Nasoi 2025 - Separation, elevation

 

Nasoi 2025

Contents

Nasoi 2025.. 1

Overview... 1

Series of Themes: 2

The Priestly Blessing. 2

The Mishkan and the Temple. 2

Law and Justice, and Special Occasions. 2

All Holidays. 3

And the difficulty with all these “miracle stories”?. 3

When should one start to worry?. 3

On the Second Topic, Gershon and Merari: 3

 

 

Overview

Paraschas נָשֹׂ֗א is particularly notable because the dedication of the Mischkan, which was only briefly mentioned as a fact in Pekudei, is described here in detail. This description consists of a very long repetition of the same text for the gifts of the tribal leaders on the occasion of the dedication.
Twelve times—for each tribe and tribal leader separately—the exact same gift is described in detail.
This is quite extraordinary, considering that elsewhere in the text (e.g., with Sarah – Sarai), a single letter is debated and searched for.

The sequence of themes in the text is also interesting.
(It should be noted that for each of the points listed below, there is one or more Masechtes (tractates) in the Talmud! And each of them can easily be studied for years before one even begins to grasp what is truly contained within.)

First comes the story of Gerschoin and Merari, whose census actually belongs to the previous Parsha but is treated separately here.
Then follows a series of seemingly entirely different themes (Masechtes on the topic in parentheses):

1.       Zorua, Sav, and Tomei Meis – Those with tzaraat, those with discharge, and those defiled by the dead (various Masechtes).

2.       What to do if someone unintentionally ate or used something sanctified (Me´ila).

3.       The unfaithful wife – Sotah (Sotah).

4.       The Nazir – a special vow (a specific type of promise to HaShem, similar to but not identical with an oath) to abstain from grapes and wine for a limited time, to let the hair grow, and to draw closer to G0d through partial separation (Nazir, Nedarim).
Then comes the Priestly Blessing, truly the highlight, at least from the perspective of recent generations.
Finally, the description of the dedication offerings of the twelve tribes for the Mischkan follows.

One of the central themes running throughout is the Mischkan and its pivotal role in all aspects of Jewish life.
Another theme is:
Various Types of Separation
Gerschoin and Merari:
What is separated here?
Kli Yakar writes: Logically, Gerschoin, as the firstborn, should have been counted first among the Levites, singled out due to his special rights as the firstborn.
But instead, Kehat was counted first. Why?
Because Kehat carried the Aron HaKodesh, the Holy Ark with the Tablets and the Torah inside.
We learn from this that, unlike kingship or inheritance, which are reserved for the firstborn, the Torah is for everyone, and those who study it and toil with it receive its crown—set apart for HaShem.

Series of Themes:
Group 1 is separated due to various forms and degrees of ritual impurity.
Group 2, concerns someone who takes something designated for HaShem for themselves (Me’ila)—a sacrifice, tithes (to the Levites and Kohanim), or an object designated for the Mischkan. This is a form of misappropriation and must be corrected.
Point 3, marital infidelity—or jealousy over suspected infidelity—is fitting here, as marriage is also a form of separation, both for the spouses toward each other and for HaShem.
HE is the one who forms and unites marriages, and when infidelity occurs, it is not only a betrayal of the spouse but also of HIM, just as with a sacrifice, tithes, or an object designated for the Mischkan.
Point 4, the Nazir, is someone who chooses to dedicate themselves specifically to HaShem—an act that is highly debated in Scripture, as one should not separate from the community, even for the sake of drawing closer to G0d. Closeness is achieved, on the contrary, through seeking community in prayer, learning, and fulfilling commandments.
Nevertheless, the holy Torah provides a framework for someone to temporarily dedicate themselves to HaShem to seek special closeness (my thought on why: with the goal of better integrating into the community, as, hopefully, this period brings greater clarity about one’s relationship with HaShem, oneself, and the community).

The Priestly Blessing
The Kohanim are authorized to bless the entire nation and individuals in HaShem’s name, and HaShem says: You speak the words and raise your hands, and I guarantee that I will bless, at all times, until the end of time.
This blessing has endured through all destructions and persecutions. We recite it over our children; we receive it from our Kohanim in the houses of worship.
This, too, is a form of separation: HaShem “turns His face to you and grants you peace/wholeness.” What more could a person desire than for the Creator of the world to turn to them and grant them peace? What a special relationship this signifies!
And the most beautiful part: We are all, each one of us, special and set apart for peace with HaShem, as individuals and as a nation.
The question: What is still special about me if everyone else is also special? If everyone is an exception, where is the rule?
This is an old and fascinating question. It might be answered, like other miracles, as follows: Just as every oak leaf in the history of the world is unique in shape, color, and development, so too is every person. There are commonalities, but there are also unique qualities that only this person, at this time, in this place, can and must bring. For this, they were born. And for this, they are blessed.

The Mishkan and the Temple
We have already mentioned several times how extraordinarily important the theme of the Mishkan and the Temple is in the Chumash. It dominates more than a quarter of the entire text.
In this Parsha, we see again how central all areas of life continually return to the Mishkan.

Tum´a und Tahara (Impurity and Purity)
Firstly, no one in a state of Tum’a, ritual impurity, may approach the Mishkan.
This topic is as extensive as it is important, and the various degrees and types of Tum’a are complex.
As mentioned elsewhere, today we no longer have a sense or understanding of it. However, when the Temple stands, knowing and practicing Tum’a and Tahara can be a matter of life and death.

Law and Justice, and Special Occasions
At the Mishkan, legal norms are taught and interpreted.
And for almost every occasion life brings, the Mishkan and its offerings ultimately play a central role:
If someone experiences a miracle or has reason for great joy and gratitude, they bring a Todah (thanksgiving offering) or a Shelamim (peace offering), both of which must be eaten within a short time. Since even a nuclear family, even with ten children, cannot eat a cow or a sheep so quickly, they must invite many people. This prompts the question: “What happened? Tell us!” And so, HaShem’s name is praised and magnified in the community, strengthening its bond.
If someone has an issue or laws have been violated between man and G0d or man and man, there are court proceedings, meetings with Kohanim or Moshe, and ultimately, a sacrifice may be required, possibly along with other actions. But all this takes place at the Mishkan, and later at the Temple.

All Holidays
All holidays include Temple service, including Shabbat. This means: at the latest, every Shabbat and on all high holidays, everyone gathers at the Mishkan.
How does this work? As we’ve discussed before: In the Mishkan and the Temple, different laws of nature apply than outside. Time, space, and spacetime are flexible and malleable. We don’t know how.
At a certain level of Kedusha, the relationships of spacetime to the world change, making things possible that seem impossible in our lower, physically-oriented state.
Even in exile, there are many stories about our great sages where the laws of nature suddenly no longer function as usual.
All the more so in the Mishkan or Temple, where the Kedusha is far, far higher!

And the difficulty with all these “miracle stories”?
The problem is that we immediately focus on the unusual effects, exclaiming “Ah” and “Oh,” and completely miss the central point: the Kedusha! The closeness to HaShem! The love for our Father. These are the cause and the essence. The altered realities are side effects, results, not the main point!

When should one start to worry?
Somewhere in our writings, someone said: Our sages of blessed memory, when did they begin to worry? When they went an entire day without seeing a miracle! For then they knew that their Kedusha, their closeness to HaShem, had diminished.

On the Second Topic, Gershon and Merari:
נָשֹׂ֗א אֶת־רֹ֛אשׁ בְּנֵ֥י גֵרְשׁ֖וֹן גַּם־הֵ֑ם לְבֵ֥ית אֲבֹתָ֖ם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָֽם׃
Raise the heads of the sons of Gershon and Merari, also they, according to the houses of their fathers, by their families.

Kli Yakar

(22) נשא את ראש בני גרשון – He should have counted the sons of Gershon, the firstborn, first, and regarding the explanation offered in Midrash Rabbati (6:1), that because the transport of the Holy Ark (Ark of the Covenant) was entrusted to Kehat, they were counted first in honor of the Ark, this itself raises the question: Why was the Holy Ark not entrusted to the firstborn to honor the chosen strength of the Torah, in which the right of the firstborn is defined?
And it seems to me to say that the Holy One, blessed be He, wanted to show that the wise inherit honor (based on Mishlei 3:35). Indeed, it was so that the people should be taught to honor those who study the Torah and to call the holy ones of the Lord honored [alluding to Isaiah 58:13], to give them precedence in all matters of holiness. This was done by counting Kehat first because they carried [the Ark with] the word of the Lord. Had the Ark been given to Gershon, the firstborn, and his family counted first, one might think he was counted first due to his birthright, and the task of carrying the Ark would not have been given significance. Therefore, the Ark was given to Kehat, and they were counted first, so that all would know to give honor to the Torah and those who study it.

אך מדסמך בעל המדרש ענין זה לפסוק יקרה היא מפנינים (משלי ג׳:ט״ו) כדאיתא ברבתי ודאי כוונתו להורות שכתר תורה הפקר לכל וע״כ לא ניתן הארון אל הבכור שלא יהיה תפארתו לומר אני ראוי לכתר תורה יתר מזולתי אלא הכל שוין בה לכך נאמר יקרה היא מפנינים.

But since the author of the Midrash connects this matter to the verse “she is more precious than pearls” (Mishlei 3:15), as stated in Rabbati, it is clear that the intention is to teach that the crown of the Torah is freely available to all. Therefore, the Ark was not entrusted to the firstborn, so he could not boast, saying, “I am, by virtue of my birth, more suitable and worthy than my brothers to bear the crown of the Torah.” On the contrary, all are equal before it, and thus it is said, “and she is more precious than pearls.”

היינו מכ״ג שנכנס לפני ולפנים כי לכתר כהונה אין זוכה כ״א מי שהוא מזרע אהרן אבל כתר תורה הפקר לכל והכל זוכין אליו, ויקרה היא מפנינים, מכתר מלכות שיש לו זהב ורב פנינים ואין זוכה בו כ״א מי שהוא מזרע דוד אבל לכתר תורה הכל זוכין ומטעם זה דרש ברבתי יקרה היא מפנינים מן הבכורה כד״א וזאת לפנים בישראל, (רות ד׳:ז׳) כי אל הבכורה אין זוכה כ״א מי שנולד ראשונה אבל לתורה הכל זוכין.


This means (more precious than) the High Priest who enters the Holy of Holies, for the crown of the priesthood is only earned by one descended from Aaron. But the crown of the Torah is freely available to all, and all can earn it, and it is more precious than pearls; more precious than the crown of kingship, which contains gold and many pearls and is only earned by one descended from David. But the crown of the Torah is for all, and for this reason, Rabbati taught, “she is more precious than pearls,” meaning more than the birthright, as it is written, “and so this was formally established in Israel” (Ruth 4:7); for the birthright is reserved for the firstborn, but the Torah is for all.

ד״א לכן לא ניתן משא הארון אל הבכור שלא תזוח דעתו עליו ביותר. וי״א הטעם לפי שמן קהת יצאו משה ואהרן מקבלי התורה
Alternatively, it is explained: Moshe did not give the Ark to the firstborn so that he would not become arrogant. Others say it is because Moshe and Aaron, the recipients/transmitters of the Torah, descended from Kehat.

. גם הם – בב׳ תיבות אלו חתם הענין לומר שעל כל פנים יספור תחילה את בני קהת ואח״כ יספור וימנה את בני גרשון גם הם, ואלמלא מקרא זה כתוב היה אפשר לומר שרצונו ית׳ למנות בני גרשון תחילה כי הוא הבכור ומה שצוה תחילה שימנה את בני קהת לא כדי להקדימו במספר אלא בעבור חשיבת הארון הזכירו תחילה, שכן מצינו במשכן וכליו שבראש כל אמר ועשו ארון עצי שיטים (שמות כ״ה:י׳). ואחר כך הזכיר המשכן, ובעשייתם עשה בצלאל תחילה משכן ואח״כ כלים, א״כ ודאי מה שהזכיר הארון תחילה לא כדי להקדימו בעשייה אלא לכבוד הארון וחשיבתו הקדימו, כך הייתי אומר שלכבוד הארון שהיה משא בני קהת הקדים תחילה מינוי של בני קהת אבל לעולם כשיבא משה לישא את ראשם ימנה הבכור כבכורתו תחילה, ת״ל נשא את ראש בני גרשון גם הם.


Also they – with these two words, the matter is settled, meaning: In any case, the sons of Kehat were counted first, and afterward, the sons of Gershon, also they. Had this verse not been written, one could have said: The intention of the Blessed One was to count Gershon first because he is the firstborn. The fact that the counting of the sons of Kehat is mentioned first is due to the Ark, not to command an actual counting at that time but to emphasize the importance of the Ark by mentioning it first. This is as we find with the Mishkan and its components, where it first says, “and they shall make an Ark of acacia wood” (Shemot 25:10), and only afterward mentions the Mishkan. But in the actual construction, Bezalel made the Mishkan first and then the components (the entire contents of the Mishkan). Thus, it is certain that the Ark was not mentioned first to command its prior construction but to honor the Ark and emphasize its importance. Similarly, one might say that Kehat’s counting was mentioned first to honor the Ark, but it is guaranteed that Moshe would come and count the firstborn first. Therefore, the Scripture says: And the heads of the sons of Gershon, also they, count.

משמע שמתחילה תשא את ראש בני קהת ואחר כך ראש בני גרשון כי כל גם מוסיף על ענין ראשון בא.
This implies that first, the heads of the sons of Kehat were raised, and afterward, the heads of the sons of Gershon, for everything builds on the first.

ונאמר לשון נשא בבני קהת ובבני גרשון, ולא בבני מררי, לפי שהיה לשניהם מעלה ביתר שאת על בני מררי, קהת מצד משא הארון וגרשון מצד הבכורה, ועוד שמשאו היה יותר מקודש מן משא בני מררי שהיה הפחות שבכולם, ע״כ לא הזכיר אצלו לשון נשא, ובזה אתי שפיר ג״כ מה שאמר גם הם ולא אמר גם אותם אלא שר״ל הלא גם המה יש להם יתרון אשר מצדו הם ראוין לנשיאת ראש והיינו הבכורה כאמור.


And the word “raise” is used for Kehat and Gershon but not for the sons of Merari, because both have an elevated status over Merari: Kehat because of the Ark they carry, and Gershon because of his birthright. Furthermore, his role in the transport was more sacred than any of Merari’s, whose role was the least honorable of all. Therefore, the word “raise” is not used for him, and this also beautifully explains why it says “also they” and not “also these,” to emphasize, “behold, they too have a merit that calls for their elevation, for they come from the firstborn, as mentioned.”

ומטעם זה נאמר בכ״מ למשפחותם לבית אבותם. חוץ מבני לוי שנאמר בהם פקוד את בני לוי לבית אבותם למשפחותם. (במדבר ג׳:ט״ו) וכאן נאמר נשא את ראש בני גרשון גם הם לבית אבותם למשפחותם טעם אחד לשניהם כי הבכורה באה לאדם מצד אבותיו אם הוא כחו וראשית אונו, וכשבא להחליף הלוים בבכורים הזכיר בלוים לבית אבותם כאילו היו המה הבכורים אשר מעלתם תלויה בבית אבותם, וכן כאן אמר נשא את ראש בני גרשון הבכור גם הם ר״ל גם הם יש להם מעלה ומה היא המעלה לבית אבותם, היינו הבכורה המתיחסת לבית אבותם. ואם נפשך לומר שהקדמת לבית אבותם שייך דווקא אצל הבכורים ולא אצל הלוים אז נוכל לומר שלכך הזכיר אצל הלוים לבית אבותם למשפחותם. להורות שימנה גם בכורי הלוים כי סד״א מאחר שדיו לבכור שיפקיע את עצמו מן הפדיון לא נתנו בכורי הלוים תחת בכורי ישראל וא״כ אין צורך למנותם בחנם, קמ״ל פקוד את בני לוי לבית אבותם שאפילו הבכורים שמעלתם מבית אבותם יספור וימנה כי אע״פ שאינן בכלל פדיון הבכורות מ״מ הם בכלל מינוי עבודת המשכן וכליו.


For this reason, it is said in several places, “according to their families, according to their fathers’ houses.” Except for the Levites, where it says, “Count the sons of Levi according to their fathers’ houses, according to their families” (Bamidbar 3:15). And here it says, “Raise the heads of the sons of Gershon, also they, according to their fathers’ houses, according to their families.” The reason for both is the same: The birthright comes to a person from their fathers, as it is their strength and the beginning of their vigor. When the Levites were substituted for the firstborn, “according to their fathers’ houses” was mentioned for the Levites, as if they were the firstborn, whose merit depends on their fathers’ houses. Similarly, here it says, “Raise the heads of the sons of Gershon, also they,” meaning they too have a merit. And what is this merit? “According to their fathers’ houses,” that is, the birthright, which relates to their fathers’ houses.
If you wish to say that mentioning “according to their fathers’ houses” is specifically relevant to the firstborn and not to the Levites, then we can say that this is why “according to their fathers’ houses, according to their families” was mentioned for the Levites. This shows that the firstborn of the Levites should also be counted. One might think that since it is enough for a firstborn to exempt themselves from redemption, the firstborn of the Levites were not given in place of Israel’s firstborn and thus need not be counted. Therefore, it teaches us, “Count the sons of Levi according to their fathers’ houses,” that even the firstborn, whose merit comes from their fathers’ houses, should be counted and mustered. For although they are not included in the redemption of the firstborn, they are still included in the counting for the service of the Mishkan and its components.

 

 

No comments:

Post a Comment