“And they shall make for Me a sanctuary and I will
dwell among them.” (Shemot 25:8)
Our parasha discusses the construction of the Mishcan. The Mishcan was the portable sanctuary that
accompanied Bnai Yisrael in the wilderness.
Once Bnai Yisrael entered and conquered the land of Israel, this Mishcan
– Tabernacle – was replaced by a permanent structure. This structure was the Bait HaMikdash – the Sacred Temple –
constructed by King Shlomo.
Our passage contains the specific command to
construct the Mishcan. However,
Maimonides indicates in his Sefer HaMitzvot that this passage is also the
source for the commandment to build the Bait HaMikdash. [1] Sefer Mitzvot Gadol – SeMaG – agrees that
there is a commandment to build the Bait HaMikdash. However, he objects to Maimonides’ contention that the mitzvah is
derived from our pasuk. He suggests
that the proper source for the commandment to build the Bait HaMikdash is a set
of pasukim in Sefer Devarim. In these
pesukim, Moshe tells Bnai Yisrael that they will cross over the Jordan and
inhabit the land of Israel. Moshe then
tells the people that Hashem will choose a place for His Mikdash and it is to
that place that all sacrifices will be brought.[2],
[3]
Rav Yosef Karo suggests that there is an obvious reason for SeMaG’s rejection
of Maimonides’ position. Our passage is
not discussing the Bait HaMikdash. It
is specifically commanding the construction of the Mishcan. How can Maimonides contend that this passage
is the source for the obligation to build the Bait HaMikdash?[4]
It seems that SeMaG’s objection to Maimonides’
position is reasonable. Why does
Maimonides insist on citing our passage as the source for the commandment to
build the Bait HaMikdash? Rav Yosef
Karo suggests that Maimonides position is based upon a problem within the
wording of our passage. What is this
problem?
In our pasuk, Bnai Yisrael are commanded to build a
sanctuary for Hashem. There are two
terms used in the Torah for “sanctuary.”
These terms are Mishcan and Mikdash.
The term Mishcan is generally used to refer to the Tabernacle of the
wilderness. In our passage, Hashem
directed Bnai Yisrael to build this Tabernacle of the wilderness. Therefore, it seems that the passage should
have used the term Mishcan. However in
our passage, Hashem does not tell Bnai Yisrael to build a Mishcan – a
Tabernacle. He tells Bnai Yisrael to
build a Mikdash. Why does the passage
use the term Mikdash and not the seemingly more appropriate term Mishcan?
Rav Yosef Karo suggests that Maimonides is answering
this question. According to Maimonides,
the term Mikdash is a more general term than Mishcan. It includes all both the Tabernacle and the Bait HaMikdash. The passage specifically uses the term Mikdash
in order to include both forms of sanctuary – the portable Tabernacle and the
permanent Bait HaMikdash.[5] It seems that according to Rav Yosef Karo,
Maimonides maintains that our pasuk legislates the requirement to establish a
sanctuary. This institution does not
have a specific form. Instead, the
structure of the sanctuary is flexible.
This commandment includes the Mishcan constructed in the wilderness and
the Bait HaMikdash constructed by Shlomo.
How are these different structures included in one mitzvah? Sometimes it is appropriate for this
sanctuary to be a portable structure.
At other times, a permanent structure is more fitting. The environment in which the sanctuary will
be placed determines its form. When
Bnai Yisrael were traveling in the wilderness, the nation was not permanently
situated. It was appropriate for the
sanctuary to travel with the camp. Once
Bnai Yisrael settled in the land of Israel, the nation was permanently
situated. At this point, a permanent
structure became appropriate.
This is a reasonable explanation of Maimonides’
position. However, SeMaG raises an
important objection to this position.
The Midrash Sifri enumerates three commandments that came into effect
when Bnai Yisrael entered the land of Israel.
These mitzvot are to appoint a king, to build a Mikdash, and to destroy
Amalek. It seems that Sifri is
asserting that the commandment to construct the Mikdash – a sanctuary – is
comparable to the other two commandments mentioned by the Sifri. These other two commandments did not apply
in the wilderness. Similarly, it
appears that the commandment to build a Mikdash did not apply in the
wilderness. Instead, the commandment
first became operative with Bnai Yisrael’s conquest of the land of Israel.[6] It is interesting that Maimonides also
quotes this midrash in his Sefer HaMitzvot.[7] How can Maimonides’ position be reconciled
with this midrash?
Maimonides explains that there is a fundamental
difference between the Mishcan and the Bait HaMikdash. He explains that the Mishcan was originally
constructed in the wilderness and was intended to serve as a temporary
structure. When the nation entered the
land of Israel, the Mishcan was established in Gilgal. It was then moved to Shiloh. The Mishcan was subsequently replaced by a
sanctuary constructed in Nov. The Nov
sanctuary was also eventually replaced by a sanctuary build in Givon. In turn, the sanctuary of Givon was replaced
by the Bait HaMikdash. Once the Bait
HaMikdash was constructed, its site became the permanent location for any
subsequent sanctuary. The second Bait
HaMikdash was constructed upon this location and the third will also be built
on this site. In short, all of the
sanctuaries build before the Bait HaMikdash were temporary. These sanctuaries were erected at a site for
a period of time and then moved to a new location and sometimes even replaced
by a new structure. However, once the Bait
HaMikdash was built upon the Temple Mount in Yesushalayim, this site became the
permanent location of the structure.[8]
This distinction is reflects a fundamental
difference between the sanctuaries that preceded the Bait HaMikdash and the Bait
HaMikdash itself. As explained above,
the institution of sanctuary is expressed in different forms. In the wilderness, the sanctuary took the
form of the Mishcan – a portable structure.
The sanctuary took other forms once the nation entered the land of
Israel. However, all of the iterations
of the sanctuary were innately temporary and precursors to the Bait HaMikdash. The Bait HaMikdash represents the ultimate
and final form of the sanctuary. Once
he Bait HaMikdash was built, it was the final form and site for the
sanctuary. All subsequent sanctuaries
are reconstructions of this King Shlomo’s Bait HaMikdash and built on its site.
This distinction between the Bait HaMikdash and its
precursors resolves the contradiction between Maimonides’ position and the
Sifri. Although versions of the
sanctuary existed before the nation entered the land of Israel, the final and
ultimate fulfillment of the commandment to build a sanctuary could not be
achieved until the land of Israel was completely secured and the Bait HaMikdash
was constructed.
Let us now reconsider the dispute between Maimonides
and SeMaG. According to Maimonides, the
mitzvah to build a sanctuary includes the Bait HaMikdash and all of its
precursors. According to SeMaG, the
commandment specifically instructs us to build the Bait HaMikdash. It does not include the precursor of the Bait
HaMikdash. Why does SeMaG exclude the Mishcan from the commandment?
It seems that according to SeMaG, the Bait HaMikdash
is a fundamental element of the sanctity of the land of Israel. In other words, the sanctity of the land of
Israel has a specific structure. This
sanctity requires that the land of Israel include as a central element the Bait
HaMikdash. The Mishcan and the other
sanctuaries that preceded the Bait HaMikdash were places for the offering of
sacrifices and the worship of Hashem.
But these structures were not expressions of the sanctity of the land of
Israel.
Maimonides disagrees. He argues that the commandment to build a sanctuary was given in
the wilderness. It was first fulfilled
through the construction of the Mishcan.
According to Maimonides, the sanctuary is a central element within the
national community of Bnai Yisrael.
This community first emerged in the wilderness. With its emergence came the requirement to
build this community around a sanctuary.
The appropriate sanctuary for the nation as it traveled through the
wilderness was the Mishcan. The
structure of the national community evolved and did not achieve its final form
until the people possessed the land of Israel.
In other words Bnai Yisrael evolved from a nomadic nation into a people
with a land. As the national community
evolved, the institution of the sanctuary evolved. Once the people achieved possessed the land, the nation became
complete. The complete community
required a permanent Bait HaMikdash. In
short, Maimonides and SeMaG disagree on the framework of the sanctuary. According to SeMaG the sanctuary is an
expression of the sanctity of the land of Israel. Therefore, the Mishcan and the Bait HaMikdash are fundamentally
different institutions. According to
Maimonides, the sanctuary is a fundamental element of the national community of
Bnai Yisrael. Therefore at different times
in the history of Bnai Yisrael, the Mishcan and the Bait HaMikdash have served
as appropriate expressions of this institution. Of course, Maimonides acknowledges that the Bait HaMikdash is the
ultimate form of the institution of a sanctuary. However, this is because the nation of Bnai Yisrael is only
complete once it is in possession of the land of Israel.
In memory of my dear friend and mentor Albert J.
Maimon Z”L.
May his soul be bound in the bonds of eternal life.
[1] Rabbaynu Moshe ben Maimon (Rambam / Maimonides) Sefer HaMitzvot, Mitzvat Aseh 2.
[2] Sefer Devarim 11:10-11.
[3] Rabbaynu Moshe ben Yaakov of Coucy (SeMaG), Sefer Mitzvot Gadol, Mitzvat Aseh 163.
[4] Rav Yosef Karo, Rav Yosef Karo, Hilchot Bait HaBechirah 1:1.
[5] Rav Yosef Karo, Rav Yosef Karo, Hilchot Bait HaBechirah 1:1.
[6] Rabbaynu Moshe ben Yaakov of Coucy (SeMaG), Sefer Mitzvot Gadol, Mitzvat Aseh 163.
[7] Rabbaynu Moshe ben Maimon (Rambam / Maimonides) Sefer HaMitzvot, Mitzvat Aseh 20.
[8] Rabbaynu Moshe ben Maimon (Rambam / Maimonides) Mishne Torah, Hilchot Bait HaBeChirah 1:1-3.