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 47: | Line 47: | ||
</mekorot> | </mekorot> | ||
<point><b>"כִּי תִשָּׂא"</b> – Rashi interprets this phrase to refer to any occasion on which the people are counted.</point> | <point><b>"כִּי תִשָּׂא"</b> – Rashi interprets this phrase to refer to any occasion on which the people are counted.</point> | ||
− | <point><b>Why now?</b> According to Rashi, a census was required at this juncture since many people had just died as a punishment for | + | <point><b>Why now?</b> According to Rashi, a census was required at this juncture since many people had just died as a punishment for the sin of the Golden Calf. This is consistent with Rashi's position that all of Shemot 25-31 is not recorded in chronological order and the Mishkan instructions were transmitted to Moshe only in the aftermath of the Golden Calf.<fn>See Chronology of Shemot 19-34.</fn> Rashi thus maintains that the primary motivation for the donation of the initial half-shekels was the census,<fn>Rashi further states that the total from this census is recorded in Shemot 38:26, and it matches the total population for the census in Bemidbar 1. Since Rashi maintains that these were two different censuses, he attempts (in 30:16) to explain the coincidence of the identical totals as well as the need for both. For elaboration and analysis, see Censuses in the Wilderness.</fn> and not the collection for the building of the Mishkan (which was taking place simultaneously).</point> |
<point><b>"וְלֹא יִהְיֶה בָהֶם נֶגֶף בִּפְקֹד אֹתָם"</b> – Rashi explains that a simple headcount without using shekalim might bring on an "עין הרע" ("evil eye"),<fn>Cf. Bavli Bava Mezia 42a cited by R"Y Bekhor Shor and others.</fn> and this could result in a plague. Rashi views the "evil eye" as a real concern, and not just a figment of the people's imagination.<fn>Cf. Shadal above.</fn></point> | <point><b>"וְלֹא יִהְיֶה בָהֶם נֶגֶף בִּפְקֹד אֹתָם"</b> – Rashi explains that a simple headcount without using shekalim might bring on an "עין הרע" ("evil eye"),<fn>Cf. Bavli Bava Mezia 42a cited by R"Y Bekhor Shor and others.</fn> and this could result in a plague. Rashi views the "evil eye" as a real concern, and not just a figment of the people's imagination.<fn>Cf. Shadal above.</fn></point> | ||
<point><b>Censuses in Bemidbar 1 and 26</b> – Rashi states that the census in the second year in the wilderness was also performed using shekalim.<fn>He would presumably hold the same position regarding the count in the fortieth year.</fn></point> | <point><b>Censuses in Bemidbar 1 and 26</b> – Rashi states that the census in the second year in the wilderness was also performed using shekalim.<fn>He would presumably hold the same position regarding the count in the fortieth year.</fn></point> |
Version as of 18:13, 9 March 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 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 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 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