Half Shekels – For Census or Tabernacle/2

Half Shekels – For Census or Tabernacle?

Exegetical Approaches

THIS TOPIC IS CURRENTLY IN PROGRESS!

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 view also divides, with Rashbam 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 requiring a combination of both a census and a capital campaign to create an obligation to donate, and Ramban concluding that each factor alone warrants a collection.

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 for 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.

Sources: ShadalShemot 30:12About R. S.D. Luzzatto¹

"כִּי תִשָּׂא" – Shadal asserts that this was a one-time command² to count the nation via half-shekels.³ The census is being taken at this point, as the people have just become a nation.

Concern of a plague – Shadal asserts that a census can often lead to feelings of self-confidence and hubris ("כֹּחִי וְעֹצֶם יָדִי") which, in turn, brings about punishment and devastation. The people viewed these consequences as being the result of the "evil eye," an erroneous notion that God did not correct.⁴ As such, Hashem told them to bring a half-shekel which could act as an atonement and save them from any negative repercussions of the counting.⁵⁶

Why only one time? The donations were used to build the Tabernacle which was then able to provide protection against any negative consequences from future censuses.⁷

"עֲבֹדַת אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד" – The monies collected were used for the original construction of the Tabernacle. The requirement was not motivated by a need for donations,⁸ and was not mandated for any future upkeep. "עֲבֹדַת אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד", thus, refers not to maintenance and continued service in the Tabernacle, but to the initial building.

Censuses in Bemidbar 1 and 26 – In both of these censuses, the nation was not counted via half-shekels, and thus none are mentioned.

Shaul's censuses – These do not mention a half-shekel, as none were needed. He would likely explain both "בָזֶק" and "טְּלָאִים" as names of places.

David's census and Divine punishment – David was punished not because he did not count via shekalim but because he counted without good reason, just for his own glorification.⁹

Contributions mandated by Yoash – Shadal might propose that this was a special command of Yoash to bring donations for renovations of the Temple. Yoash is upset not because the people are not fulfilling a Torah prescription, but because of the lack of contributions. It is possible that he refers to these monies as "מַשְׂאַת מֹשֶׁה" not because they were originally mandated by Moshe, but to give more credence to his request, and to compare them to the nation's original donations to the Tabernacle.

One-third shekel donation in Nechemyah – This donation has nothing to do with a census but was rather a decision by the nation to contribute yearly to the Temple.

The custom of giving half-shekels –

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.

Sources: RashiShemot 30:12Shemot 30:15Shemot 30:16Bemidbar 1:2Shemuel I 11:8Shemuel I 15:4About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki, HaKetav VeHaKabbalahShemot 1:1About R"Y Mecklenburg, Shadal in his HaMishtadelShemot 30:12About R. S.D. Luzzatto,¹⁰ U. CassutoShemot 30:12About U. Cassuto

"כִּי תִשָּׂא" – Rashi reads this phrase as a command to immediately count the people. According to Rashi, these verses are out of chronological order and were told to Moshe only after the sin of the Golden Calf.¹¹ He explains that since many people had just died as a punishment for their idolatry, a census was required. Rashi further states that the total from this census is transmitted in Shemot 38:26.¹²

Concern of a plague – Rashi explains that a simple headcount without using shekalim might bring on an "עין הרע" ("evil eye"), and this could result in a plague.

Censuses in Bemidbar 1 and 26 – Rashi states that the census in the second year in the wilderness was also performed using shekalim.¹³

Shaul's censuses – According to Rashi, both of Shaul's counts utilized objects, rather than simply counting the people themselves. He reads "בְּבָזֶק" and "בַּטְּלָאִים", as the names of those objects.

David's census and Divine punishment – Rashi understands that a plague came in the time of David because he counted the people without using shekalim.

"עֲבֹדַת אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד" – The silver collected from the census in the first year was used for the silver sockets of the Tabernacle. Thus, for Rashi, "עֲבֹדַת" refers to the construction work of the Mishkan, rather than its ongoing service.

Contributions mandated by Yoash –

One-third shekel donation in Nechemyah –

The custom of giving half-shekels –

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 a transient 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.

Sources: JosephusAntiquities 3:8:2 (194-196)Antiquities 18:9:1 (312)About Josephus, RashbamShemot 30:12Shemot 35:1About R. Shemuel b. Meir, AbarbanelShemot 30 Questions 1-4Abarbanel Shemot 30:11-14Abarbanel Shemot 30:15Abarbanel Bemidbar 1:2About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel,¹⁴ Hoil MosheBemidbar 1:2About R. Moshe Yitzchak Ashkenazi

Qumran 4Q159

Why only one time? Most of these commentators maintain that the collection was required for the initial construction of the Tabernacle, and as such was a one time donation. According to Qumran 4Q159, in contrast, every individual is simply required to give a once in a lifetime contribution.¹⁵

"כִּי תִשָּׂא"

• Rashbam appears to view the census as a by product of the collection; once Moshe was gathering the people to collect donations, he also counted them.¹⁶
• Hoil Moshe, who posits that the verses are achronological and occurred after the sin of the Golden Calf, proposes that Moshe desired to count the remaining members of the nation. Hashem saw this as an opportunity to collect money which could serve as an atonement for their sin and be used to build the Tabernacle.¹⁷

Concern of a plague – Hoil Moshe views the shekalim as atonement for the sin of the Golden Calf, and might suggest that without them, the nation would have deserved further punishment. The others do not address the issue.

"עֲבֹדַת אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד" – According to most of the commentators, this refers to the initial building of the Tabernacle. According to Qumran 4Q159, in contrast, it refers to ongoing service.

Censuses in Bemidbar 1 and 26 – No shekel donations are mentioned since regular censuses do not require such a contribution.

Shaul's censuses – Shaul did not count via shekalim since there is no obligation to do so.

David's census and Divine punishment – Hoil Moshe asserts that David is punished for the actual counting, not for the fact that he did so without taking some redemption from the people.¹⁸ As David's decision to count stemmed from a desire for honor and had no other utility, it deserved punishment.¹⁹

Contributions mandated by Yoash – This approach could suggest that Yoash, on his own, requested contributions for the upkeep of the Mikdash, unconnected to any Torah obligation.²⁰

One-third shekel donation in Nechemyah – This can be viewed as a new obligation taken by the people upon themselves after returning to Israel. Presumably, they were influenced by the original donations given in Shemot.²¹

The custom of giving half-shekels – This approach would assert that this is simply a custom, likely learned from the original contributions for the Tabernacle.

Ongoing Maintenance

These verses are an eternal mitzvah to provide annual support for the Mishkan or Mikdash.

Sources: Talmud BavliYoma 22bMegillah 29bAbout the Bavli, R. Saadia GaonCommentary Shemot 30:11Cited by Ibn Ezra Shemot Long Commentary 30:12About R. Saadia Gaon, Ibn EzraShemot Long Commentary 30:12Shemot Long Commentary 30:16Shemot Short Commentary 30:12Shemot Short Commentary 30:16About R. Avraham ibn Ezra

"כִּי תִשָּׂא" – Though the phrase refers to an annual counting of the people, what is actually being mandated is an annual giving of half shekels, through which the nation's number will be known. The census is really a means to an end.

Concern of a plague – The plague results from a laxity in giving contributions to the Tabernacle or Temple and is unrelated to the census.²²

"עֲבֹדַת אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד" – This refers to the general upkeep and ongoing service of the Temple, including provisions for the sacrifices and the like.²³

Census in Pekudei –

Censuses in Bemidbar 1 and 26 – As there is no obligation to count via shekalim, none are mentioned in these censuses.

Shaul's censuses – Here, too, there is no mention of shekalim since they are not a requirement for counting.

David's census and Divine punishment – R. Saadia asserts that David erroneously believed that the plague resulted from his counting, when in reality it was due to a different sin altogether, the nation's participation in Avshalom's rebellion.

Contributions mandated by Yoash – This story serves as the basis for this position. R. Saadia Gaon and Ibn Ezra prove from Yoash's rebuke to the nation "מַדּוּעַ לֹא דָרַשְׁתָּ עַל הַלְוִיִּם לְהָבִיא מִיהוּדָה וּמִירוּשָׁלִַם אֶת מַשְׂאַת מֹשֶׁה" that the annual contributions are mandated by Moshe in the Torah.

One-third shekel donation in Nechemyah – According to R. Saadia this was an additional third beyond the half shekel mandated by the Torah. As the returning nation was small in number, they realized that the temple expenses would not be covered if each just gave a half shekel.²⁴

The custom of giving half-shekels – According to R. Saadia, this is not just a custom, but a Torah-mandated law.

Polemical motivations – R. Saadia may be motivated by a desire to find explicit support in Torah for the Rabbinic position regarding annual contributions to the Temple, in order to counter the arguments of the Karaites who claimed that there was no such obligation.

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.

Sources: ChizkuniShemot 30:12Shemot 30:16About R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach, RambanShemot 30:12Bemidbar 1:3Bemidbar 16:21About R. Moshe Nachmanides, Minchah BelulahShemot 30:13About R. Avraham Rappo of Porto, Vilna Gaon (GR"A)Aderet Eliyahu Shemot 30:11About R. Eliyahu Kramer, MalbimShemot 30:12About R. Meir Leibush Weiser

One time or ongoing?

• A periodic obligation – According to Chizkuni, the two commands are connected and relate to various generations. Any time that there is both a need to count and a need to build a Temple/tabernacle, 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 Temple.
• 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 generations²⁵ whereas the command to give half shekels for the Tabernacle was a one time command for the generation of the desert.²⁶

Why only one time?

"כִּי תִשָּׂא" – – According to this approach, the command to give something (either shekalim or another redemptive object) when counting is an ongoing one. The language "when you count" can be understood in its simple sense.

Concern of a plague – Though not mentioned explicitly, this approach apparently assumes that counting people directly somehow results in a plague.

"עֲבֹדַת אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד" – According to Ramban this refers to maintenance of the Mikdash , while according to Chizkuni and the Gr"a it refers to the actual building of the Tabernacle/ Temple.

Census in Pekudei –

Censuses in Bemidbar 1 and 26 – Chizkuni asserts that no redemption was necessary as the silver from the first census was still in use in the Tabernacle. Ramban, in contrast, maintains that half shekels were collected during these censuses even though they are not mentioned in the verses.²⁷

Shaul's censuses – The Gr"a maintains that any redemptive object can be used when counting and would likely explain "טְּלָאִים" as lambs and "בָזֶק" as another object.²⁸ According to Chizkuni, it is possible that the protection afforded by the Tabernacle was still in effect and so nothing was needed when counting.

David's census and Divine punishment – Ramban²⁹ asserts that David's census did actually involve a collection of shekalim,³⁰ but a plague came nonetheless since David had no purpose in the counting and was thus culpable of a certain hubris.³¹ According to the Gr"a, in contrast, the plague came because David did not count in the proper way, and did not collect some redemptive object.³² Chizkuni argues that the plague came because the silver from the Tabernacle was no longer around to protect during a census.

Contributions mandated by Yoash – According to Ramban, this is related to the annual contribution that is mandated by the Torah. The others might suggest that this was the king's personal request of the nation.

One-third shekel donation in Nechemyah – Ramban asserts that this was an additional contribution above the half shekel as there were extra expenses when the nation returned from exile.³³ The other commentators might suggest that it was simply an innovation of the people.

The custom of giving half-shekels – According to Ramban this is Biblically mandated, while according to the Gr"a it is הלכה למשה מסיני.

¹ In his earlier work, HaMishtadel, Shadal adopted a somewhat different position – see below.

² This is 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". Shadal acknowledges that the language of "כִּי תִשָּׂא" would seem to imply that the command applies for all times (cf. ChizkuniShemot 30:12Shemot 30:16About R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach and RambanShemot 30:12Bemidbar 1:3Bemidbar 16:21About R. Moshe Nachmanides). However, he deduces from the obligation described in the subsequent verses to utilize the silver for the construction of the Mishkan, that the entire command was for one-time only. See below that other exegetes dispute both his interpretation of "עֲבֹדַת אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד" and his claim that the entire unit of Shemot 30:11-16 must be understood to refer to only a single obligation.

³ According to Shadal the total from this census is provided in Shemot 38. 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 Censuses in the Wilderness.

⁴ Shadal asserts that sometimes Hashem does not correct the nation's misconceptions, as long as they benefit the people. In this case, since the error leads the nation away from trust in the self and to a reliance on God and belief in His providence, Hashem does not totally uproot it.

⁵ While the people saw this as protection from the evil eye, it protected them from the harmful effects of self-glorification when counting.

⁶ Shadal expounds at length on how Hashem built in to the laws of nature that man's arrogance will bring about his downfall. He also asserts that the Children of Israel viewed these consequences as being the result of the "evil eye" ("עין הרע"), and that Hashem viewed the nation's misconception as beneficial for their spiritual development (as it led them away from arrogance and toward a reliance on God and belief in His providence), and thus did not totally uproot it. See About Shadal for other examples of this phenomenon.

⁷ As long as the Tabernacle existed, its very presence provided any necessary atonement so no future redemptions were needed when counting.

⁸ Shadal argues against Abarbanel who views the collection as part of plan to ensure that enough money is collected, pointing out that the nation brought more than enough of every other material so there would have been no fear that they would not have provided enough silver as well. The shekels were used for the Tabernacle just to prevent the need for other redemptions during future censuses.

⁹ Shadal further proposes that at this juncture David collected donations for the Mikdash, which could then serve as future atonement.

¹⁰ See above that Shadal's later Commentary on the Torah reflects a shift in his position.

¹¹ See Chronology of Shemot 19-34.

¹² The total population in this census matches the total given for the census in Bemidbar 1. Since Rashi maintains that these were two different censuses, he must explain the coincidence of the identical totals as well as the need for both. See Rashi Shemot 30:16, and see Censuses in the Wilderness.

¹³ He would presumably hold the same position regarding the count in the fortieth year.

¹⁴ Cf. Akeidat YitzchakShemot #52 Questions 1-4About R. Yitzchak Arama.

¹⁵ It is not clear when this was given, but presumably at some point after the person reached the age of twenty.

¹⁶ The language of "כִּי תִשָּׂא" does not support this understanding as it suggests that there is some original desire to count the nation, and that it is not simply an afterthought.

¹⁷ This works better with the opening "כִּי תִשָּׂא". According to Hoil Moshe, Hashem is saying to Moshe, "when you count the nation" (as you desire) use it as a way of collecting redemptive monies.

¹⁸ He points out that Yoav chides the king on the cencus itself and makes no mention of David not using shekalim.

¹⁹ Compare to Shadal above who explains similarly.

²⁰ As above, it is possible that Yoash refers to these monies as "מַשְׂאַת מֹשֶׁה" to give more credence to his request, and to compare them to the original donations to the Tabernacle, but not because they were commanded by Moshe.

²¹ Since there is no Torah obligation, they could choose whatever amount they wanted. It is possible that much of the population was poor, and so a lower number was set.

²² One can count without fear of repercussion even if no redemptive money is collected. Conversely, even if one counts via shekalim, if no monies were donated to the Temple, plague might result.

²³ R. Saadia points to the similar language in Yehoshua 22:27, "לַעֲבֹד אֶת עֲבֹדַת ה' לְפָנָיו בְּעֹלוֹתֵינוּ וּבִזְבָחֵינוּ וּבִשְׁלָמֵינוּ" where עבודה explicitly refers to sacrifices.

²⁴ He supports the idea that this was an additional obligation taken upon the people by themselves from the language in Nechemyah 10:33, ""וְהֶעֱמַדְנוּ עָלֵינוּ מִצְוֹת לָתֵת עָלֵינוּ שְׁלִשִׁית הַשֶּׁקֶל בַּשָּׁנָה

²⁵ Since the Gr"a maintains that the census in the desert only took place in the second year, he can not say that the first verse applies to the present. This leads him to separate it from the rest of the section.

²⁶ The Gr"a sees the unit as being composed of two distinct sections. While verse 12 is a command aimed at future generations, the rest of the unit is aimed only at the generation of the desert. As such, the collection of shekalim relates only to the Tabernacle donation, while future cenuses mandate any redemptive object.

²⁷ He suggests that the language of "תפקדו אותם" rather than simply "תמנו" hints to this as it connotes a certain watching over.

²⁸ Ramban??

²⁹ See his comments in Bemidbar 1.

³⁰ he finds it inconceivable that david would not be aware of the prohibition, or that Yoav, who was upset at the request, would not have corrected this aspect himself. moreover, he points to the usage of the word "מפקד" as support that the census was done via objects.

³¹ In his comments in Shemot, in contrast, Ramban suggests that David did not know that the law was for all generations and thus erred.

³² This is not explicit in his comments but appears to be what he is suggesting.

³³ Compare with the similar explanation of R. Saadia above.