Shabbat Parashat Vayakhel | 5768
Vayakhel | 24 Adar I 5768 | 01/03/2008
The Torah relates: “Every man and woman whose heart volunteered (nadav) them… brought a donation (nedava) to Hashem” (Shemot 35:29). The midrash (Shemot Rabba 48:8) says that the donation was a remedy for the spiritual destruction brought on by the sin of the Golden Calf. It connects the good will that flowed from this event to the pasuk from the haftara of Shuva: “I will forgive their iniquity; I will love them voluntarily (nedava)” (Hoshea 14:5). The midrash says that Moshe pleaded to Hashem to hold off on destroying the nation and let them prove themselves with donations to build the Mishkan, as they redeemed the sin of giving nezamim (nose rings) for the Calf by giving nezamim for the Mishkan. What is the significance behind the nezem that makes its use such a fitting atonement?
If one’s parent died in the month of Adar in a simple year (with one Adar), when does he observe yahrtzeit in a leap year? Is the answer the same for the bar mitzva of a boy born in a simple year who turns 13 in a leap year?
Heaven forbid that the Torah should contain something that contradicts a proof or a clear sign, but the Torah does bring miracles, changes in the way things are created, and one object turning into another. This comes to demonstrate the Creator’s wisdom and His ability to do what He desires when He desires it. The question of whether the world started with creation or whether it preexisted is deep, and the two sides’ proofs are equal. It is decided in favor of creation from new by the tradition from Adam, Noach, and Moshe, through prophecy that is more reliable than any comparison.
The defendant (=def) hired the plaintiff (=pl) to do excavating and dirt filling work at a building site for a set price. Def told pl that he should follow the architect’s instructions regarding all elements of his work. After doing arguably a complete job, pl asked the architect if he was finished with his work; he replied that he had, and so pl left with all of his heavy equipment. Therefore, he demands to be paid in full. Def claims that after measuring the site, it was clear that pl had not completed the job. The architect said that he had not been aware that pl was to follow his instructions and thus he had not meant to determine that pl had completed his responsibilities. Def had to make other arrangements to have the work finished and therefore wants to reduce the amount coming to pl.
This edition of Hemdat Yamim is dedicated in loving memory of
R ' Meir ben Yechezkel Shraga Brachfeld
Hemdat Yamim is endowed by Les & Ethel Sutker of
Max and Mary Sutker
and Louis and Lillian Klein, z”l.
A weekly divrei Torah leaflet: A Glimpse at the Parasha, Ask the Rabbi, From the writings of Harav Avraham Yitzchak Hakohen Kook, zt”l, Pninat Mishpat (Jewish Monetary Law).