Difference between revisions of "Shabbat Table Topics – Parashat Pekudei/0/en"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m |
|||
| (5 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
<page type="Basic"> | <page type="Basic"> | ||
<h1>Shabbat Table Topics – Parashat Pekudei</h1> | <h1>Shabbat Table Topics – Parashat Pekudei</h1> | ||
| − | |||
<category>Identical Tallies | <category>Identical Tallies | ||
| − | Shemot 38 speaks of the half shekel donations contributed | + | <p><a href="Shemot38-25" data-aht="source">Shemot 38:25</a> speaks of the half shekel donations contributed for the construction of the Tabernacle, and through which the nation was counted. Surprisingly, the head count reached is identical to the tally of the census in <a href="Bemidbar1-46" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 1:46</a> which took place only in the second year in the Wilderness.</p> |
<ul> | <ul> | ||
<li>How can this be?  Were there no deaths or births in the interim?  Moreover, considering that only a few months separated the two events, why were two censuses necessary at all?</li> | <li>How can this be?  Were there no deaths or births in the interim?  Moreover, considering that only a few months separated the two events, why were two censuses necessary at all?</li> | ||
| − | <li>U. Cassuto uses knowledge of Ancient Near Eastern censuses to suggest that  the two events were were both part of a single extended process which started with the building of the Tabernacle.  R"Y Bekhor Shor agrees that there was only one census, but suggests that it occurred only in the beginning of the second year in Bemidbar 1.  He claims that the half shekels of Parashat Ki Tisa played no role in counting the nation and were solely for the building of the Mishkan.  What are the advantages and disadvantages to each approach?  See Censuses in the Wilderness and Half Shekels – For Census or Tabernacle?</li> | + | </ul> |
| + | <ul> | ||
| + | <li><multilink><a href="UCassutoShemot38-25" data-aht="source">U. Cassuto</a><a href="UCassutoShemot38-25" data-aht="source">Shemot 38:25</a><a href="Prof. Umberto Cassuto" data-aht="parshan">About Prof. Umberto Cassuto</a></multilink> uses knowledge of Ancient Near Eastern censuses to suggest that  the two events were were both part of a single extended process which started with the building of the Tabernacle.  <multilink><a href="RYosefBekhorShorShemot38-25" data-aht="source">R"Y Bekhor Shor</a><a href="RYosefBekhorShorShemot38-25" data-aht="source">Shemot 38:25</a><a href="R. Yosef Bekhor Shor" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor</a></multilink> agrees that there was only one census, but suggests that it occurred only in the beginning of the second year in Bemidbar 1.  He claims that the half shekels of Parashat Ki Tisa played no role in counting the nation and were solely for the building of the Mishkan.  What are the advantages and disadvantages to each approach?  See <a href="Censuses in the Wilderness" data-aht="page">Censuses in the Wilderness</a> and <a href="Half Shekels – For Census or Tabernacle" data-aht="page">Half Shekels – For Census or Tabernacle?</a></li> | ||
</ul> | </ul> | ||
</category> | </category> | ||
Latest revision as of 07:24, 23 August 2019
Shabbat Table Topics – Parashat Pekudei
Identical Tallies
Shemot 38:25 speaks of the half shekel donations contributed for the construction of the Tabernacle, and through which the nation was counted. Surprisingly, the head count reached is identical to the tally of the census in Bemidbar 1:46 which took place only in the second year in the Wilderness.
- How can this be? Were there no deaths or births in the interim? Moreover, considering that only a few months separated the two events, why were two censuses necessary at all?
- U. Cassuto uses knowledge of Ancient Near Eastern censuses to suggest that the two events were were both part of a single extended process which started with the building of the Tabernacle. R"Y Bekhor Shor agrees that there was only one census, but suggests that it occurred only in the beginning of the second year in Bemidbar 1. He claims that the half shekels of Parashat Ki Tisa played no role in counting the nation and were solely for the building of the Mishkan. What are the advantages and disadvantages to each approach? See Censuses in the Wilderness and Half Shekels – For Census or Tabernacle?
