‘…command the Children of Israel… for all time’ (Tetzaveh)

 Last week (Parshat Terumah) I argued that the Mishkan was never meant to be a temporary sanctuary. That, indeed, it was designed primarily for its future use in the Land of Israel where it would travel from tribe to tribe, allowing even the most far-flung communities to enjoy an equal opportunity to connect with God and energize themselves spiritually. Hence the Mishkan was at once both modest and glorious, designed to perfection yet perfectly portable.

Furthermore, this was why the Kohanim and Leviim were granted no property, as it was their roll to travel with the Mishkan in order to serve the People, rather than become an entrenched power base subject to corruption.

I argued, moreover, that the construction of the first Temple was the trigger for the ruination of a united Israel and the permanent loss of 10 out of 12 tribes within one generation of Shlomo’s grandiose temple project.

Indeed, there would never have been a temple to begin with had the Jews listened to the Torah and not requested a king in the first place; let alone a king whose grotesquely lavish lifestyle and enormous harem flew in the face of what the Torah had demanded of a king, should the Israelites insist on having one.

I received some predictable criticism from my frumdamentalist friends who refused to accept that Shlomo was anything but a paragon of spirituality and virtue. As well, they bombarded me with Midrashim that would “prove” that God had always intended a permanent Beit HaMikdash on the very site that Shlomo selected for this purpose. And, as a final note, they argued that the word מקדש in the verse ועשו לי מקדש ושכנתי בתוכם  (Shemot 25:8) refers to the Beit Hamikdash. This, of course, is absurd on its face.  The word ‘mikdash’ simply means ‘sanctuary’. In no way does it imply stones, mortar and a permanent base of operation. This, aside from the fact that the verse is specifically referring to the Mishkan.

Then they demanded of me proof that the Mishkan was not merely a temporary sanctuary for use until the Temple could be built. “Why doesn’t the Torah tell us this?” they asked. But then, why should the Torah tell us something that is patently self-evident? It never occurs to the Torah to tell us otherwise. The Torah never even hints at any grand structure in a future city called Jerusalem that would replace the Mishkan.

Then I remembered the first two verses of the next Parsha, Tetzaveh, which concerns the lighting of the Menorah, arguably the most central implement in the Mishkan, the one that would be a permanent source of illumination:

וְאַתָּ֞ה תְּצַוֶּ֣ה ׀ אֶת־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֗ל וְיִקְח֨וּ אֵלֶ֜יךָ שֶׁ֣מֶן זַ֥יִת זָ֛ךְ כָּתִ֖ית לַמָּא֑וֹר לְהַעֲלֹ֥ת נֵ֖ר תָּמִֽיד׃ בְּאֹ֣הֶל מוֹעֵד֩ מִח֨וּץ לַפָּרֹ֜כֶת אֲשֶׁ֣ר עַל־הָעֵדֻ֗ת יַעֲרֹךְ֩ אֹת֨וֹ אַהֲרֹ֧ן וּבָנָ֛יו מֵעֶ֥רֶב עַד־בֹּ֖קֶר לִפְנֵ֣י יְהֹוָ֑ה חֻקַּ֤ת עוֹלָם֙ לְדֹ֣רֹתָ֔ם מֵאֵ֖ת בְּנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵֽל׃ {ס}

And you (Moshe) command the Children of Israel to bring you clear oil from pressed olives for lights, to kindle an eternal flame IN THE TENT OF MEETING (i.e. Mishkan) From evening to morning, before the Lord, Aharon and his sons shall set it up to  outside the curtain that veils the Ark of Testimony. THIS SHAL BE A RULE FOR ALL TIME  throughout the generations from the Children of Israel.
(Shemot/Exodus 27: 20-21)

Could the Torah be any more explicit regarding its expectations? IN THE MISHKAN … FOR ALLL TIME. Here the Torah does not use the word “mikdash” lest latter day frumdamentalists might misconstrue that for something other than the Mishkan. No, the Torah says “בְּאֹ֣הֶל מוֹעֵד֩” which is clear-cut, unambiguous. In other words, the Israelites are commanded to have the Menorah burning IN THE MISHKAN … FOR ALL TIME.

Clearly it was a colossal error for the Mishkan to languish in Shiloh for 239 years when it should have been traveling through the Land of Israel.

Clearly it was a colossal mistake to ignore the Torah’s wishes and demand a king.

Clearly it was a colossal sin for the king to live in a manner that flouted the Torah’s limitations on the monarchy.

Celarly it was a colossal blunder to mothball the Mishkan and replace it with a permanent Beit HaMikdash which would glorify the king more than it would glorify God.

All of the above would, inevitably result is a corrupt relationship between the monarchy and the priesthood and cause the utter decimation of the Israelite nation. Indeed, had we remained 12 united tribes by way of a circulating Mishkan and an uncorrupted priesthood there might never have been a first exile, let alone a second one

We can see all this clearly from the vantage point of time.  And, perhaps, instead of dreaming of another monstrosity (like the Temple built by that monster Herod), we should yearn for a beautiful but modest Mishkan making its way around Israel thereby connecting us all as equals on a level spiritual playing field called Eretz Israel.

You may also be interested in my earlier essays on Parshat Tetzaveh from 2016 and 2018

1.

Giving the everyman – and woman – a chance to contribute

http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/parshat-tetzaveh-giving-the-everyman-and-woman-a-chance-to-contribute/ .

2.

Who does the kohen serve, and why we should listen to our hearts

http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/parshat-tetzaveh-who-does-the-kohen-serve-and-why-we-should-listen-to-our-hearts/ .