Difference between revisions of "Half Shekels – For Census or Tabernacle/2"
>Import script (Original Author: Neima Novetsky, Rabbi Hillel Novetsky) |
>Import script (Original Author: Neima Novetsky, Rabbi Hillel Novetsky) |
||
Line 76: | Line 76: | ||
<point><b>"כִּי תִשָּׂא"</b> | <point><b>"כִּי תִשָּׂא"</b> | ||
<ul> | <ul> | ||
− | <li>Rashbam appears to view the census as a by product of the collection; once Moshe was gathering the people to collect donations, he was told to also count them.<fn>The language of "כִּי תִשָּׂא" does not support this understanding as it connotes both an ongoing and intentional commandment, not something that is simply an afterthought relating to a | + | <li>Rashbam appears to view the census as a by product of the collection; once Moshe was gathering the people to collect donations, he was told to also count them.<fn>The language of "כִּי תִשָּׂא" does not support this understanding as it connotes both an ongoing and intentional commandment, not something that is simply an afterthought relating to a one time event. One would have also expected the order of the verses to be reversed, with the request for shekalim preceding the counting.</fn></li> |
− | <li>Abarbanel and Hoil Moshe view the counting as a ploy by which to ensure that enough contributions were made for the Tabernacle. <fn>Hoil Moshe posits that the verses are achronological and occurred after the sin of the Golden Calf. He suggests that Moshe desired to count the remaining members of the nation and 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. The opening "כִּי תִשָּׂא" then, does not have to refer to an ongoing obligation but is rather Hashem's suggestion to Moshe regarding his immediate actions | + | <li>Abarbanel and Hoil Moshe view the counting as a ploy by which to ensure that enough contributions were made for the Tabernacle.<fn>Hoil Moshe posits that the verses are achronological and occurred after the sin of the Golden Calf. He suggests that Moshe desired to count the remaining members of the nation and 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. The opening "כִּי תִשָּׂא" then, does not have to refer to an ongoing obligation but is rather Hashem's suggestion to Moshe regarding his immediate actions – "when you count, [make sure to do so via shekalim]". Abarbanel similarly views Hashem's words to Moshe as "good advice" ("עצה הגונה") rather than an actual command to take a census. He understands the word "כִּי" to mean "בעבור" and suggests that Hashem is saying "since you desire to count [do it in the following way]".</fn></li> |
</ul> | </ul> | ||
</point> | </point> | ||
− | <point><b>"וְלֹא יִהְיֶה בָהֶם נֶגֶף בִּפְקֹד אֹתָם"</b> – 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. Abarbanel asserts that a direct headcount might lead to plague due to the "evil eye. | + | <point><b>"וְלֹא יִהְיֶה בָהֶם נֶגֶף בִּפְקֹד אֹתָם"</b> – 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. Abarbanel asserts that a direct headcount might lead to plague due to the "evil eye".<fn>Such a fear exists only in cases where a count is not commanded by Hashem.</fn></point> |
<point><b>"עֲבֹדַת אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד"</b> – According to this approach, this refers to the initial building of the Tabernacle. </point> | <point><b>"עֲבֹדַת אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד"</b> – According to this approach, this refers to the initial building of the Tabernacle. </point> | ||
<point><b>Censuses in Bemidbar 1 and 26</b> – No shekel donations are mentioned since regular censuses do not require such a contribution.<fn>Abarbanel asserts that in censuses mandated by Hashem there is no fear of an "evil eye" since if Hashem commands the count, he will surely protect the nation.</fn></point> | <point><b>Censuses in Bemidbar 1 and 26</b> – No shekel donations are mentioned since regular censuses do not require such a contribution.<fn>Abarbanel asserts that in censuses mandated by Hashem there is no fear of an "evil eye" since if Hashem commands the count, he will surely protect the nation.</fn></point> |
Version as of 04:29, 14 February 2014
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 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 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 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.
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 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 generations37 whereas the command to give half shekels for the Tabernacle was a one time command for the generation of the desert.38
- Sin of pride – Ramban40 asserts that David's census did actually involve a collection of shekalim,41 but a plague came nonetheless since David had no purpose in the counting and was thus culpable of a certain hubris.42
- 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.43