Difference between revisions of "Half Shekels – For Census or Tabernacle/2"
(Original Author: Neima Novetsky, Rabbi Hillel Novetsky) |
(Original Author: Neima Novetsky, Rabbi Hillel Novetsky) |
||
Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
<point><b>The "evil eye" and natural order</b> – Shadal expounds at length on how Hashem built in to the laws of nature that man's arrogance will bring about his downfall. This phenomenon, he explains, was commonly misattributed to the harmful effects of the "evil eye".</point> | <point><b>The "evil eye" and natural order</b> – Shadal expounds at length on how Hashem built in to the laws of nature that man's arrogance will bring about his downfall. This phenomenon, he explains, was commonly misattributed to the harmful effects of the "evil eye".</point> | ||
<point><b>One-time protection for all-time</b> – According to Shadal, the half-shekels were given on this one occasion only.<fn>Shadal deduces from the obligation described in the subsequent verses to utilize the silver for the construction of the Mishkan (a one-time event), that the entire command applied only on this one occasion. This is also supported by the fact that, in contrast to the surrounding units (Shemot 30:8,21,31), the Torah here makes no mention of the obligation being "לְדֹרֹתֵיכֶם". Additionally, as noted below, the giving of half-shekels never appears in any subsequent Biblical census. However, other exegetes (see below) dispute both Shadal's interpretation that "עֲבֹדַת אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד" refers to the building of the Tabernacle and his claim that the entire unit of Shemot 30:11-16 constitutes only a single unitary obligation. In fact, in his HaMishtadel, Shadal himself notes that Shemot 30 never mentions the silver sockets (it becomes clear only in <a href="Shemot38-25" data-aht="source">Shemot 38</a> that this donation of silver was used for them), but rather employs a more general description which could include both building as well as ongoing maintenance. Shadal also points out there that the Torah does not specify that the efficacy of this single donation shekalim would endure forever.</fn> As long as the Tabernacle existed, the presence of the half-shekels in its foundations allayed the nation's concerns over the "evil eye", such that they no longer felt a need to make redemption payments during subsequent censuses.<fn>Cf. Chizkuni below "יש מפרשים כל זמן שהמלאכה הנעשית מכסף זה היתה קימת אין צורך לתת כופר פעם אחרת כשיהיו נמנים".</fn></point> | <point><b>One-time protection for all-time</b> – According to Shadal, the half-shekels were given on this one occasion only.<fn>Shadal deduces from the obligation described in the subsequent verses to utilize the silver for the construction of the Mishkan (a one-time event), that the entire command applied only on this one occasion. This is also supported by the fact that, in contrast to the surrounding units (Shemot 30:8,21,31), the Torah here makes no mention of the obligation being "לְדֹרֹתֵיכֶם". Additionally, as noted below, the giving of half-shekels never appears in any subsequent Biblical census. However, other exegetes (see below) dispute both Shadal's interpretation that "עֲבֹדַת אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד" refers to the building of the Tabernacle and his claim that the entire unit of Shemot 30:11-16 constitutes only a single unitary obligation. In fact, in his HaMishtadel, Shadal himself notes that Shemot 30 never mentions the silver sockets (it becomes clear only in <a href="Shemot38-25" data-aht="source">Shemot 38</a> that this donation of silver was used for them), but rather employs a more general description which could include both building as well as ongoing maintenance. Shadal also points out there that the Torah does not specify that the efficacy of this single donation shekalim would endure forever.</fn> As long as the Tabernacle existed, the presence of the half-shekels in its foundations allayed the nation's concerns over the "evil eye", such that they no longer felt a need to make redemption payments during subsequent censuses.<fn>Cf. Chizkuni below "יש מפרשים כל זמן שהמלאכה הנעשית מכסף זה היתה קימת אין צורך לתת כופר פעם אחרת כשיהיו נמנים".</fn></point> | ||
− | <point><b>"כִּי תִשָּׂא"</b> – Shadal asserts that this refers to a one-time command to count the nation. This census occurred before the building of the Mishkan.<fn>Shadal acknowledges that the language of "כִּי תִשָּׂא" would seem to imply that the command applies specifically in the future (cf. <multilink><a href="ChizkuniShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Chizkuni</a><a href="ChizkuniShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Shemot 30:12</a><a href="ChizkuniShemot30-16" data-aht="source">Shemot 30:16</a><a href="R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach (Chizkuni)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="RambanShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Shemot 30:12</a><a href="RambanBemidbar1-3" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 1:3</a><a href="RambanBemidbar16-21" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 16:21</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe Nachmanides</a></multilink>). However, he states that he is forced to conclude otherwise because of the concluding verse of the unit – see the analysis above.</fn></point> | + | <point><b>"כִּי תִשָּׂא"</b> – Shadal asserts that this refers to a one-time command to count the nation. This census occurred before the building of the Mishkan.<fn>Shadal acknowledges that the language of "כִּי תִשָּׂא" would seem to imply that the command applies specifically in the future (cf. <multilink><a href="ChizkuniShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Chizkuni</a><a href="ChizkuniShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Shemot 30:12</a><a href="ChizkuniShemot30-16" data-aht="source">Shemot 30:16</a><a href="R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach (Chizkuni)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="RambanShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Shemot 30:12</a><a href="RambanBemidbar1-3" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 1:3</a><a href="RambanBemidbar16-21" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 16:21</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe Nachmanides</a></multilink>). However, he states that he is forced to conclude otherwise because of the concluding verse of the unit – see the analysis above.</fn></point> |
<point><b>Why now?</b> Shadal explains that the census is being taken at this point because the people have just become a nation,<fn>According to Shadal the total from this census is provided in <a href="Shemot38-25" data-aht="source">Shemot 38</a>. He asserts that this census is distinct from the one described in detail in Bemidbar 1, despite the fact that their totals are precisely the same. See his discussion in Bemidbar 1:46 for his explanation of the coincidence of the identical totals. For a broader analysis of the issue as a whole, see <a href="Censuses in the Wilderness" data-aht="page">Censuses in the Wilderness</a>.</fn> and it is a mere coincidence that it occurs before the building of the Mishkan.<fn>Shadal would maintain that the command is located in the midst of the instructions regarding the Mishkan since the proceeds benefited the Mishkan. However, this was just a collateral benefit, not the primary objective of the census.</fn></point> | <point><b>Why now?</b> Shadal explains that the census is being taken at this point because the people have just become a nation,<fn>According to Shadal the total from this census is provided in <a href="Shemot38-25" data-aht="source">Shemot 38</a>. He asserts that this census is distinct from the one described in detail in Bemidbar 1, despite the fact that their totals are precisely the same. See his discussion in Bemidbar 1:46 for his explanation of the coincidence of the identical totals. For a broader analysis of the issue as a whole, see <a href="Censuses in the Wilderness" data-aht="page">Censuses in the Wilderness</a>.</fn> and it is a mere coincidence that it occurs before the building of the Mishkan.<fn>Shadal would maintain that the command is located in the midst of the instructions regarding the Mishkan since the proceeds benefited the Mishkan. However, this was just a collateral benefit, not the primary objective of the census.</fn></point> | ||
<point><b>"עֲבֹדַת אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד"</b> – According to Shadal, this terms refers to the one-time labor of constructing the Tabernacle,<fn>Cf. Shemot 39:32 and many other verses.</fn> and not to its ongoing upkeep.<fn>See Shadal in <multilink><a href="HaMishtadelShemot30-12" data-aht="source">HaMishtadel</a><a href="HaMishtadelShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Shemot 30:12</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. S.D. Luzzatto</a></multilink> who discusses whether the phrase "‏וְהָיָה לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לְזִכָּרוֹן לִפְנֵי ה'‏" must imply that the contributions were used for an everlasting part of the Mishkan's structure, and cf. Cassuto below.</fn> The half-shekels collected in the census were used for fashioning the silver sockets, as described in <a href="Shemot38-25" data-aht="source">Shemot 38</a>. However, Shadal emphasizes that the obligation to give was not motivated by a need for donations.<fn>Shadal argues against Abarbanel who views the collection as part of a plan to ensure that enough silver was collected, pointing out that the nation brought more than enough of every other material, so there should have been no concern that there would be a shortage of silver. According to Shadal, the only reason the shekels were incorporated into the foundations of the Tabernacle was so that there would be no future worries about the "evil eye" (at least as long as the Tabernacle was in existence).</fn></point> | <point><b>"עֲבֹדַת אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד"</b> – According to Shadal, this terms refers to the one-time labor of constructing the Tabernacle,<fn>Cf. Shemot 39:32 and many other verses.</fn> and not to its ongoing upkeep.<fn>See Shadal in <multilink><a href="HaMishtadelShemot30-12" data-aht="source">HaMishtadel</a><a href="HaMishtadelShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Shemot 30:12</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. S.D. Luzzatto</a></multilink> who discusses whether the phrase "‏וְהָיָה לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לְזִכָּרוֹן לִפְנֵי ה'‏" must imply that the contributions were used for an everlasting part of the Mishkan's structure, and cf. Cassuto below.</fn> The half-shekels collected in the census were used for fashioning the silver sockets, as described in <a href="Shemot38-25" data-aht="source">Shemot 38</a>. However, Shadal emphasizes that the obligation to give was not motivated by a need for donations.<fn>Shadal argues against Abarbanel who views the collection as part of a plan to ensure that enough silver was collected, pointing out that the nation brought more than enough of every other material, so there should have been no concern that there would be a shortage of silver. According to Shadal, the only reason the shekels were incorporated into the foundations of the Tabernacle was so that there would be no future worries about the "evil eye" (at least as long as the Tabernacle was in existence).</fn></point> | ||
Line 116: | Line 116: | ||
<multilink><a href="RadakShemuelII24-1" data-aht="source">Radak</a><a href="RadakShemuelII24-1" data-aht="source">Shemuel II 24:1</a><a href="RadakMelakhimII12-5" data-aht="source">Melakhim II 12:5</a><a href="RadakDivreiHaYamimII24-6" data-aht="source">Divrei HaYamim II 24:6</a><a href="R. David Kimchi (Radak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Kimchi</a></multilink>, | <multilink><a href="RadakShemuelII24-1" data-aht="source">Radak</a><a href="RadakShemuelII24-1" data-aht="source">Shemuel II 24:1</a><a href="RadakMelakhimII12-5" data-aht="source">Melakhim II 12:5</a><a href="RadakDivreiHaYamimII24-6" data-aht="source">Divrei HaYamim II 24:6</a><a href="R. David Kimchi (Radak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. David Kimchi</a></multilink>, | ||
<multilink><a href="ChizkuniShemot30-16" data-aht="source">Chizkuni</a><a href="ChizkuniShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Shemot 30:12</a><a href="ChizkuniShemot30-16" data-aht="source">Shemot 30:16</a><a href="R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach (Chizkuni)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach</a></multilink>, | <multilink><a href="ChizkuniShemot30-16" data-aht="source">Chizkuni</a><a href="ChizkuniShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Shemot 30:12</a><a href="ChizkuniShemot30-16" data-aht="source">Shemot 30:16</a><a href="R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach (Chizkuni)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach</a></multilink>, | ||
− | <multilink><a href="RambanShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Shemot 30:12</a><a href="RambanBemidbar1-3" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 1:3</a><a href="RambanBemidbar16-21" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 16:21</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe Nachmanides</a></multilink>, | + | <multilink><a href="RambanShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Shemot 30:12</a><a href="RambanBemidbar1-3" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 1:3</a><a href="RambanBemidbar16-21" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 16:21</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe Nachmanides</a></multilink>, |
− | <multilink><a href="RalbagShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href="RalbagShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Shemot 30:12,15-16</a><a href="RalbagShemot30T1" data-aht="source">Shemot 30, Toalot 1-2</a><a href="RalbagBemidbar1-1" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 1:1-3</a><a href="RalbagShemuelII24-1" data-aht="source">Shemuel II 24:1</a><a href="RalbagMelakhimII12-5" data-aht="source">Melakhim II 12:5</a><a href="RalbagNechemyah10-33" data-aht="source">Nechemyah 10:33</a><a href="RalbagDivreiHaYamimII24-5" data-aht="source">Divrei HaYamim II 24:5-7</a><a href="RalbagDivreiHaYamimII24T13" data-aht="source">Divrei HaYamim II 24, Toelet 13</a><a href="R. Levi b. Gershon (Ralbag)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Levi b. Gershon</a></multilink>, | + | <multilink><a href="RalbagShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href="RalbagShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Shemot 30:12,15-16</a><a href="RalbagShemot30T1" data-aht="source">Shemot 30, Toalot 1-2</a><a href="RalbagBemidbar1-1" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 1:1-3</a><a href="RalbagShemuelII24-1" data-aht="source">Shemuel II 24:1</a><a href="RalbagMelakhimII12-5" data-aht="source">Melakhim II 12:5</a><a href="RalbagNechemyah10-33" data-aht="source">Nechemyah 10:33</a><a href="RalbagDivreiHaYamimII24-5" data-aht="source">Divrei HaYamim II 24:5-7</a><a href="RalbagDivreiHaYamimII24T13" data-aht="source">Divrei HaYamim II 24, Toelet 13</a><a href="R. Levi b. Gershon (Ralbag, Gersonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Levi b. Gershon</a></multilink>, |
<multilink><a href="MinchahShemot30-13" data-aht="source">Minchah Belulah</a><a href="MinchahShemot30-13" data-aht="source">Shemot 30:13</a><a href="R. Avraham Porto (Minchah Belulah)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham Porto</a></multilink>, | <multilink><a href="MinchahShemot30-13" data-aht="source">Minchah Belulah</a><a href="MinchahShemot30-13" data-aht="source">Shemot 30:13</a><a href="R. Avraham Porto (Minchah Belulah)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Avraham Porto</a></multilink>, | ||
<multilink><a href="GraShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Vilna Gaon (GR"A)</a><a href="GraShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Aderet Eliyahu Shemot 30:12</a><a href="R. Eliyahu Kramer (Vilna Gaon – GR"A)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Eliyahu Kramer</a></multilink>, | <multilink><a href="GraShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Vilna Gaon (GR"A)</a><a href="GraShemot30-12" data-aht="source">Aderet Eliyahu Shemot 30:12</a><a href="R. Eliyahu Kramer (Vilna Gaon – GR"A)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Eliyahu Kramer</a></multilink>, |
Version as of 04:54, 1 January 2015
Half Shekels – For Census or Tabernacle?
Exegetical Approaches
Overview
Commentators disagree over the circumstances which mandate the donations detailed in Shemot 30:12-16. One group of commentators explain that the census is the determining factor. Within this option, Shadal maintains that half-shekels were given only in the very first census in the wilderness, while Rashi asserts that a similar procedure was followed in subsequent countings as well.
A second category of exegetes argues that support of the Mishkan or Mikdash is the main purpose, and that there is no need to give during a census. This approach also divides, with Josephus positing that the verses describe a one-off contribution to build the Mishkan, and R. Saadia claiming that the Torah is speaking of an annual obligation to support Hashem's Sanctuary. Finally, some commentators suggest that both a census and the Mishkan play a role, with Chizkuni positing that a combination of both a census and a capital campaign was required for there to be an obligation to donate, and Ramban concluding that either factor alone could suffice.
Census Focused
Shemot 30:12-16 commands Moshe to conduct a census using shekalim, rather than through a simple headcount. While the proceeds are used for the Tabernacle, this is not the main objective, and the Torah is not mandating a regular donation to the Mikdash.
One-time Obligation
These verses were an instruction on only a single occasion in the wilderness to count the nation via the giving of half-shekels. All future censuses, in contrast, do not require a similar donation.
All Future Censuses
These verses constitute an enduring ordinance that all future censuses be performed through the counting of donated items such as half-shekels, rather than via a forbidden headcount.
Mishkan Contributions
The Torah is mandating financial support for the Mikdash, and a census is merely a vehicle through which this is achieved.
One-time Building Fund
The verses in Shemot 30 were an ephemeral command to donate for the construction of the Tabernacle, and this was in effect only during the first year in the wilderness. This obligation does not apply to future generations.
Ongoing Maintenance
These verses are an eternal mitzvah to provide annual support for the Mishkan or Mikdash.
Combination of Factors
Both the need for a census and the requirement to support the Mishkan/Mikdash are involved in the obligation to give the half-shekels. Commentators discuss whether both factors must be present, or whether each factor suffices on its own.
- A periodic obligation – According to Chizkuni, the two commands are connected and relate to only certain periods in history. Any time that there is both a need to count and a need to build a Tabernacle/Temple, one must do so through a half shekel donation.
- Both are ongoing – Ramban asserts that there is both an ongoing obligation to give a half shekel whenever there is a census and a separate annual obligation to contribute shekalim to the Mikdash.
- One and one – According to the GR"A, the command to give some sort of redemptive object when counting is an ongoing obligation for future generations,40 whereas the command to give half shekels for the Tabernacle was a one time command for the generation of the desert.41
- Sin of pride – Ramban43 asserts that David's census did actually involve a collection of shekalim,44 but a plague came nonetheless since David had no purpose in the counting and was thus culpable of a certain hubris.45
- Lost protection – Chizkuni argues that the plague came because the silver from the Tabernacle was no longer around to protect during a census.
- No ransom – According to the GR"A, the plague came because David did not count in the proper way, and did not collect some redemptive object.46