The historical approach
This first way of addressing the question of lengthy repetitions bases itself on a brief suggestion by the Ralbag, which has recently been developed and popularized by Orthodox Bible scholar Joshua Berman. Ralbag proposes that, viewed from the correct perspective, such textual phenomena should not be viewed as anything remarkable at all. This is because we must analyse the Torah in the context of the stylistic flourishes of ancient literature – with an overriding awareness that the Torah was written in the Ancient Near East. Rabbi Dr Berman then supplies examples from Ancient Near Eastern history in which lengthy descriptions are repeated in a way which appears odd to the modern reader.
By so extending the principle of “dibra Torah belashon benei adam” – that the Torah was presented in a form which would make it easiest for its first readers to relate to it – Ralbag (and Berman) seek to deny that there is any question to be answered here at all.
Having established the existence of such a principle, Berman further draws upon it to address other challenges from academic bible critics, to establish the antiquity of parts of the Torah such as the Song of the Sea as well as claims that certain passages of the Torah originated from multiple authors and sources.
The theological approach
A second approach to the lengthy enumeration of all of the Mishkan’s details seeks to identify theological reasons which underpin this phenomenon. Towards the end of the first section of the Kuzari, Rabbi Yehudah Halevi places great emphasis on the need for the Torah’s commandments to be observed in a way which accords precisely with the way in which they were revealed. This requirement, he continues, is particularly acute with regard to ritual commandments such as korbanot and Mishkan construction. There is a very thin line between correct forms of divine worship and human attempts to rationalize and construct our own illegitimate way of worshipping God.
It was such an illegitimate rationalisation, argues the Kuzari, which led the Israelites to serve the golden calf in place of Moshe as some imagined form of intermediary. If the Mishkan construction can be viewed as part of the process of repairing the raw and unrestrained spiritual urges which led to the sin of the golden calf, the careful and deliberate adherence to precise details of this commandment lies at the very heart of its purpose. Thus, explains Rabbi Y. D. Soloveitchik in his Beit Halevi, each aspect of Mishkan construction which was faithfully enacted by the Israelites necessitated its own individual mention that it had been built “as God commanded Moshe” – a phrase which appears an impressive total of 18 times in the portion of Pekudei.
This approach can be viewed from the mystical perspective in terms of each commandment and detail of the Mishkan being capable of fulfilling its spiritual function. But it can also be understood from Rambam’s more practical and rational approach to the commandments. As told by Rambam, the purpose of korbanot and the Mishkan was to withdraw the Israelites from the sort of pagan worship and mindset which they had absorbed in Egypt in order to replace it with a monotheistic worldview. Talmud Reclaimed explains how for this to succeed, a very delicate balance had to be maintained in order to create a system of worship which was, on the one hand, sufficiently similar to existing religious rites, while also distancing them from problematic and idolatrous doctrines. This balance required a painstaking loyalty to the precise details of the divine command in these areas – and therefore this obedience was enumerated at great length in the Torah.
The warm-and-fuzzy approach
Championed by Ramban in his commentary to yesterday’s reading, this approach sees the lengthy repetition as an indication of great importance. Just as, the midrash teaches, the Torah’s copious recounting of Eliezer’s trip to Aram was seen to indicate God’s great love even for the chatter of the servants of the Avot, so too Vayakhel and Pekudei are confirmation of God’s great love for the Israelites and the abode they built for Him in their midst. This theme was further developed by the late Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, who contrasted the relatively few verses which the Torah dedicated to the world’s creation with the verbosity which embodied the construction of His abode among Israel.
On a personal note, I was grateful for the long and repetitive themes of yesterday’s reading, which allowed me to meditate on and lay the groundwork for the post that you have just read!
First posted on Facebook 10 March 2024, here.
