Pekudei 5769

Here is a vort for Pekudei. I know it's old news now, but for the sake of completion.....


Witness Protection

“These are the accountings of the Mishkon, the Mishkon of Witness which were counted according to Moshe, the work of the Leviim in the hand of Isomor ben Aharon HaKohen.” Shemos 38:21

Why does the Torah suddenly refer to the Mishkon as Mishkon HaEdus, (witness)? Until now it has been plain old Mishkon!

Rashi writes that the Mishkon, (constructed as an atonement for the Golden Calf), was a witness to Yisroel that Hashem had forgiven them for their sin.
The Mizrachi, a commentator on Rashi, explains that the Luchos/Tablets of the Ten Commandments could not fill this purpose. Since the Children of Israel had become Jews as far as Halocho is concerned at the giving of the Torah at Har Sinai, they had to receive the commandments as this was already incumbent upon them. Hashem had already accepted Klal Yisroel, and Klal Yisroel had already agreed to receive the Torah. They could not be unselected. Thus, the Shechinah’s residing amongst them through the Mishkon was a witness to Hashem’s forgiveness of them.

The Da’as Zekeinim however, (the Ba’alei HaTosfos), write that the Mishkon was a witness for the other nations of the world that Hashem had forgiven Yisroel for the sin of the Golden Calf. What are they arguing over?

Before suggesting an answer, we need to refer to the sefer Parshas Drochim, the first part of which deals with the status of the Avos, (Avrohom – Matan Torah), in terms of whether they were completely Jewish, completely not Jewish, or a mixture of both with regard to applying the most stringent ruling, (sometimes the halocho is more stringent for non-Jews).
(Note: We can see that the Mizrachi does not hold according to this first view since he holds that Yisroel became Jewish at Sinai).

Having seen this we can suggest as follows: The Da’as Zekeinim hold that the receipt of the Luchos was a witness for Yisroel that they had been forgiven, thus leaving the dwelling of the Shechinah amongst them to be a witness to the rest of the world.
(This is coming off the Mizrachi who says that the Luchos were insufficient proof – I have understood this as meaning that were it not for the problem that he points out, the Luchos would have been sufficient as a witness. The other nations would require a greater indication that Yisroel had been forgiven to draw their attention).

Perhaps Da’as Zekeinim hold that Yisroel were not full Jews until Matan Torah and that Matan Torah had two components, the first being a statement of readiness to receive the Torah on the part of Yisroel, and the second being the actual handing over of the Luchos to Moshe, signifying Hashem’s assent to giving the Torah to Yisroel and upgrading everyone spiritually to the status of full Jew.

The sin of the Golden Calf took place before Moshe presented the Luchos to the people and he went so far as to break them, perhaps an indication of the non-finalization of the process of conversion.
When Moshe ascended the mountain for the second time, the receipt of the second Luchos was the sign that the process was complete, Hashem had accepted Yisroel and they were now Jews in the Halachic sense.

Rashi may disagree with this two stage process of conversion; at Matan Torah Klal Yisroel became Jews regardless of subsequent developments, since Hashem had initiated the process, no further indication of His assent was required. Thus, receiving the Luchos was no witness to the forgivenes of Bnei Yisroel, the presence of Hashem’s Shechinah was.