As our parasha opens, G-d tells Moshe to instruct the bnei Yisra’él to donate the materials to be used in constructing the Mishkan and its associated artifacts. Amongst those artefacts, Moshe is instructed make a large, rectangular box (aron) 2 ½ ammoth long by 1 ½ wide and 1 ½ deep (144 x 86.5 x 86.5 cm or 56.75 x 34.05 x 34.05 inches, בשיעור החזון אי"ש), made of wood and plated with gold within and without.
The cover (kapporeth) of this aron qodesh or “casket of holiness,” intended to hold the ‘éduth, or “testimony” of Israel’s unique encounter with the Infinite at Sinai -- the Tablets which Moshe had brought down from Sinai – would bear two remarkable figures: ועשית שנים כרבים זהב מקשה תעשה אתם משני קצות הכפרת: כו' והיו הכרבים פרשי כנפים למעלה וגו' (“And you shall make two kruvim; of beaten gold shall you make them, from both ends of the kapporeth.… And the kruvim will be spreading wings….”: XXV, 18, 20).
Not the least remarkable thing about these figures is that the Divine instruction to make them comes so soon in the wake of לא תעשה לך פסל וכל תמונה אשר בשמים ממעל ואשר בארץ מתחת ואשר במים מתחת לארץ (“You will not make for yourself a statue or any image [of] what is in the heavens above or what is on the earth below or what is in the water below the earth”; XX, 4).
The existence of kruvim cannot be gainsaid, as it is attested by the Torah from the dawn of mankind. When the first man and his wife were expelled from the garden, the Torah tells us: וישכן מקדם לגן עדן את הכרבים כו' לשמר דרך עץ החיים (“…Andd He established east of Gan ‘Eden the kruvim… to guard the way [to] the tree of life”; Genesis III, 24).
What, then, are these mysterious creatures, and why should they feature so prominently in the Mishkan on the aron qodesh, such that (as our parasha goes on to inform us) the Divine Presence would later be manifest between them, when G-d communicated with Moshe (v. 22)?
B.
The midrash asks our question: כרובים הללו למה לי? כדי לידע שיש כרובים למעלה. ומנין שיש כרובים למעלה? דכתיב, "היא החי' אשר ראיתי תחת אלקי ישראל בנהר כבר ואדע כי כרובים המה" (“Why [must] I have these kruvim? In order to know that there are kruvim up above. And whence [do we learn] that there are kruvim up above? For it is written; ‘That is the animal which I saw under the G-d of Israel at the River Kvir, and I knew that they were kruvim’ [Ezekiel X, 20]”; מדרש הגדול, פרשתנו).
Indeed, the Zohar tells us, commenting on Psalms CVI, 3: "המהלך על כנפי רוח" דא רוחא דמקדשא עלאה ורזא דא "שנים כרבים זהב" (“‘Who goes upon wings of spirit’ – this is the spirit of the supernal Miqdash, and the allusion is ‘two kruvim [of] gold’”; זוה"ק ח"א ל"ב:). Kruvim up above, as our midrash asserts.
But why should it be so necessary to know that there are kruvim above, that they should be physically represented on the aron qodesh containing the ‘éduth?
Enter Rambam: ונצטוינו אנחנו לבנות היכל לבורא ולעשות שם הארון ובו שני לוחות וכתוב בהן "אנכי ד' אלקיך" ו"לא יהיו לך" ומן הידוע כי עיקר אמונת הנבואה הוא מוקדם לאמונת התורה כי אם אין נביא אין תורה והנביא תבואהו הנבואה באמצעות המלאך כו' עד שמשה רבינו תחלת נבואתו היתה במלאך כו' (“And we are commanded to build a Temple for the Creator and to make there the aron in which are the two Tablets on which is written ‘I am Ha-Shem your G-d’ and ‘You shall have no other’; and it is known that the principle of faith in prophecy [nevu’a] has precedence over faith in the Torah, since if there is no prophet [navi] there is no Torah; and a navi receives his nevu’a by means of a mal’ach… until the beginning of the nevu’a of Moshe our teacher was through a mal’ach [cf. Exodus III, 2]”; מורה נבוכים ח"ג פמ"ה).
So the aron contains testimony of the founding document of Israel, the Torah, and its continual presence amongst our people. But, as Rambam asserts, the gift of Torah was not possible without the possibility of communication between the Infinite and mankind; that communication is called nevu’a, and the Torah attests repeatedly that nevu’a takes place through, and therefore presupposes, the medium of mal’achim.
Rambam goes on: והנה נתבאר במה שהקדמנו כי אמונת מציאות המלאכים נמשכת אחרי אמונת מציאות הא-ל ובזה תתקיים האמונה והתורה ולחזק אמונת זה העיקר צוה הבורא ית' לעשות על הארון צורות שני מלאכים כדי לקיים מציאות המלאכים בלבות ההמון כו' ואילו תהי' צורה אחת כו' והיא הטעאה גדולה כי יחשבו כי זה צורת האלוקה הנעבד כמו שיעשו ע"ז כו' וכאשר נעשו שני כרובים ונאמר בתורה "ד' אלקינו ד' אחד" התקיים בזה אמונת מציאות המלאכים ושהם רבים כדי שלא יטעו בם וגו' (“It is explained in what we have previously said that faith in the existence of mal’achim is drawn from faith in G-d’s existence, and through this are established faith and Torah. To strengthen faith in this principle, the blessed Creator commanded to make on the aron the forms of two mal’achim, in order to establish the existence of mal’achim in the hearts of the masses.…. And were there only one form… it would be a great cause of error, for they might think that this was the form of the Divinity being worshipped, as if they were making an idol… And since the kruvim were made, and it was said in the Torah, ‘Ha-Shem our G-d, Ha-Shem is one’ [Deuteronomy VI, 4], faith in the existence of mal’achim, and that they are numerous, is established, in order that they not err through them”; שם).
In support of Rambam’s thesis, it should be noted that the M’chilta points out that G-d added the apparently superfluous prohibition אלהי כסף ואלהי זהב לא תעשו לכם (“Gods of silver and gods of gold you shall not make for yourselves”; Exodus XX, 23) specifically because of the commandment to make the kruvim, to preëmpt any atavistic idolatrous impulses (מכילתא דבחדש פ"י).
The grammatical oddity of the phrase shnayim kruvim (where one should expect shnei kruvim) prompts Chazal to offer an additional reason for the number two: המשכן כנגד ברייתו של עולם, שני כרובים על ארון העדות כנגד שני שמות הקדושים ד' אלקים (“The Mishkan is symbolic of the creation of the world, and the two kruvim atop the aron ha-‘éduth are symbolic of the two holy names, Ha-Shem Eloqim [through which the creation was effected]”; מדרש תדשא פ"ב).
Hence, the obligation to make two mal’achim appears clear; why two kruvim, specifically?
C.
What, exactly, is a kruv? The Talmud asks this question, and provides Rabbi Abbahu’s answer: כרביא שכן בבבל קורין לינוקא רביא (“Like a child [ravya], for in Babylon they call an infant [yenuqa] ravya”; חגיגה י"ג:). Rabbi Abbahu sees ruv as the root of the word, and the initial k as the comparative prefix.
There is some evidence in support of this view; for instance, in Genesis XXI, 20, the phrase roveh qashath can be interpreted as “a youth, a bowman,” likewise deriving roveh from ruv (עיי' פי' רבינו חננאל על הגמרא, אונקלוס שם בספר בראשית, והעמק דבר עה"פ ). In the Zohar we find: מאן מקיים עלמא כו' ינוקי דלעאן באורייתא ובגין אינון רביין דעלמא עלמא אשתזיב. לקבליהון "תורי זהב נעשה לך", אלין אינון ינוקי רביין עולמין דכתיב "ועשית שנים כרובים זהב" (“Who supports the world?...The yenuqei which occur in the Torah, and because of those ravyan of the world, the world has been preserved. Concerning them [it is written] “Doves of gold shall we make for you” [Song of Songs I, 11]; these are the yenuqei ravyan ‘ulmin [“youths’], as it is written, ‘And you shall make two kruvim, gold”; זוה"ק ח"א הקדמה א:).
But this cannot be the whole story. As the sharp-eyed reader with a living sense of the Hebrew language will already have noted from our passage, the definite prefix precedes the initial k, rather than following and being absorbed into it, as we would expect, implying that the k is part of the root. Rav Pappa noted this, and the Talmud also records his view: אלא מעתה דכתיב "פני האחד פני הכרוב ופני השני פני אדם ובשלישי פני ארי' ונרביעי פני נשר" היינו פני כרוב היינו פני אדם אפי רברבי ואפי זוטרא (“But from now, since it is written, ‘the one’s face was the face of a kruv, and the second’s face the face of a human being, and the third the face of a lion, and the fourth the face of an eagle’ [Ezekiel X, 11], this means that the face of a kruv is a human face, whether adult or child”; חגיגה שם, וע"ע רש"י רשב"ם ראב"ע רא"ם וגור ארי' על פסוקינו בענין פירוש מלת כרוב). Rabbeinu Bechayé cites Rav Pappa’s drasha, and adds: ויהי' זה להעיר על אהבתו לישראל כאהבת אב לבנו שהיא אהבה חזקה (“And this is to highlight His love for Israel, like the love a father for His son, which is a strong love”).
So, kruv is formed from a unique root, and denotes a mal’ach with a human face, sometimes that of an adult, sometimes that of an infant (presumably the kruvim guarding Gan ‘Eden, which Rashi terms מלאכי חבלה, “angels of destruction,” were the adult variety); when they are the sort with the juvenile face, it seems, they can be referred to by the Aramaic term ravya.
D.
G-d’s gift of Torah to Israel, then, is the measure of His love for us. The prophet Yirmyahu declares the tie between Torah and the world’s continued existence: אם לא בריתי יומם ולילה חקות שמים וארץ לא שמתי (“If My covenant is not [in effect] by day and night, I shall not have established the laws of heaven and earth”; Jeremiah XXXIII, 28).
The Chatham Sofér quoted his rebbe, the great Rabbi Nathan Adler, as saying that the reason the kruvim face each other is to indicate that Torah scholars must learn with one another, face to face, with the pure intent of seeking to under the wisdom of the Torah contained in the aron. Hence, even the positioning of the kruvim is emblematic of Torah and Torah scholarship.
Perhaps this is why G-d chose to make His Presence manifest between the kruvim, for the mishna tells us שנים שיושבים ויש ביניהם דברי תורה שכינה שרוי' ביניהם, שנאמר "אז נדברו יראי ד' איש אל רעהי ויקשב ד' וישמע ודו' (“Two who sit and there are words of Torah between them, the Divine Presence dwells in their midst, as it is said, ‘Then shall those who fear Ha-Shem speak to one another, and Ha-Shem will pay attention and listen… [Mal’achi III, 16]” ; אבות פ"ג מ"ג).
And perhaps the father-and-son appearance serves to remind us that Torah flows from father to son, and from rebbe to talmid: כל המלמד את בן חבירו תורה מעלה עליו הכתוב כאילו ילדו (“Anyone who teaches his counterpart’s son Torah, Scripture considers it as if he had sired him”; סנהדרין י"ט).
No comments:
Post a Comment