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.)
No comments:
Post a Comment