The Klal And The Individual

There are two types of korbanos.  There are korbanos of the tzibbur such as the korban tammid where one korban is offered for the entity of Klal Yisrael.  There is another type of korban which is a korban yachid where a private indivdual has an obligation or offers to bring a korban of his one.  The Rambam splits these two categories into the different books, the book of Korbanot which deals with the individual korbanot and the book of Avodah which coves the communal obligations.  The korban pesach is an interesting korban in that it is a korban yachid offered by every individual but at the same time it is qualified as a korban tzibbur (the Yerushalmi says that is why it overrides Shabbos, see also Yoma (51a) פסח נמי אתי בכנופיא.)  (See about this in this book pg. 192-196 (in the pg. numbers on top,) article קורבן הפסח and sicha of the Rebbe volume 18 Behaloscha sicha 2.)  Or in another words as the Rebbe clarifies in a footnote based upon the Rogatchover's breakdown (מפענח צפונות פרק ד,) normally a tzibbur is a sum that is greater than the sum of its parts but in the korban pesach the tzibbur is the combination of all the individuals lumped together.  

The Rebbe goes on to explain the "טעם פנימי" for why this duality is present in the korban pesach.  Pesach is the time of the birth of Klal Yisrale and therefore the korban pesach carries two elements of Klal Yisrael.  On the one hand it is the body of Klal Yisrael, the tzibbur that is of vital importance but at the same time every individual also is important in his/ her own right.  These two perspectives are alluded to by Hillel in Avos אם אין אני לי מי לי, everyone has their own mission and is important in their own right but at the same time, וכשאני לעצמי מה אני, one has to be acting as part of the klal, one's actions as a yachid has to have a place as part of the general klal.  This dichotomy or paradox of acknowledging both the individual and the tzibbur is fraught with tension but is the goal.   

This paradox is also highlighted by the parshios of Vayakhel and Pekuday.  The name Vayakhel means a gathering yet the parsha details every individual vessel used in the Mishkan and the name Pekuday means every individual but the parsha is all about all the pieces coming together?  The Rebbe explains (volume 21 ) that the the parsha of Vayakhel highlights that even though there are individual vessels, they were not made purely with intent for their own function but also to function as part of the general Mishkan.  Conversely, Pekuday demonstrates that after there is an entire Mishkan structure, one should not just view all the individual parts as losing their own self worth in the totality of the building, but that the totality enhances the importance of the individual.  This is also hinted to by the fact that Vakayhel Pekuday are often combine but also are sometimes separate parshios.  There is a klal and individuals and both are of importance.     

The Forgotten Souls

The Chida cites the Rokeach that when Moshe Rabbenu saw the ווין used for hanging he got worried and lost his strength and that caused him to forget the 1,755 shekakim used to make the ווי העמודים in the Mishkan.  When he saw it was the sons of Hamal killed he was appeased.  This is hinted to by the 11 times it says the letter ו at the beginning of the sons of Haman's names.  What is the connection between the ווי העמודים  and the hanging of Haman's sons?  Why is it hinted to by 11 times vov?  

Moshe Rabbenu forgot the 1,775 sheklaim because these shekalim came from souls that were outside the boundary of the main body of the 600,000 Jews.  These shekalim represent the straggling Jew barely hanging on to the body of Klal Yisrael.  Moshe Rabbenu didn't see how they could remain connected, they were the "forgotten souls."  The Megaleh Amukot says that Moshe Rabbenu was reminded by R.Akiva that these shekalim were used for the hooks.  R. Akiva hinted to by the Megelah Amukot in the small א in the beginning of Vakiyra, א' זעיר"א, בגימטריא ר' עקיב'. נשתיירו אתוון מן ויקרא (א א) ויקר, שדרשו רז"ל (ע"ז דף ה'.) על פסוק (תהלים קלט יז) ולי מה יקרו רעיך אל, שהוא רבי עקיבה, is the one to darshen even every kotz, every little aspect of the Sefer Torah, even the "extras" that are not found in the body of the 600,000 letters, demonstrates that even these Jews have a place in the Mishkan.  עקיבא is עקב א, he finds even in the souls that are the עקב, the bottom, they also are connected to the א, אלופו של עולם.  These souls were also attached, they were part of the ווי העמודים, they were attached with the ו החיבור.  

Rashi says that Amalek attacked כָּל הַנֶּחֱשָׁלִים אַחֲרֶיךָ – חֲסֵרֵי כֹחַ מֵחֲמַת חֶטְאָם, שֶׁהָיָה הֶעָנָן פּוֹלְטָן.  Those that were straying at the back of the camp where the one's that Amalek was able to attack.  It is those that are lagging behind, those that don't make it into the main body of the Mishkan, those that are barely hanging on where Amalek comes to attack.  The Ramchal (cited in Otzrot Ramchal) notes that Amalek is associated with forgetting.  Moshe Rabbenu forgot these souls, he thought they would be overtaken by the powers of Amalek, they would be lost to the outside world.   The number 11 is associated with the negative side according to the Kabbalah.  כי יד על כס קה, the last letters of name of Hashem, the vav and hey which combine to equal 11 which Amalek is able to seize onto, that is the missing part of name of Hashem.   

There were 11 יריעות עזים on the outside of the Mishkan to convert even the negative power of those that are only on the outside to good.  Esau, optimized by Amalek, is represented by the hairy goats (see בראשית רבה, סה,טו.)  The goat skin were added to the outside of the Mishkan to bring even the souls that are susceptible to the attack of Esau to kedusha.  The man chosen for this job was אהליאב (according to Arizal,) from shevet Dan.  The shevet of Dan was the מאסף לכל המחנת as Rashi (Bamidbar 10:25) explains שהיה שבטו של דן מרובה באוכלוסין היה נוסע באחרונה וכל מי שהיה מאבד דבר היה מחזירו.  This means that it is shevet Dan that is in charge of bringing up all the stragglers, all those that were going to fall by the wayside.  That is why it is Oholiav ,a descendent of Dan who is charge of putting up the goat skins, he brings the souls that are suspect to be attacked by Amalek and makes sure they still hang onto kedusha.  That is why shevet Dan is the one who is the greatest misnagid to Amalek (Likutay Moharah 56:5.) 

The Rokeach notes there are 54 letters in the names of the sons of Haman and 54 times Haman is mentioned in the Megilliah.  54 is דן, it is the power of Dan that defeats Amalek.  It is through the ווי עמודים, the connection that even the "outside souls" have that is the downfall of Amalek.  This is the message that R. Akiva conveyed to Moshe Rabbenu, that even these souls have a takkanah, and that is hinted to in the downfall of Amalek, the root of the forgetting, of these souls forgetting their way, and showed their place in the Mishkan (based upon Emunas Etecha Pekuday, Beis Yishay siman 35, article)   

Breaking Through

 וְלֹא⁠־יָכֹ֣ל מֹשֶׁ֗ה לָבוֹא֙ אֶל⁠־אֹ֣הֶל מוֹעֵ֔ד כִּֽי⁠־שָׁכַ֥ן עָלָ֖יו הֶעָנָ֑ן וּכְב֣וֹד י״י֔ מָלֵ֖א אֶת⁠־הַמִּשְׁכָּֽן.  Moshe could not enter due to the presence of the cloud and the kavod of Hashem present.  Why specifically at this time after the completion of the Mishkan, the place of the ultimate connection between Hashem and Klal Yisrael is there a barrier, are the doors shut?  

Rebbe Nachman says on the possuk (Shemos 20:18) וַיַּעֲמד הָעָם מֵרָחֹק וּמשֶׁה נִגַּשׁ אֶל הָעֲרָפֶל אֲשֶׁר שָׁם הָאֱלֹקִים that when wants to rise up to a greater level of service in Hashem, there are road barriers that stand in the way.  One who is afraid, the עם, feels distant due to the impasse but משה, one with דעת, recognizes that it is in the barrier where one finds Hashem.  It is only by fighting through the hardship that one can achieve a greater closeness to Hashem.  That is what Rashi (Shemos 24:18) means that at Mattan Torah a path was made for Moshe to enter though the smoke.  Once one puts in effort to go through the difficulty, it parts and one finds Hashem there.  This may be why specifically at this great pinnacle, the completion of the Mikdash, again there has to be a barrier to demonstrate to tap into the power of the Mikdash you must go through this final barrier.   In order to grow you must go through barriers.

What Do You Count

 From משולחנו של רבי אליהו ברוך:

The אזנים לתורה actually says the difference in a nicer light:

One Long Journey

The last verse of Shefer Shemot is כִּי֩ עֲנַ֨ן י״י֤ עַֽל־הַמִּשְׁכָּן֙ יוֹמָ֔ם וְאֵ֕שׁ תִּהְיֶ֥ה לַ֖יְלָה בּ֑וֹ לְעֵינֵ֥י כׇל־בֵּֽית־יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל בְּכׇל־מַסְעֵיהֶֽם.  What does this have to do with the culmination of the Mishkan?  The Sforno explains that it it telling us the strength of the presence of the Shechina in the Mikdash.  It never left until Klal Yisroel traveled from the stop.

Rashi says מקום חנייתן, אף הוא קרוי מסע so בכל מסעיהם includes the places of encampment.  The message is that there are no stops along the journey.  Even when one reaches another level, another camp along the journey, it is still part of one long path that must be continued.  This is fitting to conclude the book of Shemot for it encapsulates how the entire journey from the descent into Egypt until the building of the Mishkan is part of one arduous path  with "camps" of ten plagues, splitting of the sea, Mattan Torah etc. but it is all part of an ongoing journey (see Likutay Sichos volume 6 sicha 2.)  As the Sforno notes, the journey is incomplete for it is only in the Third Beis Hamikdash where the Shechina will have a permanent residence. 

Never Forgotten

The Yalkut (415) says  אמר להם בואו ואעשה לפניכם חשבון נכנסו כל ישראל עד שהוא יושב ומחשב שכח אלף ושבע מאות וחמשה ושבעים שקל שעשה ווים לעמודים התחיל יושב ותמה אמר עכשיו ישראל מוצאים ידיהם לומר נטלו משה האיר הקב"ה עיניו וראה אותם עשוין ווים לעמודים אמר להם ואת האלף ושבע המאות וגו', באותה שעה נתפייסו ישראל על מלאכת המשכן שנאמר אלה פקודי המשכן.  Why were these forgotten coins made into the hooks of the chatzar?  Why were these coins forgotten? 

The forgotten coins represent the forgotten Jews.  Those that are so far removed from pure avodah that they don't show up on Moshe's radar. However, even they will be remembered and will turn into the hooks, they will latch on to the outer part of the Mishkan.  They are attached (vav hachibur) via the ווי עמודים.  They will clutch on for dear life as they may be permitted only in the most external layer of the Mishkan.  There are twelve months of the year corresponding to every one of the shevatim.  The second Adar represents those that have strayed from the shevatim.  They have strayed outside the boundaries of Klal Yisroel.  However, it is in this time where they can be enlightened by the nes of Purim.  Even in the הסתר אסתר את פני, the light of Purim is able to awake these souls.  That is represented by the ואו - the gematria of 13, the gematria of אחד, that even they people can become attached to the body of Klal Yisroel.  That is what concerned Klal Yisroel.  what will be of these souls, especially in the days of the future?  Moshe said even they will be attached, will become וויו for the chatzer (based upon Emunas Etecha.)    

Nedivot Lev

From the Mir parsha sheet by Rav Shmuel Wolman.

Why was Moshe Rabbeinu not given the opportunity to be involved in the donations to the Mishkan? The sefer Maalos HaTorah, written by the brother of the Gaon, offers a mind-boggling insight. The Torah tells us the entire creation of the Mishkan needed to be an active nedivus lev. The men and women that ran to give all their precious possessions towards this cause were acting out of nedivus lev, parting with their most prized assets. Yet Moshe Rabbeinu was such an ish Elokim, says the Maalos HaTorah, that despite his vast wealth, he was totally detached from his worldly possessions, and they were completely meaningless to him. Therefore, although technically Moshe Rabbeinu had plenty to offer towards the cause, his donation could not possibly be an act of nedivus lev, and he therefore could not contribute to the cause.

Besides providing a powerful insight into Moshe Rabbeinu’s ability to totally negate the finer things in life, the Maalos HaTorah is conveying an entirely new understanding of the concept of nedivus lev. It was not an added element in the building of the Mishkan, but rather the entire essence of the drive to donate to the Mishkan, to the extent that Moshe Rabbeinu’s contribution was worthless, since it could not come with nedivus lev.

In fact, throughout these five parashiyos that discuss the Mishkan, the Torah repeatedly emphasizes the component of nedivus lev, which seems to confirm how essential it was. But why, indeed, was it such a vital element in the donations to the Mishkan?

I think the Torah is conveying a fundamental lesson that could revamp our entire attitude towards avodas Hashem. Hakadosh Baruch Hu asks us to, build Him a home, kaveyachol, and this request necessitates a huge fundraising campaign to provide the resources for this home. We could get the feeling that this is all a very practical project: Get the resources to make this building campaign a success, so we can provide a home for the Shechinah Hakedoshah.  But this is obviously absurd.

Does the Eibishter — who proclaims, though the navi Chaggai: לִי הַכֶּסֶף וְלִי הַזָּהָב — really need our donations of gold and silver? Does the Creator of all the worlds, who is מחדש בטובו בכל יום תמיד really require our craftsmen to provide Him with a home? Obviously not. So what is this all about? The answer is that רחמנא לבא בעי — all the Eibishter wants is the relationship that is created through Klal Yisrael’s nedivus lev and the heartfelt sacrifice and devotion of giving up all their dearest belongings. The Eibishter was not focused on the creation of the Mishkan itself, but rather on the תּוֹכוֹ רָצוּף אַהֲבָה, the tremendous love that permeated every bit of the Mishkan.

We can now understand the Torah’s unusual focus on Klal Yisrael’s nedivus lev, as it describes in detail how zealous the men and women were to give the shirts off their back at the first opportunity. Because that’s what it’s all about! What was important wasn’t what they gave, but how they gave it. The nedivus lev is all the Eibishter is focused on.

This idea sheds light on Chazal’s criticism of the nesi’im, who waited to see what would be brought by others so that they could fill in whatever was missing. Chazal say that the reason the word nesi’im is written missing a yud is to indicate that their attitude was lackluster. The meforshim wonder, wasn’t their offer to fill in any missing donations a noble one? Rabbeinu Bechaye says that their intentions were l’sheim Shamayim — to be practical and ensure that nothing would be lacking. So why were they faulted?

The rosh yeshiva, Rav Chaim Shmulevitz zt”l, explains that when it comes to nedivus lev, there’s no room for cheshbonos. If you crave the relationship with Hashem and you’re so desperate to participate in the project of וְעָשׂוּ לִי מִקְדָּשׁ וְשָׁכַנְתִּי בְּתוֹכָם, then there’s no place for waiting until the end. A person involved in a labor of love and a display of devotion is desperate to secure a slot.

This principle — that the Eibishter doesn’t need our help or donations, and is concerned solely with our nedivus lev — yields a whole new approach to avodas Hashem. It’s not merely about the results; it’s not about saving the day and getting the job done. Rather, it’s all about רחמנא לבא בעי, about pushing ourselves to our limits — בְּכָל לְבָבְךָ וּבְכָל נַפְשְׁךָ וּבְכָל מְאֹדֶךָ. The rest is not our concern.

The Eibishter does not need our help, and either way, the results are in Hashem’s hands and do not reflect our accomplishments. We need to do our best, and the rest is beyond the scope of what we are expected to accomplish.

Moshe Rabbeinu was not able to be part of the meleches haMishkan, and Hakadosh Baruch Hu wants to give him a chelek in it, so He performed a nes that would compel him to make believe that he was accomplishing. Isn’t that strange? If Hashem was already awarding Moshe a bona fide share in the building of the Mishkan, why make him go through the motions of a charade in which he wasn’t really accomplishing anything?

The answer is that this is precisely what the binyan haMishkan is all about! The Eibishter does not care at all about the accomplishment, but is concerned, rather, about the nedivus lev — giving it your all. That is exactly what the Eibishter told Moshe Rabbeinu: עסוק אתה בידך נראה כמקימו, והוא נזקף וקם מאליו. This was not a charade at all; rather, Hakadosh Baruch Hu was telling Moshe Rabbeinu, “Put your whole heart into it. Imagine that you’re able to lift it, and give it every ounce of your strength. The rest is on Me.”

This is the quintessential message of nedivus lev: Don’t own the result or the accomplishment, but give it your all, with nedivus lev.

Accordingly, we can understand that this is actually the fulfillment of the command ofוַהֲקֵמֹתָ אֶת הַמִּשְׁכָּן , because all that a person is ever meant to do is to invest the effort towards the result. In this vein, the passuk in Parashas Nasso states: וַיְהִי בְּיוֹם כַּלּוֹת מֹשֶׁה לְהָקִים אֶת הַמִּשְׁכָּן, clearly indicating that the Torah considers Moshe Rabbeinu to be the one who put up the Mishkan.

The Nefesh Chaim teaches that the binyan haMishkan is a microcosm of the binyan ha’adam. Each Yid contains within him a Mishkan, and we need to build that Mishkan with the same focus on nedivus halev, understanding that רחמנא לבא בעי. At the same time, we can draw comfort and chizuk that we are not being asked to own the result, but rather to give it our all, as the Mishnah teaches: לא עליך המלאכה לגמור. The Eibishter has nachas ruach only from a Yiddishkeit born of nedivus lev, where our hearts are fully invested in avodas Hashem.

Despite the noble intentions of the nesi’im, they were criticized for not approaching Yiddishkeit with nedivus halev and the yearning for a relationship. As the chassidim explain, the letter yud was left out of their name to indicate that although they were engaged in mitzvos and avodas Hashem, they were missing the yud — representing the Yid, the heart, which is the essential ingredient in our Yiddishkeit.

As we try to survive in a world that is so focused on the bottom line, that worships accomplishment and belittles effort, these parashiyos convey a message that can revitalize our Yiddishkeit: עסוק אתה בידך — give it your all, with your whole heart, and that’s what the Eibishter wants from us.

The Daas Zekeinim MiBaalei HaTosafos tells us that Rosh Chodesh Nissan was the day when Klal Yisrael experienced the joy and satisfaction that resulted from the nedivus lev they invested in the hakamas 

Permanant Structure

Seforno in the beginning of Pekuday explains that the reason the mishkan wasn't destroyed vs. the battei mikdash that were.  In his words: ספר מעלות זה המשכן, שבשבילם היה ראוי להיות נצחי ושלא ליפול ביד אויבים: ראשונה: שהיה ״משכן העדת״, שהיו בו לוחות העדות. ב׳: אשר פקד על פי משה. ג׳: שהיתה עבדת הלוים ביד איתמר – כי אמנם משמרת כל חלקי המשכן ביד איתמר היתה. ד׳: ובצלאל בן אורי בן חור למטה יהודה עשה – שהיו ראשי אמני מלאכת המשכן וכליו, מיוחסים וצדיקים שבדור, ובכן שרתה שכינה במעשי ידיהם, ולא נפל ביד אויבים. אבל מקדש שלמה שהיו עובדי המלאכה בו מצור, אף על פי ששרתה בו שכינה נפסדו חלקיו, והוצרך לחזק את בדק הבית (מלכים ב כ״ב:ה׳-ו׳), ונפל בסוף הכל ביד אויבים. אבל בית שני שלא היה בו גם אחד מכל אלה התנאים, לא שרתה בו שכינה, ונפל ביד אויבים, כי אמנם בית שני לא היה ״משכן העדת״, שלא היו בו לוחות העדות, ולא פוקד כי אם על פי כורש (עזרא א׳:א׳-ג׳), ולא היו שם בני לוי, כמו שהעיד עזרא באמרו: ״ואבינה בעם ובכהנים, ומבני לוי לא מצאתי שם״ (שם ח׳:ט״ו), ומן המתעסקים בבנינו היו צידונים וצורים, כמבואר בספר עזרא (ג׳:ז׳).
To sum it up, if it was built by the proper people with the proper levels of kedusha it lasted; if not, not.  The building can only last if its built properly, otherwise it will collapse over time.

The First 7 Days

The pessukim in Ch. 40 tell us on the 8^th day the avodah the mikdash was stood up as a permanent structure and the avodah was done in it.  The Ramban understands that all of the avodah of the ketores, neros etc. was done by Moshe during the first seven days as well.  The Netviz in Haamek Davar and Amek Hanetziv on Sifri Nasso disagrees and cites a Toseftah in Menachos 7:2 to support his view that only the mizbaoch hachitzon to offer korbanot was used during the first seven days and the complete avodah was done only on the 8^th day.  The Maharal understands Rashi like the Netziv that the entire chapter is referring to the 8^th day and the avodah wasn’t done during the first seven days (see also Rashi Shemini 9:23 and Sifsai Chachamim there.)  The Tosfos we cited earlier in the week that holds during the first seven days the mishkan had the status of a bammah fits better with the Netziv that only korbanot were offered.

The pessukim are clear that the commandment to set up the lechem hapanim and kindle the menorah were directed to Moshe, however it is ambiguous as to who should burn the ketores and offer the korbanot.  According to the Ramban all the avodah of the 8^th day was done by Moshe; he derived from the menorah and the lechem hapanim that he was supposed to do all the avodah.  The Rashbam disagrees and holds that Aharon did the other avodos.  There as a question as to the text in Rashi if in verse 27 he explains that Aharon burnt the ketores. This approach fits well if we assume that Rashi holds like the Netziv for then the korbanot which were offered all 7 days by Moshe, he continued to offer, but the avodah that was done for the first time on day 8 was done by Aharon.

The Rebbe takes the text of Rashi that we have that doesn’t say Aharon offered the ketores.  When Rashi says on 4:29 that Moshe offered all the korbanot tzibbur, more than just the olah and mincha mentioned in the verse, he means to include all the avodah, including the ketores.  How does Rashi see in this verse that the one offering the korbanot it is referring to Moshe? And what is Rashi coming to tell us in his commentary about the ketores that it was offered twice, if he needs to tell us it was done twice, then why doesn’t he explain the menorah was lit in the evening as well?  The Rebbe explains (Likutay Sichos volume 6) that Rashi is coming to say that even though the lighting of the menorah in the morning and the placing of the showbread not on Shabbos was a unique avodah in this situation, the burning of the ketores in the morning qwas done in the normal manner.  Rashi says just as the hatavas hamenorah.  What is his proof?  Just as the hatavas haneros was done every day and this avodah was regular, so too the ketores. [According to this, Rashi holds that all the avodah was done during the 7 days as well.]  Rashi understands that the initial understanding would be that Aharon offered anything that there isn’t an explicit commandment to Moshe.  However, the verse says ויעל את העולה ואת המנחה, the ה' הידיעה indicates the korbanot are known already, they are the same kind of offering as the seven days and therefore Rashi concluded it was Moshe that offered them for only then is it the same as the 7 days.  Once we see Moshe did all the avodah then it is safe to assume he offered the ketores as well.

Permanent Mikdash

Rashi says that the repetition of the word mishkan hints to the destruction of the Temple and the need for it to be inaugurated again in the future.  Why at the inauguration ceremony of the mikdash would we speak of the destruction of the mikdash?  The Rebbe (Likutay Sichos volume 11) explains that the point is the opposite.  The mikdash will be permanent, it is the sins of the people that will lead to its destruction, but the building itself has an eternal power.  Even in its destruction because of an outside factor of sins, it is merely פקודי המשכן, it is a pikadon in the hands of Hashem, but we will get it back.  The power of the mikdash is eternal, it is only temporarily concealed.

What is the symbol that the mikdash is always present?  The Rambam in the 4^th Ch. Of Beis Habechirah brings the whole story of the ark being hidden in the ground.  The achronim ask why does the Rambam cite this, what halacha is to be learnt out from it?  The Rambam writes in the first Ch. That the vessels of the mikdash are part of the mikdash itself.  A mikdash without the כלי מקדש is a lack in the mikdash.  Therefore, the Rambam was bothered how could the second Temple be lacking the ark, it would be an incomplete mikdash?  The Rambam answers that Shlomo originally made a place for the aron to be placed under ground.  See the Rogatchover on the last possuk of the haftorah (Ashkenazic custom) ואשים שם מקום לארון means Shlomo made a place for the aron to be placed underground.   Therefore, when the aron was there it was considered to be in its place and there was nothing lacking from the mikdash.  The Rambam supports this idea that underground is considered the place of the aron and not just a measurement taken for security purposes by citing how Yosheyahu Hamelech hid it even before there was any danger present (Sichos on Hilchos Beis Habechirah.) 

Just as the aron remains in its place, it is just hidden, so too the mikdash is a pikadon that merely needs to be reconstituted.  However, the basis of mikdash, the symbol of the presence of the Shechinah resting there, the aron is always there and remains the same for all of the Battei Mikdash.

Questions On Rashi

Rashi says (39:43)  He said to them, “May it be His will that the Shechinah should rest in the work of your hands. And may the pleasantness of the Lord our God be upon us…” (Ps. 90:17), and this is one of the eleven psalms in “A prayer of Moses” (Ps. 90:1). Why does Rashi need to tell us its one of thew 11 songs Moshe said in Psalms?  Why does Rashi interpret the blessing as a prayer?  Furthermore, Rashi in Shemini (9:23) reverses the order and says And may the pleasantness of the Lord our God be upon us before May it be His will that the Shechinah should rest in the work of your hands.  Why does he switch the order?  And why does he not point out that its in Tehillim over there?
See answers here.

Jumble Of Ideas

A few scattered ideas.

1. The Netziv points out that in regard to the aron and mizbaoch the Torah mentions the בדים (39:35 and 39) as opposed to regarding the shulchan and mizbach ketores (35:36 and 38) the badim aren’t mentioned separately for they are included as part of the כלים.  Why are these בדים  included in the כלים and not those?  He explains that the aron and mizbaoch represent Torah and avodah respectively and by definition those must be portable, no matter where one goes it is the same Torah and avodah.  The shulchan and mizbach ketores represent kehuna and malchus and those powers only exist when Klal Yisroel is in its place, in Eretz Yisroel. 

2. In Titzaveh, 30:1 it says ועשית מזבח מקטר קטורת but in out parsha it says (40:5) מזבח הזהב לקטורת.  Why the additional ל'?  The Meshech Chachma explains Chazal say (Zevachim 59a) מזבח שנעקר מקטירין במקומו.  The Meshech Chachma says that only applies in the מקדש where the place had kedusha as well but in the mishkan that was moved from place to place the rule didn’t apply.  Therefore, when it says the commandment to make the מזבח הזהב  it calls it a מזבח קטורת for that is its name but it’s not necessary for the קטורת, but when discussing the actual placement in the mishkan, it was necessary for the ketores; hence לקטורת.  The Gemorah doesn’t give a source for the din that מזבח שנעקר מקטירין במקומו.  The Meshech Chachma suggests its learnt from the omission of the Torah telling us the ketores must be burnt on the mezbaoch, rather it just says (30:36) it must be לפני אהל מועד.  

3. After every parsha in the Chumash it says the number of pesukkim with a siman.  However, in Pekuday there is no mnemonic to the 92 pesukkim.  Why?  The Rebbe suggested that the mnemonic is בלי כל which has the numerical value of 92 but the one writing it over thought that meant there was no siman and therefore took it out (Likutay Sichos volume 6 pg. 408.)

Eighth Day

Rashi (40:29) says that Moshe served on the 8^th day as well and offered all of the korbanot except for the ones that were commanded to Aharon.  The Maharal asks that in Shemini it is clear that it was Aharon that offered the Rosh Chodesh korban of the day not Moshe?  He answers that that the 8^th day of the mishkan was the day of the changing of the guard.  At the beginning of the day Moshe served until the Shechinah came into the mishkan (Vayikra 9:23) and after that Aharon and his sons took over.  The achronim ask that the Rashi here contradicts what he writes in Zevachim 19b that Moshe and Aharon never served together?  Reb Leeb Malin (volume 2 #12) answers based upon the Maharal that they never served together; Moshe did the avodah in the beginning of the day and then he washed from the keyor and later in the day Aharon washed from the kiyor and did his avodah.

Rav Dovid Solovetchik asks on Rashi on Chumash that he contradicts both opinions of the brasia in Zevachim 102a if Moshe had the status of a kohan only during the seven days of the מלואים or for his whole lifetime?  Possibly according to the Maharal it isn’t difficult for the beginning of the 8^th day has the status of the שבעת ימי מלואים and that is included in the opinion that Moshe was a kohan for 7 seven days. 

The Keren Orah (Zevachim 19b) and Chashek Shlomo (Taanis 11b) ask according to the opinion of Tosfos Avodah Zarah (34a) that during the first seven days the mishkan had the status of a bammah and therefore he didn’t need garments of kehunah, then why did he have to wash his hands from the kiyor as it says 40:31?  They answer according to Rashi on Chumash that Moshe also served on the 8^th day, it is only on that day that he required to wash from the kiyor and he would have to wear garments of kehunah.  [See the Rogatchover.]  However, according to the Maharal, this answer is insufficient for the beginning of the 8^th day is the 7^th day.

The Gemorah in Zevachim (ibid) says that the additional washings the kohan gadol has to do on Yom Kippur aren’t מעכב.  The Gemorah asks if so, even the first kiddush of the day shouldn’t be מעכב and it answers from the verse in our parsha (40:31) that there is a hekesh from Aharon to his children that just as kiddush yedayim v’raglayim is necessary for every kohan, so too for the kohan gadol.  Why does the Gemorah need a new source that the kiddush should be מעכב even by the kohan gadol, why would he be different than any other kohan?  The Briskor Rav explained based upon his yesod (see here) that the kiddush of the kohan gadol on Yom Kippur is a requirement for the avodas hayom, distinct from the regular obligation (ויש כמה נ"מ עיין בחי' ר' דוד ואכ"מ,) that the Gemorah is asking that how do we know that this additional din is מעכב.  The Gemorah knew that he must do kiddush yedayim v’raglayim just like any other kohan, it wants to know a source that it is required because of the avodas hayom.  The Gemorah cites the hekesh from this week’s parsha, why didn’t it cite the verse in Ke Sesa 30:19 which is the commandment to Aharon and his son’s to be mekadesh yedayim v’raglayim?  Rav Leeb Malin (ibid) explains that the Gemorah wants to bring a verse that we see that something which is the avodah of the kohan gadol like Yom Kippur has to have the kiddush done and therefore cites the verse in our parsha which is on the 8^th day, when Aharon is doing his inauguration avodah.