I Do Attest

At the beginning of this week’s Sedra, the Torah refers to the Mishkan as “Mishkan HaEidus.” While the Aharon HaKodesh is sometimes referred to as the Aron HaEidus this is the first time that the Mishkan itself is associated with this term.

Rashi seems to anticipate the obvious question: how do the Mishkan give Eidus in any way? To what is it testifying? He answers that the Mishkan is “Eidus L’Yisroel SheViter L’Yisrael Al Ma’aseh HaEgel”—The Mishkan is seen as a testament to the fact that Hakadosh Baruch Hu had forgiven Klal Yisroel for the Chet of the Egel, because he chose to dwell in their midst.

The words of Rashi seem to be based on the words of Chazal, brought both in the Medrash Rabbah, as well as the Tanchumah. There is, however, one slight difference between the way Rashi explains the words “Eidus” and the way the Medrashim do: both Medrashim say that the Mishkan was a Eidus for “Kol Bo’ei Olam.” It would appear from these Medrashim that the Mishkan bears testimony not for Klal Yisroel, but for the Umos Ha’Olam, that we were forgiven for the Ma’aseh HaEgel.

On one level, we must be able to resolve the words of Rashi and those of the Medrash. For whom is the Mishkan testifying: Klal Yisroel or the Umos HaOlam? On the other hand, the words of Chazal are a bit difficult to understand as well. The Tanchuma brings that after Hakadosh Baruch forgave Bnei Yisroel for the Egel, Moshe Rabbeinu actually asked what how this would be proven to the Umos HaOlam. Why did Moshe Rabbienu need a proof for the Goyim that Bnei Yisroel were forgiven? What is the difference to them, and why do we need to assert the fact that Hashem was Mochel us?

The Re’em asks a similar question: why was the Mishkan needed as a proof that Klal Yisroel was forgiven—why were the Luchos Shenios enough of an “Eidus” to this fact? The Luchos Rishonos were given to Moshe and then broken as a result of the Egel—would not the fact that Hashem gave us another set of Luchos indicate that he was Mivater on the Egel? Why was the additional Eidus of the Mishkan necessary?

I think that in order to explain the Eidus of the Mishkan, we must first understand the concept of Eidus.

In Parshas VaYetzei, when Yaakov and Lavan make a pact not to harm one another, the word Eid is used extensively. They each use this word a number of times in their discussion, and they also refer to the monument the create with a terminology of Eidus: Yaakov calls it Gal-Eid (literally a pile of Eidus) and Lavan in turn calls his “Yigar Sahadusah”—the Aramaic of Gal-Eid.

The Malbim begins his Pirush of these Pessukim by explaining the difference between the words Eid and Eidus. An Eid is a person or an item that bears witness, but there is a can only relate testimony so long as it is in physical existence. If someone sees a crime, for example, he is an Eid, but can only provide testimony so long as he is alive. The word Eidus, however, refers to something that can provide it’s testimony for a long time, or even possibly forever. The Torah, for example, is referred to as “Eidus Hashem” because the Torah is eternal—it provides its testimony forever.

With this in mind, we can understand that the Mishkan is referred to a the “Mishkan HaEidus” because its testimony—that Hashem was Mivater on the Chet HaEgel—is long lasting. The Mishkan is not an Eid, which can only bear testimony while it exists, but it creates an Eidus which has a much longer lifespan. If this is the case, we must understand why the enduring Eidus of the Mishkan was necessary—why did we need Eidus “SheViter L’Yisrael Al Ma’aseh HaEgel” beyond the Dor HaMidbar?

Perhaps we can better understand this concept based on a Passuk in Shir HaShirim. The Passuk says: “Shuvi Shuvi HaShulamis, Shuvi Shuvi V’Nechezeh Bach.” Chazal tell us that these words are said by the Umos HaOlam—the word “Shuvi” is repeated four times, representing the four Malchios of the Umos HaOlam. The nations of the world say to Klal Yisroel: “Shuvi Shuvi V’nechezeh Bach: Come see what our world has to offer”—they try to lure us away from the Derech HaShem with offers of material comforts and success. But, the Passuk continues, we respond to them “Mah Techezu BaShulamis KiMicholas HaMachanayim”: “What can you show us that is equal to the ‘M’cholas HaMachanayim’?”

There are a number of explanations given by Chazal and the Meforshim as to the meaning of the words “M’cholas HaMachanayim”, but I think the Pshat offered by the Seforno is especially relevant to us. The literal translation of these words can be: “the circles of the camps”. The Sforno therefore says that “M’cholas HaMachanayim” refers to the Machanos of the Midbar, when we were encamped surrounding the Machaneh Shechina and Machaneh Liviya.

When the Umos HaOlam try to entice us to leave behind our Reuchinyas existence for the trappings of Olam HaZeh, to stray from the Derech HaEmes to take part in their Olam HaSheker, our response to them is: “Can you offer us anything like the M’cholas HaMachanayim, when the Shechina itself dwelled within our midst?”

This Sforno is powerful on its own, but with our understanding of the Eidus of the Mishkan, it becomes even more meaningful.

When we are goaded by the Goyim we point to the Mishkan: when Hashem dwelled in our midst despite our Aveiros. Even though we had committed such a grievous Avirah as the Egel HaZahav, Hashem was Mivater and came to live amongst us, so to speak. It is this connection, this relationship, and this potential for Vitur that we ask the Goyim to replicate: “Mah Techezu BaShulamis KiMicholas HaMachanayim”

This is a lesson that repeats itself on a regular basis. When we feel far from Kedusha, when the Yetzer Harah tells us that out shortcomings outweigh our potential for greatness, we can look to the Eidus of the Mishkan, and see that the Shechina desires to rest amongst us even when we make mistakes. As Chazal tell us: “V’Shachanti B’Shocham—B’Soch Kol Echad V’Echad.” Each of us can be our own Mishkan, and welcome the Shechina into ourselves.

Maybe is why the Luchos Shniyos were not enough of a proof “SheViter L’Yisrael Al Ma’aseh HaEgel”. The Luchos were a physical item that were given to the Dor Hamidbar, they are not as relevant to us in the long term because we cannot each experience that level of Kabbalas HaTorah. We needed an Eidus—something that would last generations and continue to bear witness to the fact that Hashem had forgiven Klal Yisroel and restored our relationship to the point that he wished to dwell among us.

This is also why Moshe asked for an Eidus for the Umos HaOlam—not because it matters to us whether they think Hashem was Mivater or not, but because he wanted to ensure that we had an answer for the Goyim when they tried to lure us away from Hashem. Moshe knew that there would be a time when the fact that Hashem was indeed Mivater on the Chet HaEgel would help us withstand the allure Yetzer Harah and the Umos HaOlam.

We can therefore also understand that the words of Rashi and the words of the Medrash are in agreement. The Eidus of the Mishkan is not strictly for the edification of the Umos HaOlam: it is an Eidus that Yisroel can use in response to their taunting. It is truly “Eidus L’Yisroel” and “Eidus L’Chol Boei Olam”

This week we complete not only Sefer Shemos, but also the series of Parshios in which we learn about the Meleches HaMishkan. It is therefore fitting to take a lesson from this Parsha that will allow us to appreciate the Mishkan in our own lives. We must always remember the Eidus of the Mishkan: despite whatever we may have done, Hashem wishes to dwell in our midst, “B’Soch Kol Echad V’Echad”. We must not allow the outside world to lure us away from what we know to be the Derech Hames—we can each serve as our own “Micholas HaMachanayim.”