Parashat HaShavua - Beha'alotecha

We encounter In Beha’aloteca two models, one open and expansive and one closed and protective, of how God and Torah should be present in, and interact with, the world: the menorah, open and expansive, and the aron (Ark of the Covenant), closed and protective.

About the menorah Philo observes: “ it is worthwhile to consider why, after having explained the measure of the table and of the altar of incense, he has given no such description of the candlestick; may it not be, perhaps, for the reason that… the heaven, of which the candlestick is the symbol, is of infinite magnitude…; its boundary is God, and he also is its ruler and the director of its course.” (The Works of Philo, p. 295) It is hard to imagine a more expansive interpretation than this!

According to Rabbeinu Bachya (Spain, 1255-1340), the construction of the Beit Mikdash, the Temple, that housed the menorah showed how it was meant to illuminate the entire world: “As our sages of blessed memory taught, when a person builds a house the windows are narrower on the outside and wider on the inside to illuminate the interior as much as possible, but Solomon did not do so; he built the Temple with windows narrower on the inside and wider on the outside so the light would radiate out from the Temple and illuminate the world, to demonstrate that the Temple was all light / שדרשו רז"ל דרך העולם כשאדם בונה בית עושה לו חלונות צרות מבחוץ ורחבות מבפנים כדי שיהא האור נכנס מבחוץ ומאיר מבפנים, אבל שלמה לא עשה כן; בנה בית המקדש ועשה שם חלונות צרות מבפנים ורחבות מבחוץ כדי שיהא האור יוצא מבהמ"ק ומאיר לחוץ, להודיעך שכולו אור.” (Nu. 8:1) The light of the menorah was not meant to be contained, it was meant to illuminate all.

Contrast this with the aron. This week’s reading includes two passages that we have incorporated into our Torah service, the first in the beginning and the second at the end: “And it was, whenever the Ark set out, Moshe would say, ‘Arise Lord, may Your enemies be scattered and may those who hate You flee from You.’ And when it came to rest he would say, ‘Return Lord among the myriads of thousands of Israel’” / ׆ וַיְהִ֛י בִּנְסֹ֥עַ הָאָרֹ֖ן וַיֹּ֣אמֶר מֹשֶׁ֑ה קוּמָ֣ה ׀ יְהֹוָ֗ה וְיָפֻ֙צוּ֙ אֹֽיְבֶ֔יךָ וְיָנֻ֥סוּ מְשַׂנְאֶ֖יךָ מִפָּנֶֽיךָ׃ וּבְנֻחֹ֖ה יֹאמַ֑ר שׁוּבָ֣ה יְהֹוָ֔ה רִֽבְב֖וֹת אַלְפֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵֽל׃ ׆ (Nu. 10:35-36) Rabbeinu Bachya says “the Torah paused here for these two verses; it would have been fitting to continue [to Chapter 11 with] ‘the nation were like those who complain,’ from [Chapter 10 verse 34] ‘the cloud of the Lord was above them by day, when they traveled from the camp’ / הפסיק כאן בשני פסוקים אלה והיה ראוי להדביק ׳ויהי העם כמתאוננים׳ עם ׳בנסעם מן המחנה’” (Nu. 10:35) But instead, verses 35 and 36 were inserted at the end of Chapter 10! Why?

Here Bachya turns to Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel for an answer. The verses are here, he says, “to provide a break between one disaster and the next. The first disaster was the fact that on the day they departed from God’s mountain they turned away from God, and the second is here when “the nation were like those complained” / להפסיק בין פורענות ראשונה לפורענות שניה, פורענות ראשונה ׳ויסעו מהר ה',׳ אותו היום ׳סרו מאחרי ה'׳, פורענות שניה ׳ויהי העם כמתאוננים׳.”

I will now circle back to my original premise, that the aron here symbolizes a closed and protective stance with regard to God and Torah. The Torah writes these two verses within brackets, the letter “nun / נ,” one before the first verse and one after the second. Bachya explains: “The Holy Blessed One added these symbols to separate it from the adjacent passages before and after, and to teach us that it is not in its place / עשה לה הקב"ה סימנין כדי להבדילה בין הסמוכות לה בתחלה ובסוף וכדי ללמדנו שנכתבה שלא במקומה.” While the latter point simply reinforces the interpretation that the two verses are out of place, the former signals to us that the Torah must be protected from bad things. The aron is closed. Recall the fatal mistake of Uzzah in even daring to touch the aron to keep it from falling! (2 Sam. 6-7)

We can be grateful, I think, that both these models exist, the menorah and the aron, the open and expansive as well as the closed and protective. My hope is that we never feel compelled to go to one extreme at the expense of the other; that instead we have the freedom and flexibility to navigate the two successfully, that sometimes when appropriate we can be the menorah, and other times the aron.

Shabbat shalom!

Rabbi Jack Nahmod
Middle School Judaic Studies Head
Rabbinic Advisor