Rashi in His Own Words
שמות ל"ח, כ"א: אֵ לֶּה ַ ד עַ ל פִּ י משֶּ ה עֲבֹ דַ ת הַ לְ וִּ יִּ ם בְ יַד אִּ יתָּ מָּ ר בֶּ ן אַ הֲרֹ ן הַ כֹ הֵ פְ קוּדֵ י הַ מִּ שְ כָּן מִּ שְ כַן הָּ עֵ דֻת אֲ שֶּ ר פֻקן:
רש"י ד"ה המשכן משכן :שני פעמים ,רמז למקדש שנתמשכן בשני חורבנין על עונותיהן של ישראל:
Shemos 38:21: These are the numbers of the Mishkan, the Mishkan of the Testimony, which was counted at Moshe's command; (this was) the work of the Levi'im under the direction of Isomor, the son of Aharon the Kohen.
Rashi Heading - the Mishkan, the Mishkan: (The word מִּ שְ כָּן is written) twice. This alludes to the Temple, which was taken as security (מַ שְ כוֹן) by the two destructions for Israel's iniquities.
Synopsis
This week's Torah portion, Pekudei, begins with the words, "These are the numbers of the Mishkan, the Mishkan of the Testimony, which was counted at Moshe's command. (This was) the work of the Levi'im under the direction of Isomor, the son of Aharon the Kohen." Rashi cites from the verse the words "the Mishkan, the Mishkan" and explains that "(The word 'מִּ שְ כָּן - Mishkan' is written) twice. This alludes to the Temple, which was taken as security ('מַ שְ כוֹן - Mashkon') by the two destructions, for Israel's iniquities."
The concluding Torah portion discusses the Mishkan construction; it is the appropriate place to hint at the two Holy Temples. However, why does Rashi discuss the destruction of the Temples rather than the time they stood? Furthermore, Rashi finds the word Mishkan – Sanctuary, related to the term Mashkon – Security. There is certainly no relationship between the two words according to Peshat! Following the simple explanation, the word sanctuary is related to the Hebrew meaning to dwell or rest. Finally, with a security, one gives the same object he receives. If I lend someone money and take a guarantee, I return the same thing to him when the borrower repays me. However, the first and second Temples were very different from each other. The second Bais Hamikdosh, which Hashem returned to us, greatly lacked the level of G-dly revelation that existed in the first.
The explanation is that each Temple was the same in terms of function. Despite specific differences, each served as Hashem's house, His permanent dwelling. On the other hand, a Tabernacle is a tent, a temporary residence. When Hashem gave us the second Holy Temple, He returned the same thing we had before, a permanent dwelling place for the Almighty. Therefore, they both indeed served as a Mashkon. The reason for discussing their destruction rather than their existence is to bring out an important point. Rashi concludes by saying that the Temples were destroyed due to Israel's sins. However, each Mikdash stood for centuries, and our sins began long before their destruction. Hashem wanted the existence of both Temples to such a great extent that He was patient with us for centuries before destroying either one. Not only was He patient, but He was helping us by urging us and giving us the strength to repent.
Rashi's Explanation
At the beginning of this week's Torah portion, Pekudei, the Torah says, "These are the numbers of the Mishkan, the Mishkan of the Testimony, which was counted at Moshe's command. (This was) the work of the Levi'im under the direction of Isomor, the son of Aharon the Kohen." Rashi cites from this verse the words "the Mishkan, the Mishkan" and explains that "(The word 'מִּ שְ כָּן - Mishkan' is written) twice. This alludes to the Temple, which was taken as security ('מַ שְ כוֹן - Mashkon') by the two destructions, for Israel's iniquities."
Each time we encamped in the desert, we set up the Mishkan. Each time Hashem told us to journey to our next encampment, we disassembled and carried the Tabernacle. It was an intrinsic part of the Jew's lives in the wilderness. It was where Hashem revealed Himself to them. Additionally, the Jewish Nation performed its Divine service there. After entering Israel, the Mishkan would remain in one form or another and in one location or another. It was built and rebuilt in various forms. Ultimately, it progressed to making the permanent Bais Hamikdosh in Jerusalem the ultimate destination. The Temple was built and rebuilt there. With the coming of redemption through Moshiach, it will be constructed permanently. Rashi teaches us that the Torah uses the word Mishkan twice to allude to the two Holy Temples.
Our Parshah is the fifth (and final) consecutive portion that discusses the building of the Mishkan. Here, in our current Torah portion, we are concluding and summing up the construction of the Mishkan. Therefore, this is an appropriate place for the Torah to allude to the two Holy Temples.
Difficulties in Understanding Rashi
Granted, this is the appropriate place for the Torah to allude to both Holy Temples. However, why hint at their destruction? It would seem much more relevant to imply the centuries that each Temple stood!
Secondly, why derive this from the similarity between the words "מִּ שְ כָּן - Mishkan" (meaning sanctuary) and "מַ שְ כוֹן - Mashkon" (meaning security, as in collateral for a loan)? According to Peshat, the word Mishkan is not related to the Hebrew word for "security." Instead, it comes from the Hebrew word meaning to rest or dwell. This is why the Torah commands us, at the beginning of the discussion of the Tabernacle, "And they shall make a sanctuary for Me, and I will dwell within them."
Additionally, since Rashi cites the words from the verse "the Mishkan, the Mishkan," it is evident that he is coming to explain the meaning of the repetition of the word Mishkan. Why, then, does Rashi need to say at the beginning of his comments "(that the Torah writes the word Mishkan) twice?" Generally, Rashi does not specify the question that his comments answer. This is certainly true here, where the difficulty is so apparent.
Furthermore, why does Rashi say, "This alludes to the Temple, which was taken as a security (מַ שְ כוֹן) (in the singular) by the two destructions (in the plural)?" Rashi tells us that the verse uses the word Mishkan twice, which implies plural. He concludes by saying, "in the two destructions," which is also plural. However, in the middle, he writes that the Mishkan was a security in the singular.
Why does Rashi find it necessary to conclude his comments by saying that the Temple was taken "as security by the two destructions, for Israel's iniquities?" What is the need to say that Hashem took it for Israel's iniquities? Once we know that He took the Temple twice, we can understand the repetition of the word Mishkan. Why does Rashi need to say why Hashem took it?
Earlier, when Yosef was reunited with his brother Binyamin, the Torah tells us that "he (Yosef) fell on his brother Binyamin's neck and wept, and Binyamin wept on his neck." Rashi explains that Yosef wept "for the two Temples which were destined to be in Benyamin's territory and would ultimately be destroyed." Binyamin cried "for the Tabernacle of Shiloh, which would be in Yosef's territory, yet would ultimately be destroyed." Perhaps here, the repetition of the word Mishkan hints at the destruction of the Mishkan Shiloh and the First Bais Hamikdosh. The second Temple did not have the same G-dly revelation level as the first Temple or the Mishkan Shiloh.
Rashi's use of the word Mashkon – collateral, is seemingly questionable. If one lends money to another, he will take a security and return it when the debt is repaid. This does not seem to fit with what Rashi says here. Rashi says that both Temples were taken by G-d, destroyed, and held as a security until we repay the debts (i.e., sins). However, when the second Bais Hamikdosh was built, it did not have the same security that Hashem took. As mentioned above, the second Temple lacked holiness and the revelation of G-dliness that existed in the First Temple. We certainly did not receive the same security that G-d took from us!
The Explanation
As our forefather Yaakov said, "How awesome is this place! This is none other than the house of G-d, and this is the gate of heaven." The gate of heaven is a reference to the heavenly Temple. Furthermore, it says, "... directed toward Your habitation, which You made, Hashem..." Rashi explains there that this means that "the Temple below is directly opposite the Temple above, which You made." Therefore, it is written regarding the Bais Hamikdosh that "Shlomo commenced to build the House of the Lord in Yerushalayim on Mount Moriah ...." That is also why the Torah refers to the Temple as the "Eternal House." All of the above applies equally to the first and second Temples.
There is also a quality that applies equally to every incarnation of the Mishkan. This includes the Mishkan in the wilderness and the Mishkan Shiloh. Although they were permeated with Hashem's presence, none was a gateway to the heavenly sanctuary. Each Tabernacle was called a tent, meaning a temporary dwelling place of the Almighty. This is as we find that G-d said to Noson, the prophet, "But I have walked in a tent and a tabernacle." The Torah frequently refers to the Tabernacle in the wilderness as "the Tent of Meeting."
Even a complete beginner to the study of Chumash is well aware that both Temples, even if one is far greater than the other, share a common denominator. They are both permanent dwellings of the Almighty. At the same time, he realizes that even though the Mishkan shares many qualities in common with the Temple, it is only a temporary dwelling place.
Based on this, we understand that as long as each Temple shares the same main property, one can serve as a security for the other. This is true regardless of how many differences exist between one and the other. On the other hand, neither Bais Hamikdosh can serve as a security for any Mishkan.
From this, we can understand that Rashi does not learn something from the extra word the Torah uses, as is often the case. Instead, his comments are based on the repetition of the same word. That is why Rashi is particular about saying that Mishkan is written twice. That is the entire point. The Torah states "Mishkan" two times, which alludes to the two Holy Temples. Whatever differences may have existed between them, they are essentially the same.
This also explains why Rashi emphasizes the similarity between Mishkan and Mashkon – security. This is also why Rashi focuses on the destruction of the Temple rather than its existence. This teaches us a novel concept. Just as a security continues to exist in the same form when it moves from one domain to another, the same is true of the Bais Hamikdosh. When Hashem took it away from us, it was a security. Although it was temporarily gone, it was returned to us as before. So too, will Hashem return the third Temple to us.
This also answers why Rashi concludes with "for Israel's iniquities." If the Mikdash was removed for another reason, for example, that its preordained time to exist had ended, that would mean it was finished. We would not receive our security, and another sanctuary would not be the same. However, Hashem temporarily removed it for a side reason. Our sins destroyed it, and our conduct caused its destruction. The only thing that changed was the relationship between the Jewish people and the Temple. The Bais Hamikdosh itself remained the same.
There is another reason for saying that Hashem destroyed the Temple for Israel's sins. The first Temple lasted 410 years, and the second lasted 420 years. The Jews had begun sinning long before the destruction of either Temple. Nevertheless, G-d allowed us to repent for centuries before destroying either Temple. This brought out His great desire for the existence of the Bais Hamikdosh.
A Deeper Lesson from Rashi
The Sages teach us that "it suffices for the servant to be as his master." Just as Hashem not only allowed each Mikdash to remain standing for centuries despite our sins, He even helped us by giving us the strength to do Teshuvah. Our attitude toward a fellow Jew must be the same. We must reach out and lovingly work at helping others build a sanctuary for G-d, even if their conduct does not follow the Torah. On the contrary, we have no right to exempt ourselves from this task. The Torah says that one must "love his fellow as himself."
(Adapted from a talk given on Shabbos Parshas Vayakhel - Pekudei 5732)
I hope you gained as much by reading this as I did by translating and adapting it.
Click here to dedicate a week, a month, or a year to the Rashi of the Week.
You can find us on the web at www.RebbeTeachesRashi.org.
