seems redundant, thereby making it a more eligible basis for a halachic exposition.
- Our verse relates Hashem’s command to Moshe, while the verse in Bamidbar is descriptive in nature. Generally speaking, a halachic requirement is more likely to be derived from a command than a description.
The Meshech Chochmah does not elaborate on this issue. Rather, in a very understated way, simply by means of reference, he raises the question, leaving it to the reader to contemplate the matter further.
Perhaps we may suggest that since there were many unique laws that applied on the first day of the Mishkan, as outlined in the beginning of Parshas Shemini, the Gemara preferred to cite as its source a verse which described the ongoing parameters of how the Mishkan was set up. Alternatively, from our verse alone, we may have concluded that the insistence that the Mishkan be built only by day applied specifically to the first time it was built. By contrast, on subsequent occasions, and in later locations, we may have thought that it is merely being “rebuilt”, so that the timing would not be so significant. Hence, the Gemara cited a verse from a subsequent occasion to inform us that all acts of building can take place only by day.
2 Bamidbar 9:15.
