Page 298 - 24107

Orchard of Delights
downfall. Or in other words, Moses was seeking to understand why
God acquiesces to the existence of evil in the world.
In fact, this was not the first time Moses had seemingly challenged
God on this matter. Pharaoh’s harsh initial reaction to Moses’ request
to “let my people go” apparently disappointed him, so he turned to
God and exclaimed the following: “‘My Lord why have You done
evil to this people, why have You sent me? And from when I came to
Pharaoh to speak in Your Name he did evil to this people, but You
did not save Your people’” (Exodus 5:22-23).
As Rabbi Yitzchak Ginsburgh explains, Moses’ query is surprising
since God had already told him at the burning bush that Pharaoh
would not listen until He afflicted Egypt with plagues. Clearly,
Moses understood the overall theological paradigms at work: exile
and redemption, light coming out of darkness, the need to sometimes
descend in order to ascend, and the nature of Divine trials crafted
to bring out the best in human beings. So what then was he asking?
Moses was actually asking the deepest existential question possible:
Why did God, Who is all powerful and could create any form of reality
He wished, choose such paradigms incorporating exile, darkness, and
suffering for human development? Here too, the Slonimer Rebbe
notes that Moses was asking God why He had arranged reality to
include evil when He could have done otherwise.
Part of God’s answer to Moses’ request to see His glory was soon
in coming: “you will see My back, but My face may not be seen”
(Exodus 33:18). This enigmatic statement informs Moses that human
beings, in the present state of reality, cannot entirely fathom the
need for and ultimate purpose of evil in the world. Metaphorically,
seeing God’s face would have meant fully understanding how and
why the world operates as it does. This revelation, God tells Moses,
will only be available in the future.
Support for Rabbi Ginsburgh and the Slonimer Rebbe’s
interpretation of Moses question may be derived from another
question Moses asks God a bit earlier: “And now if I have indeed
found favor in Your eyes – make Your ways known to me” (Exodus
33:13). The Talmud interprets Moses’ request as a bid to comprehend
why sometimes the evil prosper and the righteous suffer. Ultimately,
298
Vayakhel # 24107
#
perspectives, from the very practical to the mystical, from the
literal to the allegorical. PaRDeS allows us to delve ever deeper and
consistently expand upon the notion of what, according to the peshat,
is merely an assembly of the people, but from the perspectives of derash
and sod is an allusion to deep visions of the unity of the people.
££The Tabernacle’s Thirteen Materials
£The Tabernacle’s Thirteen MaterialsThe Tabernacle’s Thirteen Materials
In Judaism, there is a legal and philosophical concept called chazakah,
a term which itself comes from the Hebrew root word for “strong”:
if an action is performed three times, a presumption of permanence,
consistency, and strength is created. Given the importance of learning
according to the PaRDeS system and our having used this system in
the two previous sections, we will now employ PaRDeS a third time
to explain the number of different materials used in the Tabernacle’s
construction. By repeating this model of learning again, we hope to
leave a permanent impression on the reader, so that this interpretive
paradigm becomes his or her automatic way of analyzing and delving
into the Torah text.
According to Rashi and the straightforward peshat there were
thirteen types of materials employed in the Tabernacle’s construction.
Among these materials were various metals (gold, silver, and copper), 24107-EYAL - 24107-EYAL | 10 - B | 18-01-28 | 12:12:04 | SR:-- | Magenta #24107-EYAL - 24107-EYAL | 10 - B | 18-01-28 | 12:12:04 | SR:-- | Yellow 24107-EYAL - 24107-EYAL | 10 -
precious stones, wood (for the beams), textiles made from wool and
linen that were dyed different colors, animal skins, oil, and spices.
These materials were listed once in the portion of Terumah and are
enumerated in Vayakhel again.
Both the Torah and the Kabbalah treat thirteen as a highly
symbolic number; thus the level of remez naturally alludes to other
instances of the number thirteen. Perhaps the most important allusion
is to the Thirteen Principles of Compassion revealed to Moses by God
after the sin of the Golden Calf. In the previous section, we explained
that the Tabernacle itself is a partial rectification for the Golden Calf;
311