Rabbi David Etengoff
 
Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon Hakohen, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Shoshana Elka bat Avraham, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, Peretz ben Chaim, the Kedoshim of Har Nof and Pittsburgh, and the refuah shlaimah of Yakir Ephraim ben Rachel Devorah, Mordechai ben Miriam Tovah, and the safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world.
 
The primary focus of our parasha is the illness known as tzaraat. The unique nature of this class of disease is emphasized by the Rashbam (Rabbi Shmuel ben Meir, 1080-1158) in his introduction to our topic:
 
All of the sections dealing with the negayim (afflictions) affecting people, garments, houses and the manner in which they appear as well as the number of days requiring sequestering, the white, black, and golden identifying hairs — may not in any way be understood by following the simple and direct meaning of the text. Neither may we rely upon standard human knowledge and expertise [i.e. current medical information]. Instead, we must follow the analysis (midrash) of the Sages, their decrees, and the inherited body of knowledge that they received from the earliest sages. This is the essence [of this matter]. (Commentary on the Torah, translation and brackets my own)
 
In sum, according to the Rashbam, tzaraat can only be understood from the Torah’s standpoint, rather than from a physiological or medical perspective. This is because its etiology does not follow the normative laws of biology. Instead, it is a spiritually-based ailment that manifests in a physical fashion.
 
The Torah presents us with three types of tzaraat: “If a man has a se’et, a sapahat, or a baheret on the skin of his flesh, and it forms a lesion of tzaraat on the skin of his flesh, he shall be brought to Aaron the kohen, or to one of his sons, the kohanim.” (Sefer Vayikra 13:1, this and all Bible translations, with my emendations, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach)  Midrash Vayikra Rabbah, Tazria 15:9, identifies each of these categories as metaphorically representing one of the ancient nations who either violently injured, or sought to harm, our people. Thus, “Se’et [a rising] is Babylonia... Sapahat [a scab] is [the kingdom of the] Medes... and baharet [a bright spot] is Greece.” (This and the following translation, Darosh Darash Yosef: Discourses of Rav Yosef Dov Halevi Soloveitchik on the Weekly Parashah, Rabbi Avishai C. David editor, pages 227-228) 
 
Our Midrash notes that Haman, who attempted to eradicate our people, was the most infamous member of the ancient Medes: “[The kingdom of the] Medes raised Haman the wicked, who crawled like a snake, as it is written, ‘On your belly you shall go.’” (Sefer Bereishit 3:4)  My rebbe and mentor, Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik zatzal (1903-1993), known as “the Rav” by his students and followers, builds upon our Midrash, and describes Haman in the following fashion:

...[he] slithered like a snake but was puffed up with arrogance. A fawning personality, he lacked dignity. His sycophantic behavior resulted in his becoming prime minister to King Ahashverosh. Yet, Haman was no leader. A weak and spineless man, he used flattery to get ahead. Thinking that it would save his life, he behaved in a servile manner toward Esther even after she exposed him. Like other haughty people, he did not realize how base he was, that he was actually a form of sapahat. (Darosh Darash Yosef, page 231, underlining and italics my own)
 
In the Rav’s view, the haughty and arrogant Haman emerges as a base and slithering being who lacked all manner of dignity — to the extent that “he was actually a form of sapahat.” What does it mean for a person to be a form of sapahat, to be a scab on the body of humanity in general, and an enemy of the Jewish people in particular? The Rav indirectly addresses this question in his analysis of those who demonstrate ga’avah (arrogant pretentiousness) and pursue kavode (in this case, false honor):
​
If, however, one pursues these qualities, then they are false and reprehensible. This is particularly the case if one actively deceives himself and pretends to be someone other than who he really is...The greatest falsehood takes place when a person lies to himself. (Rabbi Yosef Dov Halevi Soloveitchik, Yimei HaZikaron, page 208, Sifiriyat Elinor, editor, translation and brackets my own)
 
Haman is the ultimate example of an individual who “actively deceives himself and pretends to be someone other than who he really is.” He convinced himself that he had geut — grandeur, when in fact, he was merely “puffed up with arrogance” born of self-delusion and grandiose visions. Moreover, the Rav asserts, Haman’s ga’avah was nothing other than “a negative character trait, a form of spiritual tzaraat...Therefore, we must avoid ga’avah and be careful not to behave like Haman, who thought that only he was worthy of honor.” (Darosh Darash Yosef, page 231)  Clearly, for the Rav, Haman epitomized the notion that “the greatest falsehood takes place when a person lies to himself.”
 
The Rav continues his presentation and emphasizes that, in stark contrast to the spiritual tzaraat of ga’avah demonstrated by Haman and others of his ilk, Hashem has true geut and, therefore, must be recognized as He Who acts with grandeur. As King David and Yeshayahu the prophet taught us so long ago:
 
The L-rd has reigned; He has attired Himself with majesty (geut)... (Sefer Tehillim 93:1)
 
In the land of uprightness, he [the evil one] deals unjustly, and he does not see the majesty (geut) of the L-rd. (Sefer Yeshayahu 26:10)
 
Sing to the L-rd for He has performed majestic deeds (geut); this is known throughout the land. (Sefer Yeshayahu, 12:5)
 
As the Rav underscores many times, “The principle of imitatio dei [imitating Hashem’s behaviors] demands that we emulate G-d’s attributes.” (Darosh Darash Yosef, page 231) Therefore, may we always reject ga’avah and the spiritual tzaraat it represents, and embrace the authentic majesty of Hashem and follow in His noble ways. V’chane yihi ratzon. 
 
Shabbat Shalom
 
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org
 
They may also be found on http://www.yutorah.org/ using the search criteria Etengoff and the parasha’s name.
 
The email list, b’chasdei Hashem, has expanded to hundreds of people. I am always happy to add more members to the list. If you have family or friends you would like to have added, please do not hesitate to contact me via email mailto:[email protected].
 
*** My audio shiurim for Women on the topics of Tefilah and Tanach may be found at: http://tinyurl.com/8hsdpyd
 
*** I have posted 164 of Rabbi Soloveitchik’s English language audio shiurim (MP3 format) spanning the years 1958-1984. Please click on the highlighted link.

​Near
 
Rabbi David Etengoff
 
Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon Hakohen, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Shoshana Elka bat Avraham, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, the Kedoshim of Har Nof and Pittsburgh, and the refuah shlaimah of Yakir Ephraim ben Rachel Devorah, Mordechai ben Miriam Tovah, and the safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world.
 
This week’s parasha contains one of the Torah’s most difficult passages:
And Aaron's sons, Nadav and Avihu, each took his pan, put fire in them, and placed incense upon it, and they brought before the L-rd foreign fire, which He had not commanded them. And fire went forth from before the L-rd and consumed them, and they died before the L-rd. (Sefer Vayikra 10:1-2, this and all Bible translations, The Judaic Press Complete Tanach)
Many Talmudic sages, Midrashim and mefarashim (biblical exegetes) struggle to explain this tragedy by diligently searching for clues regarding the improper behaviors that led to Nadav and Avihu’s untimely deaths. One such suggestion is found in Talmud Bavli, Sanhedrin 52a:
Moses and Aaron once walked along, with Nadab and Abihu [k'var - already] behind them, and all Israel following in the rear. Then Nadab said to Abihu, “When will these elderly men die, so that you and I will be the leaders of our generation.” But the Holy One, blessed be He, said unto them: “We shall see who will bury whom.” (Translation, The Soncino Talmud, with my emendations, brackets my own)
 
It should be noted that Rashi (1040-1135) understood this narrative in a very direct fashion, and therefore states: “Because they wanted [to acquire] power and authority [upon the demise of Moshe and Aharon,] they [Nadav and Avihu] died.” (Translation and brackets my own)
 
At first blush, the Talmud’s vignette is exceptionally difficult, since we have an explicit Midrashic passage that teaches us that Nadav and Avihu were greater than both their father, Aharon, and their uncle, Moshe:
Rav Yitzchak began: “Your words were found and I ‘embraced’ them, and Your word was to me a joy and a rejoicing of my heart, for Your name was called upon me, O L-rd G-d of Hosts.” (Sefer Yirmiyahu 15:16)  Rav Shmuel bar Nachman said: “This statement was said to Moshe at Mount Sinai, and he did not understand it until events [i.e. the death of Nadav and Avihu] unfolded before him. Moshe said to Aharon: ‘My brother, at Sinai it was told to me that I would one day sanctify this house [the Mishkan], and that I would do this together with a great man. I initially thought that perhaps this house would be made holy either through my efforts or yours. Now [subsequent to the death of Nadav and Avihu,] I realize that your two sons are greater than both you and myself.’” (Midrash Vayikra Rabbah, Vilna edition, Parashat Shemini 12:2, translation and brackets my own)
 
If, as this Midrash states, Moshe declared to Aharon, “I realize that your two sons are greater than both you and myself,” how is it even remotely possible that, according to the Talmud, Nadav could tell Avihu: “Oh that these old men might die, so that you and I should be the leaders of our generation?” In other words, if Nadav and Avihu had reached such spiritual heights, how could they possibly wish and wait for the demise of Moshe and Aharon?
Given the difficulties inherent in a literal interpretation of the Talmud’s statement, the founder of the Daf Yomi movement, HaRav Meir Shapiro of Lublin zatzal (1887-1933), analyzes this passage in a unique and trenchant manner. He begins by stressing the incredible level of kedushah (holiness) that Nadav and Avihu had achieved, as indicated in the verse: “And the L-rd spoke to Moses after the death of Aaron's two sons, when they drew near before the L-rd, and they died.” (Sefer Vayikra 16:1)  In Rav Shapiro’s view, the underlying reason for their deaths was precisely their unmatched “closeness (hitkarvute) to Hashem, which led to their yearning and longing to be with Him.” (This and the following quotations, Itturei Torah, Sefer Vayikra, Parashat Shemini, s.v. v'tatze aish, pg. 52, Rabbi Aharon Ya’akov Greenberg ed., translations and brackets my own)  Next, he notes that their level of kedushah had not been achieved “overnight.” Rather, “Nadav and Avihu were already walking behind them” over a very significant period of time, in order to “try to ascertain the levels of holiness that they [Moshe and Aharon] had achieved.”  As a result, when they would say to one another, “when will these elderly men die,” Rav Shapiro asserts that they really meant:
At some unknown point in time, the moment will arrive when they [Moshe and Aharon] will depart from this world, and then, it will be incumbent upon us to lead the generation. If that is the case, we must unflaggingly prepare ourselves for that time, so that we can continue to lead this generation in the same manner as Moshe and Aharon...yet, they were unable to do so, since no one ever arose that equaled Moshe’s level [of prophecy], and they died [without achieving their goal].
 
In a very real sense, Rav Shapiro provides us with a brilliant analysis of our Gemara that complements, rather than contradicts, our Midrashic passage. Nadav and Avihu were incredibly holy and dedicated to serving Hashem and His people. This is why they were driven to emulate the kedushah of Moshe and Aharon and thereby become the next leaders of the Jewish people. Although they were sincere, and their quest was truly l’shame shamayim (in the service of Heaven), they were unable to comprehend the extent to which Moshe differed in kind and degree from any prophet that had ever lived, or would ever live. They could not fathom the gulf that separated them from Moshe and his level of prophecy. This lack of understanding led them to bring aish zarah — incense that had not been commanded by the Almighty — and eventuated in their tragic deaths.
 
Shabbat Shalom
 
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org
 
They may also be found on http://www.yutorah.org/ using the search criteria Etengoff and the parasha’s name.
 
The email list, b’chasdei Hashem, has expanded to hundreds of people. I am always happy to add more members to the list. If you have family or friends you would like to have added, please do not hesitate to contact me via email mailto:[email protected].
 
*** My audio shiurim for Women on the topics of Tefilah and Tanach may be found at: http://tinyurl.com/8hsdpyd
 
*** I have posted 164 of Rabbi Soloveitchik’s English language audio shiurim (MP3 format) spanning the years 1958-1984. Please click on the highlighted link.

​
 
Rabbi David Etengoff
 
Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon Hakohen, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Shoshana Elka bat Avraham, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, the Kedoshim of Har Nof and Pittsburgh, and the refuah shlaimah of Yakir Ephraim ben Rachel Devorah, Mordechai ben Miriam Tovah, and the safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world.
 
The second verse of our parasha presents the commandment to offer a korban olah (completely burnt offering) in the Mishkan (Portable Desert Sanctuary) and Beit HaMikdash (Holy Temple): “Command (tzav) Aaron and his sons, saying, ‘This is the law of the burnt offering: That is the burnt offering which burns on the altar all night until morning, and the fire of the altar shall burn with it.’” (Sefer Vayikra 6:1, this and all Rashi and Bible translations, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach)  Rashi (1040-1105), basing himself upon the Sifra, the halachic Midrash to Sefer Vayikra, explains the word, “tzav,” in this manner: “The expression tzav always denotes urging [to promptly and meticulously fulfill a particular commandment] for the present (miyad), and also for future generations (v’ledorot).” The word, “miyad,” makes perfectly good sense in this context, since our verse is the source of the obligation to bring a korban olah ─ something that was possible for Aharon and his sons, and during the period of time we were blessed with the Mishkan and Beit HaMikdash. The term, “v’ledorot,” however, seems quite problematic, since we have not had a Mishkan or Beit HaMikdash for nearly 2,000 years, and we have, therefore, been prohibited from offering the korban olah.
 
My rebbe and mentor, Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik zatzal (1903-1993), known as “the Rav” by his students and followers, expanded upon our question in the following fashion:

What is the meaning of the word ledoros (for future generations) in this context? The mitzvos of mezuzah, tefillin and Shabbos are clearly ledoros. Thousands of years have gone by, and these mitzvos are observed as they had been when they were originally given. But in what way are the mitzvos of the Mishkan practiced today? There has been no korban tamid [daily offering] for almost two thousand years! In what sense does the mitzvah of offering korbanos continue? (Sefer Vayikra Chumash Mesoras HaRav, with commentary based upon the teachings of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik, edited by Dr. Arnold Lustiger, page 33)
 
The Rav answered our question based upon a narrative passage in Talmud Bavli, Megillah 31b that presents a fascinating dialogue between Hashem and Avraham Avinu (our father Abraham):

Abraham asked how he was to know that G-d would not forsake Israel if they sinned. G-d answered, “In the merit of the [Temple] sacrifices.” Abraham insisted that this merit is fine when these sacrifices are in existence, but what was to happen after the destruction of the Temple? G-d replied that if the Children of Israel learned the laws surrounding the sacrifices, He would consider their study as a virtual sacrificial offering. When we cannot offer sacrifices, we recite the halachos [laws] pertaining to them as a substitute.
 
In sum, our study of the laws concerning the sacrifices that are found throughout Rabbinic literature enables us to bring “virtual sacrificial offerings,” and thereby fulfill these laws in a substitute manner. At this juncture, the Rav extends the notion of that which is virtual to include the Beit HaMikdash itself:

There is a Mikdash in our days as well ─ not physically, but through halachic study. This is the mesorah [the passing down from each generation to the next] of Torah Sheb’al Peh, the Oral Law. Today, we read Parashas Shekalim as if the Beis Hamikdash was still standing; it is ledoros. Parashas Parah reminds us to be ritually pure so that we may bring the korban pesach [Passover offering]. Although we no longer offer a korban pesach, we read Parashas Parah as if the Beis Hamikdash still exists. (Brackets my own)
 
2,000 years is a long time to wait and hope for the rebuilding of the Beit HaMikdash. Yet, it is a dream that remains indelibly engraved in our minds, and inspires us to say three times daily:
​
Return in mercy to Jerusalem Your city and dwell therein as You have promised; speedily establish therein the throne of David Your servant, and rebuild it, soon in our days, as an everlasting edifice. Blessed are You L-rd, who rebuilds Jerusalem. (Shemoneh Esrai, translation, https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/867674/jewish/Translation.htm)
 
With Hashem’s help and mercy, may we once again be zocheh (merit) to bring korbanot in the Beit HaMikdash, soon and in our days, v’ledorot ─ and for all generations to come! V’chane yihi ratzon.
 
Shabbat Shalom
 
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org
 
They may also be found on http://www.yutorah.org/ using the search criteria of Etengoff and the parasha’s name.
 
The email list, b’chasdei Hashem, has expanded to hundreds of people. I am always happy to add more members to the list. If you have family or friends you would like to have added, please do not hesitate to contact me via email mailto:[email protected].
 
*** My audio shiurim for Women on the topics of Tefilah and Tanach may be found at: http://tinyurl.com/8hsdpyd
 
*** I have posted 164 of Rabbi Soloveitchik’s English language audio shiurim (MP3 format) spanning the years 1958-1984. Please click on the highlighted link.

 
 
Rabbi David Etengoff
 
Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon Hakohen, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Shoshana Elka bat Avraham, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, the Kedoshim of Har Nof and Pittsburgh, and the refuah shlaimah of Yakir Ephraim ben Rachel Devorah, Mordechai ben Miriam Tovah, and the safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world.
 
Chamishah Chumshei Torah (The Five Books of the Torah) contain two instances of the exact phrase, “vayikra Hashem el Moshe” (“and Hashem called to Moshe”). The first appears in Sefer Shemot 24:16, in the context of Kabbalat HaTorah (the Receiving of the Torah), and the second is found in the opening words of our parasha, as a prologue to the many and varied laws of the korbanot (offerings to Hashem). Rashi (1040-1105), in his Commentary on the Torah on our verse, bases himself upon a statement found in the Midrash Sifra, and notes that each time Hashem communicated with Moshe, it was preceded by the Almighty directly calling upon him (“kadmah kriah”). In addition, he suggests that the word, “vayikra,” is an expression of abiding affection (chibah), since this is precisely the language the Ministering Angels use when they call to one another (“v’karah zeh el zeh,” Sefer Yeshayahu 23:4).
 
In a particularly trenchant analysis, Rabbi Shimshon Raphael Hirsch (1808-1888) opines that the words, “vayikra Hashem el Moshe,” carry singular theological significance. In his view, they teach us that the Word of Hashem came to Moshe directly from the Creator, rather than through some kind of internally-generated voice:

A call came, and then G-d spoke to Moses. This is probably meant to establish the speeches of G-d to Moses as the Word of G-d coming to Moses and to prevent that misused misrepresentation which tries to change the Divine revelation to Moses into some kind of revelation in Moses, and either put it on par with all those imaginary visions of a so-called ecstasy, or simply as an inspiration coming from within a human being. (Sefer Vayikra 1:1, The Pentateuch: Translated and Explained, second edition, page 3, translation from the German, Isaac Levy)
 
Rav Hirsch continues his exposition of our verse and notes that the words, “vayikra Hashem el Moshe,” separate Judaism from all other religions that have ever existed:

[It is certainly not the case that Moses’ Divine revelations were merely self-created ecstatic moments.] This [notion,] of course, relegates Judaism, “the Jewish Religion,” to the nature of all other religious phases which have occurred in human history, to a “contemporary phase in the history of the development of the human mind.” But this is not so, [for as the Torah states:] “Then the L-rd would speak to Moses face to face, as a man would speak to his companion…” (Sefer Shemot 33:11, this, and the following Torah translation, The Judaica Press Compete Tanach)  
 
At this juncture, Rav Hirsch recapitulates his first theme, and underscores the exceptional import of Hashem speaking to Moses “face to face, as a man would speak to his companion:”
 
[This means that just like] speech from one man to another emanates purely and completely from the mind of the speaker, and in no wise whatsoever comes from the mind of the hearer, and nothing from the mind of the hearer brings it about, so was G-d’s Word to Moses purely and solely the speech of G-d. Not from within Moses, from without, it came to him, called him out of whatever train of thought he might be in at the moment, to listen to what G-d wished to say to him. This vayikra, this call preceding G-d’s speech, does away with that idea of the words of G-d which He transmitted arising from within Moses himself. (Brackets my own)
 
Rav Hirsch highlights a crucial principle of Jewish theology, namely, that Hashem spoke directly to Moshe. As the Torah states: “And there was no other prophet who arose in Israel like Moses, whom the L-rd knew face to face” (Sefer Devarim 34:10, underlining my own)  Moshe’s encounters with Hashem, and the authentic prophetic experiences they entailed, form the foundation of our entire Torah. The Voice from Sinai continues to shape the nature of our people and Judaism, and echoes until our own historical moment. We are truly blessed for evermore that “Hashem called to Moshe.”
 
Shabbat Shalom
 
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org
 
They may also be found on http://www.yutorah.org/ using the search criteria of Etengoff and the parasha’s name.
 
The email list, b’chasdei Hashem, has expanded to hundreds of people. I am always happy to add more members to the list. If you have family or friends you would like to have added, please do not hesitate to contact me via email mailto:[email protected].
 
*** My audio shiurim for women on the topics of Tefilah and Tanach may be found at: http://tinyurl.com/8hsdpyd
 
*** I have posted 164 of Rabbi Soloveitchik’s English language audio shiurim (MP3 format) spanning the years 1958-1984. Please click on the highlighted link.
 
​

 
Rabbi David Etengoff
 
Dedicated to the sacred memories of my mother, Miriam Tovah bat Aharon Hakohen, father-in-law, Levi ben Yitzhak, sister-in-law, Ruchama Rivka Sondra bat Yechiel, sister, Shulamit bat Menachem, Yehonatan Binyamin ben Mordechai Meir Halevi, Shoshana Elka bat Avraham, Tikvah bat Rivka Perel, the Kedoshim of Har Nof and Pittsburgh, and the refuah shlaimah of Yakir Ephraim ben Rachel Devorah, Mordechai ben Miriam Tovah, and the safety of our brothers and sisters in Israel and around the world.
 
Our parasha contains the final pasuk (verse) of Sefer Shemot: “For the cloud of the L-rd was upon the Mishkan by day, and there was fire within it at night, before the eyes of the entire house of Israel in all their journeys.” (Sefer Shemot 40:38, this and all Bible and Rashi translations, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach)  The beginning of our pasuk highlights “the cloud of the L-rd [that] was upon the Mishkan by day.” This was not the first time we have encountered Hashem’s cloud of glory. Rather, in His overwhelming chesed v’rachamim (kindness and mercy), the Almighty had provided this miraculous wonder for us during the Exodus from Egypt:

And the L-rd went before them by day in a pillar of cloud to cause it to lead them on the way and at night in a pillar of fire to give them light, [they thus could] travel day and night. He did not move away the pillar of cloud by day or the pillar of fire at night [from] before the people. (Sefer Shemot 13:21-22)

In his Commentary on the Torah on our verse, Rashi (1040-1105) notes that this pillar of cloud played a dual role as both Hashem’s messenger, and our fledgling nation’s guide during their travels in the Sinai Desert wasteland:

Now who was that messenger? [It was] the pillar of cloud, and the Holy One, blessed be He, in His glory, led it before them. In any case, it was the pillar of cloud that He prepared so that they could be led by it, for they would travel by the pillar of cloud, and the pillar of cloud was not [meant] to provide light but to direct them [on] the way.
 
At first glance, it would seem quite logical to equate the cloud of Hashem that was upon the Mishkan with the pillar of cloud of the Exodus. After all, they were both nissim (miracles) from Hashem. The Vilna Gaon (“the Gra,” Rabbi Elijah ben Solomon Zalman, 1720-1797), however, carefully contrasts these two instances and urges us to focus upon their significant differences, rather than their apparent similarities:

Even though there was a Cloud of Glory that accompanied and went before them during the Exodus, it was short-lived and remained with them only until the Sea of Reeds (Yam Suf). Moreover, it was invisible to the vast majority of the Jewish people, since it was seen solely by the prophets that were among them. This was not the case in this instance [i.e. our parasha’s verse]: “For the cloud of the L-rd was upon the Mishkan by day…before the eyes of the entire house of Israel in all their journeys.” (Sefer Chumash HaGra, Parashat Ki Tisa 34:10, based upon Sefer Aderet Eliyahu, this and the following translations my own)
 
According to the Vilna Gaon, there were two essential differences between the original pillar of cloud that went before our people on their journey of redemption, and the one that rested upon the Mishkan: The Cloud of Glory of the Exodus was temporary in nature, whereas the cloud resting upon the Mishkan was permanent in nature. Moreover, the Cloud of Glory of the Exodus was invisible to the majority of our nation, while the cloud of Hashem that rested upon the Mishkan was manifestly present before the entire people. What might account for these notable differences? Here, too, we are fortunate, since we can once again rely upon the Vilna Gaon’s trenchant analysis:

These changes came about from the time of Moses’ prayer [following the Sin of the Golden Calf] and onward: “For how then will it be known that I have found favor in Your eyes, I and Your people? Is it not that You will go with us? Then I and Your people will be distinguished (v’niflinu) from every [other] nation on the face of the earth.” (Sefer Shemot 33:16) Then the Holy One answered Moses: “And He said: ‘Behold! I will form a covenant; in the presence of all your people, I will perform wonders such as have not been created upon all the earth and among all the nations…’” (Sefer Shemot 34:10) [What was this?] This is what is meant by the expressions, [in our verse, “before the eyes of the entire house of Israel in all their journeys,”] and “the eyes of the entire Jewish people.” (Sefer Devarim 31:7, 34:12) And it is for this that we wait once again.

Thus, according to the Vilna Gaon, Moses’ tefilah (prayer) for reconciliation with the Almighty following the Sin of the Golden Calf altered the very nature of the ananei hakavode (Clouds of Glory). For the first time, all the men, women and children of the Jewish people could apprehend the vision of the Cloud of Glory resting upon the holy Mishkan. Suddenly, everyone could feel the Divine Presence of the Master of the Universe.
The Vilna Gaon’s words, “And it is for this we wait once again,” resonate through the ages, until our own time. With Hashem’s boundless kindness, may we witness the Cloud of Glory in the soon to be rebuilt Beit Hamikdash. V’chane yihi ratzon.
​
Shabbat Shalom
 
Past drashot may be found at my blog-website: http://reparashathashavuah.org
 
They may also be found on http://www.yutorah.org/ using the search criteria of Etengoff and the parasha’s name.
 
The email list, b’chasdei Hashem, has expanded to hundreds of people. I am always happy to add more members to the list. If you have family or friends you would like to have added, please do not hesitate to contact me via email mailto:[email protected].
 
*** My audio shiurim for Women on the topics of Tefilah and Tanach may be found at: http://tinyurl.com/8hsdpyd
 
*** I have posted 164 of Rabbi Soloveitchik’s English language audio shiurim (MP3 format) spanning the years 1958-1984. Please click on the highlighted link.