Parshas Ki Sisa 5780
I know nothing about construction. Being the rabbi of a shul presently undergoing a significant renovation project, this is something of a disadvantage. Still, there are certain things that even a novice like myself intuitively knows. For example, a basic rule of thumb: First build, then furnish. You can’t deck out the building before the building is built. Yet as obvious as this may seem, when Betzalel—who is to serve as the chief craftsman of the Mishkan construction project—exhibits his knowledge of this concept, Moshe is amazed by Betzalel’s insight.
Hashem provides Moshe with the instructions he should convey to Betzalel in this week’s parsha. And in doing so, Hashem abides by the self-evident principle mentioned above:
אֵ֣ת ׀ אֹ֣הֶל מוֹעֵ֗ד וְאֶת־הָֽאָרֹן֙ לָֽעֵדֻ֔ת וְאֶת־הַכַּפֹּ֖רֶת אֲשֶׁ֣ר עָלָ֑יו וְאֵ֖ת כָּל־כְּלֵ֥י הָאֹֽהֶל׃
The Tent of Meeting, the Ark of the Covenant and the cover upon it, and all the furnishings of the Tent.
First build, then furnish. The sequence Hashem provides calls first for the Ohel Moed—the actual structure of the Mishkan—to first be built, and only then to have the Aron Kodesh and the other furnishings crafted. Don’t find yourself in the position of having all the vessels crafted without any edifice to actually house them in. Makes perfect sense.
Yet according to the Gemara in Brachos 55a, Moshe did not convey the instructions to Betzalel in this manner, but according to the sequence in which the various dimensions of the Mishkan are recorded in Parshas Terumah, namely, with the furnishings first and the edifice second.
Not surprisingly, Betzalel catches the error. Quite surprisingly, Moshe is dazzled by Betzalel’s wisdom:
(.שמא כך אמר לך הקב”ה עשה משכן ארון וכלים אמר לו שמא בצל אל היית וידעת (ברכות נה
[Betzalel said,] “Perhaps G-d actually said to you, ‘[First] make the Mishkan, [then] the ark and the vessels’?” [Moshe] said to him, “Perhaps you were in the shadow of G-d (Betzel E-l) and you knew?” (Brachos 55a)
Betzalel merely suggests the obvious. Why is Moshe so taken with an insight that any layman could easily intuit?
Perhaps the explanation lies in considering not what Betzalel said, but to whom he said it. Moshe Rabbeinu represented the greatest level of authority within the nation, and served as nothing less than the conduit between G-d and His people. So revered was Moshe by the Jewish People that at the first sign of his disappearance, a mania ensued in which the people resorted to forging a golden calf as a new means of connecting with G-d. The people trusted Moshe to do no less than deliver Hashem’s directives to them so that they may properly serve Him. In essence, Moshe’s word was law.
This is the figure addressing Betzalel and who provides him with counterintuitive directions. Furnishings before the building? Strange, to be sure. But then, so many other mitzvos are beyond human understanding and logic. And these are direct orders from Moshe Rabbeinu, the highest human authority Klal Yisrael could boast. Wouldn’t Betzalel be well within his rights to give a “You’re the boss” shrug of the shoulders and proceed with the instructions given?
Instead, Betzalel speaks up, and in doing so receives well-deserved praise from Moshe. It is hard to speak up when confronted with the directive of a superior. It is easier to accept than to ruffle feathers, to be passive rather than be accused of insubordination. To be sure, Betzalel is as polite and respectful as can be, but nevertheless proceeds to ask Moshe Rabbeinu, “Are you sure this is how it should go?”
Moshe’s response is telling. “שמא בצל א–ל היית וידעת, Perhaps you were within the shadow of G-d (Betzel E-l), and you knew?” What gave Betzalel the temerity to speak up? The knowledge that he was in the shadow of G-d, not only the shadow of Moshe. That there was a Higher Authority, beyond that of Moshe that he had to answer to and be responsible for. It was this conviction that gave Betzalel the courage to ask.
It is often easier to avoid asking questions, avoid even mild pushback, avoid accusations or perceptions of being mutinous. But Betzalel reminds us of what may be at stake when we avoid those unpleasant conversations. By placing ourselves only within the shadow of a superior, we may well be absolving the responsibility of acting within the shadow of “The Superior.” Asking appropriate questions in appropriate tones is not the same as upsetting the applecart with unwarranted zealousness. Indeed, Betzalel questions Moshe without questioning Moshe’s authority. But tough questions at time need to be answered, uncomfortable conversations at time need to be had. We must remember that we fall within Hashem’s shadow, that we dwell within His Presence, and that we need to answer to Him not only for all the words that we speak, but also for all those we don’t.