שבת תרומה

Shabbathilsen fra Bergstien
Shabbat Teruma
‫שבת תרומה‬
- ‫תשע״ג‬
fredag 15 . – lørdag 16. februar 2013
Shabbat (og kveldsbønn)
Shabbat slutter
Denne shabbaten
,‫זמן הדלקת נרות‬
‫מנחה קבלת שבת וערבית‬
‫תפילת ילדים‬
‫צאת השבת‬
Ukens avsnitt
‫פרשת השבוע‬
2. MB 25.1-27.19
Maftir 4. MB 28.9-28.15
Haftara Jesaja 66.1-66.24
‫ ישעיה‬:‫הפטרה‬
Forfatter av ukens Dvar Tora
Denne uken er det kantor Rueven
Sternlieb som har skrevet ukens Dvar
I ukens avsnitt leser vi om instruksjonene Gud gir til Moses om
hvordan tabernaklet skal bygges, i all sin prakt. Vi leser også de
nøyaktige beskrivelsene av hvordan menoraen skal være, og
hvordan arken skal se ut.
Dvar Tora
Av Reuven Sternlieb
Overspending in the Temple?
"An Etrog sold for $300!" scream the newspaper headlines, and everyone immediately says: isn't it
better to buy a simple Etrog and give the rest of the money to charity? Such claims are often
heard with regard to various hidurey Mitzvah – where one pays more to observe the same
Mitzvah more extravagantly. But is it true? Is it really more of a waste to invest money on a mitzvah
than on mitzvot than are bein adam lachavero – between man and his fellow man?
In our Sedra we come across what seems to be an absurdity: G-d commands Moshe to build
the Mishkan, the Tabernacle. On one hand, it is no more than a tent; on the other hand, many
items in it are made out of pure gold. The two extremes of the Mishkan are somewhat strange.
When King Shlomo builds the Temple, it is much more elevated, ravishing and extravagant. In his
days, there is more of a correlation between the golden items inside the Temple and its general
Is Shlomo's temple considered more spiritual? Does its extravagance truly elevate it? Or was the
overspending in the Temple considered wasteful, and the same money would have been better
spent on mitzvot between man and his fellow man?
The Italian commentator Sforno, in his commentary on Parshat Pkudey (Shmot 38:24), says the
following harsh words:
" ‫ שהיה דבר מועט מאד בערך אל העושר שהיה‬,‫העיד על קצבת הזהב והכסף והנחושת שנכנסה במלאכת המשכן‬
‫ויותר ממנו העושר שהיה בבנין הורדוס בבית ראשון‬. ‫ועם כל זה יותר התמיד מראה כבוד ה' במשכן של משה‬
‫ ובזה הורה שלא קצבת העושר וגודל הבנין יהיו סבה‬.‫ ולא נראה כלל במקדש שני‬,‫ממה שהתמיד במקדש ראשון‬
‫ אבל רוצה ה' את יריאיו ומעשיהם לשכנו בתוכם‬,‫"להשרות השכינה בישראל‬.
"The amount of gold, silver and bronze used in the building of the Mishkan was much smaller in
comparison with that of the First Temple, and even more went in to the one built by Herod. "And
yet G-d was seen more often in Moshe's Mishkan than in the First Temple, and not at all in the
Second Temple. And this goes to show us that the amount of wealth and size of the structure are
not the reason for G-d's existence among Bnei Israel, it is their faith and good deeds that he
requires to dwell among them".
He goes on to say that the more extravagant the Temple was, the less holy it was. If we analyze the
difference between the Mishkan and the First Temple, we will understand things better.
The Mishkan and its items were built through donations given by the Bnei Israel:
"‫"דַּ בֵּר אֶ ל ְּבנֵּי יִשְּ ָראֵּ ל ְּויִקְּחּו לִי תְּ רּומָה מֵּאֵּ ת כָל אִ יׁש אֲ ׁשֶ ר יִדְּ בֶּנּו לִבֹו תִ קְּחּו אֶ ת תְּ רּומָתִ י‬.
Speak to the Bnei Israel that they may bring me an offering. From every man that gives it willingly
with his heart you shall take my offering.
Shlomo, on the other hand, taxes the people in order to build the Temple:
"‫" ַּויַּעַּל ַּה ֶמלְֶך ׁשְּ ֹלמ ֹה מַּס ִמכָל יִשְּ ָראֵּ ל ַּויְּהִי ַּהמַּס ׁשְּ ֹלׁשִ ים אֶ לֶף אִ יׁש‬
And king Shlomo raised a levy out of all Israel; and the levy was thirty thousand men.
The taxes were so heavy, that when Rehavam took the throne after his father, Shlomo, passed
away, the People of Israel ask him to unburden them and lift some of the taxes:
"‫"ָאבִ יָך ִה ְק ָׁשה אֶ ת ֻעלֵּנּו וְ אַ ָׁתה עַ ָׁתה הָׁ ֵּקל ֵּמ ֲעב ַֹדת ָאבִ יָך ַה ָׁק ָׁשה ּומֵּ עֻלוֹ הַ כָׁ בֵּ ד אֲ ֶשר נָׁתַ ן עָׁ לֵּינּו וְ נַעַ בְ ֶד ָׁך‬
Your father made our yoke grievous. Now, therefore, make you the grievous service of your
father, and his heavy yoke which he put upon us, lighter, and we will serve you.
One might say that this is the root of the difference between the Mishkan and the Temple.
The Mishkan was built because the Bnei Israel wanted it, and reflected their financial status,
whereas the Temple was built through harsh taxation that did not match up to the People's wishes.
This explanation also sheds some light on the way the Hashmonaim, the Hasmoneans, conducted
themselves when they returned to the Temple after it had been desecrated by the Greeks:
‫ חזרו והעשירו עשאום‬,‫ העשירו עשאום של כסף‬,‫ שפודין של ברזל היו וחופין בעץ‬... ;‫"כדרך שעשו בית חשמונאי‬
‫"של זהב‬
In the manner of the House of Hashmonai; … there were iron rods covered in wood, and when
they became wealthier they made them of silver, and when they became wealthier still they
made them out of gold.
The Hasmoneans were regular people and therefore took the People's financial status into
consideration. They refrained from placing a financial burden on the People, and make the Menorah
out of the material the People could afford at each stage. This is the right ratio between investing in
Mitzvot but also investing in mitzvot shebein adam lachavero. One should be mindful of what
the People want and are able to afford. And it seems this attitude should guide us in our ways.
Ukens vits
Ukens person: Yair Lapid
Dear Beloved Congregants,
This week there will be no Ukens Vits. This is
because I have been asked to issue an apology
for last week’s Ukens Vits . Following the
highly controversial joke last Shabbat, I’ve be
strongly reprimanded by nearly every
community member that I have met. The
reason? Because the bear did not eat bread,
just the poor man, so therefore should not
have said “Ha’motzi lechem min Ha’aretz”.
The bear should have said “Shehakol ne’hiyeh
So dear congregants, here it is. I am sorry. I’m
sorry for failing to observe that the bear did
not get the bracha correct before eating the
doomed man in the joke. I hope you can
forgive me before Yom Kippur.
It is nice to see the community exercising its
scholarly skills to such an important subject.
However, why stop there? After all, there are a
whole host of chalachic questions that remain
How long should the bear wait before eating a
dairy based dessert?
Was the bear wearing a kippah and tzitzit?
If the bear did not eat bread but then said
hamozy, should it still have said Bichat
If there were three bears would they have made
a kosher zimmun for benching (assuming all the
bears were male, Jewish, fully barmitva)?
Can a bear be Jewish?
Who would be brave enough to circumcise the
All important questions that I’m sure you can
all provide me answers to in Kiddush.
Shabbat Shalom.
Bilde fra thetimes.co.uk
Israel har nettopp gjennomført valg og til manges forundring dukket
det opp en utfordrer til den sittende regjering. Yair Lapid syntes å
komme fra nærmest ingensteder. Likevel vant hans parti Yesh Atid,
”Det finnes en fremtid” 19 seter i Knesset, noe som gjør partiet til det
nest største etter dette valget.
Hvem er så denne mannen.Yair Lapid ble født i Tel Aviv i 1963, hans
far var journalist og hans mor forfatter. Selv har han en lang karriere
bak seg som journalist i Maariv og Yedioth Ahronoth. Han er
forfatter, har arbeidet som programleder og nyhetsanker i israelsk TV,
er kjent som skuespiller og nå altså også som politiker. Han er gift
med journalisten Lihi Lapid og sammen har de tre barn. Yair Lapid
har lenge gjort seg bemerket i det israelske samfunn og i 2005 ble han
stemt frem som den 36. største israeler gjennom tidene.
Det var i januar 2012 at Lapid bekjentgjorde at han ville forlate
journalistikken til fordel for politikken. Tre måneder senere, i april,
registrerte han sitt parti, noe som skulle gjøre det mulig å delta i det
forestående valget høsten 2012. Ulike politiske beslutninger samt en
intervensjon fra høyesterett gjorde det imidlertid slik at valget først ble
avholdt i 2013 og Lapids parti var sikret deltakelse. Meningsmålingene
på forhånd var ikke oppsiktsvekkende, men resultatet ble en
Lapid rettet gjennom hele sin valgkamp fokuset mot de
innenrikspolitiske forhold. Han er dessuten en sterk tilhenger av å
redusere privilegiene til de ultraortodokse og kreve deres deltakelse på
arenaer i samfunnet der de pr idag ikke deltar. Når det gjelder
forholdet til sine palestinske naboer ønsker han å gjenoppta
fredsforhandlingene. Hans partis plattform er: ”To stater for to folk”.
Han vil imidlertid bevare noen av de store bosetningsblokkene av
sikkerhetshensyn, og i januar, rett før valget, sa han: ”Jeg tror ikke
araberne vil ha fred. Jeg vil derfor bli kvitt dem ved å sette opp en mur
mellom dem og oss slik at vi kan sikre en jødisk majoritet i Israel.”
Vi følger spent med.
Av Daniel Ellis
Av Berit Reisel