Noam Hashem

In Pekudei when they finished the keilim and in Shemini when the kehuna was handed over to Aharon, Moshe gave them the bracha.

Shemos 39:43 

וַיַּרְא משֶׁה אֶת כָּל הַמְּלָאכָה וְהִנֵּה עָשׂוּ אֹתָהּ כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְהֹוָה כֵּן עָשׂוּ וַיְבָרֶךְ אֹתָם משֶׁה

Rashi there

וירא משה את כל המלאכה את כל מלאכת המשכן אינו אומר אלא את כל המלאכה שהיה הכל כמעשה בראשית כמו שכתוב לעיל. מיד ברכם שנאמר ויברך אותם משה. מה ברכה ברכן? רבותינו אמרו ה' אלהי אבותיכם וגו' רבי מאיר אומר יהי רצון שתשרה שכינה במעשה ידיכם והם אמרו ויהי נועם ה' וכו' (תנחומא, פקודי יא)

Similarly Vayikra 9:23,

  ויבא משה ואהרן אל אהל מועד ויצאו ויברכו את העם וירא כבוד יהוה אל כל העם    

Rashi

יצאו ויברכו את העם. אָמְרוּ וִיהִי נֹעַם ה' אֱלֹהֵינוּ עָלֵינוּ, יְהִי רָצוֹן שֶׁתִּשְׁרֶה שְׁכִינָה בְמַעֲשֵׂה יְדֵיכֶם; לְפִי שֶׁכָּל שִׁבְעַת יְמֵי הַמִּלּוּאִים שֶׁהֶעֱמִידוֹ מֹשֶׁה לַמִּשְׁכָּן וְשִׁמֵּשׁ בּוֹ וּפֵרְקוֹ בְכָל יוֹם לֹא שָׁרְתָה בוֹ שְׁכִינָה, וְהָיוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל נִכְלָמִים וְאוֹמְרִים לְמֹשֶׁה, מֹשֶׁה רַבֵּנוּ, כָּל הַטֹּרַח שֶׁטָּרַחְנוּ שֶׁתִּשְׁרֶה שְׁכִינָה בֵינֵינוּ וְנֵדַע שֶׁנִּתְכַּפֵּר לָנוּ עֲוֹן הָעֵגֶל, לְכָךְ אָמַר לָהֶם זֶה הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר צִוָּה ה' תַּעֲשׂוּ וְיֵרָא אֲלֵיכֶם כְּבוֹד ה' — אַהֲרֹן אָחִי כְּדַאי וְחָשׁוּב מִמֶּנִּי, שֶׁעַל יְדֵי קָרְבְּנוֹתָיו וַעֲבוֹדָתוֹ תִשְׁרֶה שְׁכִינָה בָכֶם וְתֵדְעוּ שֶׁהַמָּקוֹם בָּחַר בּוֹ:

which explains why he gave them the bracha a second time.

Why the word Noam for Shechina?

Rav Bergman in maamarim (Tzav) says it's because hashra'as hashechina in the Mishkan davka required perfect middos, such as Aharon's when he saw Moshe made king and Moshe's when he saw Aharon given eternal kehuna. That's why Nadav and Avihu had to die, because their avoda had a lack of hachna'ah and joy at another's success, and it threatened the whole kedusha of the Mishkan.

The word appears in Tehillim 90, in Tefilla l'moshe, and in Zecharya 11, by the two maklos, and in Mishlei. The Malbim learns that noam is the satisfaction of knowing that you've completed your tafkid.

But it seems to me that the simple pshat is that the word Noam refers not to the prerequisite but to the Shechina itself.

I just saw something in the Teivas Goma (here and here) that makes sense of it all. The Pri Megadim says that b'etzem, all the avodos of making the Mishkan were our little hishtadlus and the Ribono shel Olam making the real creation. But to start the process, they had to make themselves a mikdash (b'socham), and for that, for Tikkun Hamiddos, or Yiras Shamayim, the ikkar is what the man does.

אגדה. וירא משה כל המלאכה כן עשו ויברך. עיין רמ"א יפה; והענין כי מלאכת המנורה השליכו לאש ויצאה מאליה. וכל מלאכה המשכן מה' היה והם סייעו לבד. ששת ימים תֵּעָשֶׂה מלאכה מאיליה, ולא נחסר מזהב וכסף ונחשת כלום כמ"ש רמ"א ז"ל, משכן העדות העיקר מה' והם סייעו, נראים כאלו הם עושים. אבל ושכנתי בתוכם שיעשו הם עצמם מקדש ויטהרו גופם להשראת שכינה, הם העיקרים והקב"ה סייעם. הכל בידי שמים כו'. ופ' תרומה ככל אשר אני מראה אותך וכן תעשו כו' ויהי נועם כו' יע"ש יפה. וקיי"ל מסייע אין בו ממש ונמצא במלאכת המשכן הם היו מסייעים והעיקר מה' ובלי סייעתם היה נעשה אבל שיטהר האדם גופו העיקר ממנו, ובלי סייעת ה' א"א לולי הקב"ה עוזרו כו'. וזה הוה סיוע שיש בו ממש ...

Mimeila, Noam is the perfect term, a word that captures everything that happened.  Noam means the shleimus hamiddos of Veshachanti b'socham that that makes it possible for us to do the beginning of a peula and Hashem then creates a perfect klei machzik bracha for Avodas Hashem, and Noam means the Shechina itself. The Noam is the machshir and the Noam is the totza'ah.  Ultimately, the Noam is knowing that you have fulfilled your tafkid of creating a matzav where the Ribono shel Olam is willing to bring His kedusha into this world.

This is not really a great novelty. It is pashut in the passuk itself. Look at the Malbim:

"ויהי נועם ה' אלהינו עלינו", (הנעימות הוא התענוג שישיג הפועל ממעשהו במה שהפיק ממעשהו את התכלית הנרצה), וע"י שאנו נשיג את השלמות, בזה ימצא ה' נועם בכלל הבריאה אשר ברא לכבודו, שישיגו הברואים את כבודו ויעבדוהו, וזה יתראה עלינו, כי נחנו נהיה תכלית הבריאה וחפץ ה' בעולמו, ובנו ימצא תכלית מעשיו ופעולותיו, "ומעשה ידינו כוננה עלינו", ר"ל כי מעשה ידי האדם בענינים השפלים אינם מכוננים עליו, דהיינו שהוא לא נעשה כן ובסיס אל מעשיו, למשל הבונה בית לשבת בו, הבית מכונן על יסוד אבנים, והאבנים מכוננים על עפר הארץ, לא על האומן הבונה, בהפך האומן יתכונן על ביתו לשבת בו ולמצוא מחסה מזרם וממטר, לא כן מעשה הטוב בענינים הנפשיים, נעשה הוא בסיס וכן למעשה ידיו, למשל הלומד תורה תורתו מכוננת על שכל האדם ונפשו, והעושה מצוה לשמה המצוה יש לה כן בנפש הפועל, וז"ש שמעשה ידינו יהיו מכוננים עלינו, לא על דבר שהוא זולת עצמותנו, "ומעשה ידינו" יהיו דברים אשר "כוננהו", שכל מה שנעשה יכונן ה' אותם מפני שיהיו טובים בעיניו, עד כאן דבר איש האלהים המתפלל, והיא תפלה כללית, וגם פרטית, שהתפלל גם על עצמו במה שנגזר עליו שלא יכנס לארץ, שאמר שאינו מבין עז אף ה' ולא עברתו, ובקש שה' ינחם על עבדו, ושיראו אליו פעולות ה' בעת יכנס לארץ להשיג שלימותו, והדר ה' יראה על בניו שהם יירשו מקומו אחריו, ושמעשה ידיו מה שהוציא עם ה' ממצרים יתכוננן עליו לא על זולתו. - ע"כ היא התפלה:

מעשה ידינו כוננה עלינו means that our efforts of self-improvement, to grow in ruchniyus, כוננה עלינו- may they be successful and make us what we want to be. מעשה ידינו כוננהו  asks Hashem "May we be worthy so that our efforts to make the world better should bear fruit and create a מדור לשכינה." The bracha, the tefilla, of נועם, has two steps. Step one,  עלינו. Step two, כוננהו. Step one, ועשו לי מקדש ושכנתי בתוכם. Step two, ועשו לי מקדש ושכנתי בתוכם. 

Vayakhel and Pekudei Parsha Questions

1. The brass altar in the courtyard is described as being "five amos long and five amos wide, square." The golden altar in the Heichal is "one ama long and one ama wide, square." The description "square" appears to be unnecessary. If all sides are equal, it's a square. What would we think if it wasn't described as being square? This pertains to practical halacha, because we have an oral tradition from Sinai that our Tefillin must be square, similar to the altars.
"Square" teaches geometric perfection of 90 degree corners and straight lines, so if it is a rhombus, or or there is a nick on the edge, it would be passul. The Meshech Chochma and Netziv in Ki Sisa 27:1 say additional answers regarding where the ribu'a has to begin and the application to the Mizbei'ach in the Mikdash which had different dimensions.

2.  If something has been used personally, can it be donated and used in the Mishkan?
From the Mar'os HaTzovos and the jewelry, yes, but only if it undergoes a significant physical change. See Magen Avraham OC 147 sk 5, אם שינה צורתן. But see Rav Hirsch here regarding the Kiyor.

3. What words in our parsha indicate that a mental resolution to give charity cannot be retracted and creates a legal obligation, and why do you think this applies uniquely to hekdesh/tzedakah.

Nediv Lev.  יו”ד סימן רנח, סעיף יג. Why? You’re on your own.

4. On the basis of a close similarity of its name, some scholars believe that one of the ingredients of the Anointing Oil was Cannabis. Which ingredient do you think that was?
Kenei Bosem. I'm not making this up. There are convincing reasons to believe this is the case.

5. If one only has enough for one candle, the Shabbos candle takes precedence over any other, including Chanuka. This is because of the vital importance of Shalom Bayis. On other days of the week, Chanuka takes precedence over Shalom Bayis. Apparently, avoiding friction on Shabbos is of greater importance than at any other time of the week. What passuk indicates that this is so.לא תבערו אש בכל מושבותיכם ביום השבת
See Gittin 52b about the Sattan instigating fights between a married couple every erev Shabbos and Reb Meir's intevention. 
See Shla'h Shabbos Ner Mitzva 32, where he says

 ועל כן עבירה כפולה היא מי שמראה כעס בשבת וכבר נתנו סימנים לא תבערו אש בכל מושבותיכם ביום השבת והוא אש המחלוקת וחימום הכעס 

and Chasam Sofer there in Gittin and Shaarei Ora I Ki Sisa.

6.  Moshe and Betzalel were required to give a precise accounting. For every penny they were given, they had to say "This is what I used it for." This was a public accounting given to Klal Yisrael, and it was presented in a fashion that the Jews all said "Well done. You used it all just as it ought to have been used."  After 120 years, when you come to the Olam Ha'Emes, you're going to undergo a Din v'Cheshbon. This Din v'Cheshbon will be like the cheshbon of Moshe and Betzalel in Parshas Pekudei. You are going to be asked, "You were given the ability to walk, to talk, to see, to feel, to think, to influence others, you were given intellectual and emotional gifts above others. What did you do with these precious gifts? You are now going to tell us exactly how you used your gifts, how you spent your time and money." It's not enough to convince yourself that you did the right thing. You're going to have to show the court that you did the right thing, Rochel Bitcha Haketana. Each one of us was given a Tafkid, and the tafkid involves בין אדם למקום, and בין אדם לחבירו, and בין אדם לעצמו. How do you think you're going to do when you leyn your personal Parshas Pekudei?
Inspired by Kol Rom I beginning of Pekudei.

The Four Crowns in the Mishkan

In Teruma and Tetzaveh, Rashi points out that three keilim had gold crowns: the Shulchan, the Golden Mizbei'ach, and the Aron haKodesh.  Rashi says that these three zeirim/crowns correspond to the three crowns mentioned by Rav Shimon in Avos 4:13 the crowns of Royalty, of Kehunah, and of Torah. (Aron, see Rashi 25:11; Shulchan, 25:24; Mizbei'ach, 30:3.)

שמות רבה לד ב

 א"ר שמעון בן יוחאי: ג' כתרים הם, כתר מלכות וכתר כהונה וכתר תורה. כתר מלכות זה השלחן דכתיב בו "זר זהב סביב". כתר כהונה זה המזבח דכתיב בו "זר זהב סביב". וכתר תורה זה הארון דכתיב בו "זר זהב". 

and

במדבר רבה ד סוף סימנים יג יד 

רבי שמעון אומר שלשה כתרים הם כתר תורה וכתר כהונה וכתר מלכות וכתר  שם טוב עולה על גביהן. מעשה הארון כנגד בעלי תורה ... מעשה השולחן כנגד מלכות בית דוד ... מזבח הזהב כנגד כתר כהונה ... מעשה מנורה כנגד בעלי שם טוב , שנאמר: טוב שם משמן טוב, ולכך היו כל כליה עמה בבגד תכלת שכתר שם טוב על גביהם

 אבות פרק ד משנה יג 

רבי שמעון אומר: שלשה כתרים הם: כתר תורה וכתר כהונה וכתר מלכות. וכתר שם טוב עולה על גביהן.   

(Reb Shimon=Reb Shimon bar Yochai.)

Yoma 72b

אמר רבי יוחנן שלשה זירים הן, של מזבח, ושל ארון ושל שולחן

Rashi says in Yoma there,

שלשה זירין נעשו בכלי הקודש. של מזבח סימן לכתר כהונה ושל ארון סימן לכתר תורה ושל שולחן סימן לכתר מלכות, שהשולחן הוא סימן לעושר מלכים

Many mefarshim ask, where is the fourth crown?  If, as the Mishna in Avos says, the greatest crown is that of Shem Tov, why is that crown not found in the Mishkan?  And now that the Medrash in Bamidbar says that the Menora represents that crown, why did the Menorah not have any crown? If the symbolic crown appeared on the Shulchan, the Mizbei'ach, and the Aron, why did the Menorah have no crown at all?

There are many teirutzim to this question, beginning with the Maharal in Derech Chaim in Avos.  But the ellipsis is obvious and clearly intentional, and so I think it deserves a simple and satisfying answer. (H. L. Mencken once wrote that "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."  Unlike most such answers, I think this one is good.)

A כתר-זיר-crown is a symbol of greatness.  By placing a crown on top of a person or a thing, you express its glory. But it is only a symbol.  What a crown expresses is splendor, a shine.  In fact, the idea of a crown is most fundamentally expressed in Iyov 29:2-3, 

מי יתנני כירחי קדם כימי אלוה ישמרני.  בהלו נרו עלי ראשי לאורו אלך חשך

There, we see the crown as a halo, a ring of light.  That is a true crown, symbolically expressed by placing a gold crown on one's head.  In fact, the words   זהב  and זיב , gold and shine, are basically the same.  We use gold to represent and produce a zohar/ziv.  In the same way, the words זר  and  זוהר are essentially the same- a crown, and a shine.  The purpose of the זר is to represent and embody a זוהר.

But the Menorah did not need a symbolic crown.  The purpose of the Menorah was to cast light, and that light is an inherent crown.  The Menorah, which represented the Keser Shem Tov, did not need a golden crown.  It did not need  זהב, because it had  זיב , and it did not need a זר because it had a  זוהר , and it did not need a קרן של זהב because it had  קרני אור.  It did not need a crown, because it had a Corona. When you have a halo, it doesn't make any sense to wear a crown.

After Mattan Torah, the members of Klal Yisrael had עדיים, crowns of glory, which they had to give back after the Eigel.  But Moshe, as far as I know, did not have any עדי.  He had Karnei Ohr, and he didn't need any עדיים.

One last thing. An answer as simple as this will often evoke the reaction that it is so obvious that everyone knows it without being told.  If,you feel that way, why don't you ask someone the question.  "If" they don't give this answer immediately, tell them to think about it for a while and come back to you with an answer.  Then you'll see how obvious it is.  The only criticism I accept on this answer is that it doesn't offer anything meaningful from a hashkafa or chochma standpoint.  It's just a simple fact.

But one question does remain.  Assuming that the light of the menora is the crown that corresponds to the Keser Shem Tov, why is the menorah and its light the best metaphor for that Keser?  The shulchan, the mizbei'ach, the Aron, are obviously appropriate.  But what is it about the Menorah that corresponds davka with Keser Shem Tov?

My initial response is that without the light of the Menorah/Shem Tov, the other kesarim remain in the dark and lose their significance. What good is a Talmid Chacham without Da'as? Or a Kohen that is unpleasant and unsympathetic? Or a King that walls himself off in his Versailles?  Only when they have a shem tov can their other qualities become an additional crown.

I'm open to suggestions.

Pekudei, Shemos 39:13. Harav Zelig Tarshish of Kelm

Going through my mother's house, הריני כפרת משכבה, I was looking at this picture, that had been under the glass on the server since I was an infant.  My sister remarked that it seemed out of character for my mother to not have left some way to identify the person, so I looked, for the thousandth time, at the back.  This time I found almost invisibly faint writing on the back that said that it is a picture of Rav Zelig Tarshish of Kelm.  Even in Kelm, that singular concentration of gadlus, Reb Zelig was renowned for his tzidkus and gadlus in Torah.  He was not really associated with the Talmud Torah in Kelm.

הרב זעליג (זעליק) תרשיש

Reb Zelig wore Tallis and Tefillin all day, as can be seen in this picture.  He has three sefarim, עין תרשיש ג"ח.  His last years were in Eretz Yisrael- I don't know where this picture was taken.  The young men don't strike me as Yerushalmi, but the stone building does.

This is the haskama on his sefer from Kovner Rov:

 מכתב מכבוד.הגאון האמיתי פאר הדור מאור הגולה מרן אברהם דובער כהנא שפירא

 שליט״א הגאב״ד דק״ק קובנה

 .בא לפני גברא רבא ויקירא הוא ניהו הרב הה״ג המאוה״ג המפורסם בתורתו וצדקתו לתהלה ותפארת כש״ת מוהר״ר יהושע זעליק תרשיש נ״י מק״ק קלם וספרו ״עין תרשיש״ בידו, חידושים על הש״ס ופוסקים. עברתי על פני הספר בכמה מקומות ומצאתי הרבה דברים ישרים ונכונים הקולעים למטרת האמת והפשטות, וגם בדברי אגדה נעימים וישרים ממולאים בבקיאות ועיבוד הסוגיות לדיוקן. והנני מבקש מכל מוקירי תורה וחברים ליראי ה׳ לאסוף נא ברכה אל תוך בתיהם לכבוד התורה ולכבוד הרה״ג המחבר נ״י והי׳ למשען לו להדפסת כתביו וברכה לביתו. ובגלל זה תהיה הברכה שרויה בביתם וצדקתם עומדת לעד 

הכ״ד המדבר לכבוד התורה ולומדי׳ כו״ח ביום ה' ד׳ אדר א' שנת תרצ״ב פ״ק קובנה.

It's interesting that Kovner Rov complimented the sefer by saying that they "strike the target of truth and simplicity," and that it shows "meticulously working through of the sugyos."

A description of Reb Zelig:

 ר׳ זעליג תרשיש, דא געבארן 1862. כל ימיו פארזונקען אין תורה־ לערנען, א גאנצן טאג ארומגעגאנגען מיטן טלית. געווען זייער ארעם. זיין הנהגה האט ארויסגערופן יראת־הכבוד אויך ביי ניט־ יידן. ביי אלעמען באטראכט געווארן ווי א צדיק. 1933 עולה געווען מיט מישפהה קיץ ירושלים, ווו ניפטר געווארן 1938. חיבור: עין תרשיש (קובנה־ירושלים, תרצ״ב־ תרצ״ח, 3 טיילן).

According to a page of testimony at Yad VaShem, his married daughter was, as were all the Jews in town, killed in Kelm by Lithuanians in July/Av 1941.  Those Lithuanians managed to overcome their יראת־הכבוד.

He had another daughter who was in Eretz Yisrael with him, married to ר׳ מנחם גערבער of the מכון לחקר התלמוד and author of  הגיון התלמוד.

Pekudei, Shemos 40:17. Why Building the Mishkan was Delayed

Part one establishes that after the components of the Mishkan were ready, Hashem delayed the final assembly for three months in order that it take place in Nissan, and discusses the significance of that month.  Part two asks the question that naturally follows- if Hashem wanted it built in Nissan, what was the logic of "Hurry up and wait?"  Why were they told to begin the process in Tishrei instead of being told to begin three months later so there wouldn't be a hiatus.

I

 ויהי בחדש הראשון בשנה השנית באחד לחדש הוקם המשכן

The Mishkan was assembled on Rosh Chodesh Nissan- but all the components were finished and ready more than three months before that.

The Tanchuma here (quoted below) says that the Tzivui to build the Mishkan was given by Moshe to Klal Yisrael the day after Yom Kippur.  They began working immediately, and it was ready by the end of Kislev.

There are Medrashim brought by the Tur in the beginning of Hilchos Chanuka (ילקוט שמעוני מלכים א קפ"ד and Bamidbar Rabba 13:2) that specify the 25th of Kislev as the date of completion.  These Medrashim say that the renewal of the Beis HaMikdash by the Chashmona'im centuries later took place on that date because the original Mishkan was completed and could have been built on that day.

א"ר חנינא בכ"ה בכסליו נגמר מלאכת המשכן ועשה מקופל עד אחד בניסן, כמו שכתוב ביום הראשון באחד לכחדש תקים את משכן, והיו ישראל ממלמלין על משה לומר למה לא הוקם מיד שמא דופי אירע בו והקב"ה חשב לערב שמחת המשכן בחדש שנולד בו יצחק דכתיב לושי ועשי עוגות ואמרו לו שוב אשוב אליך, ומעתה הפסיד כסלו שנגמרה בו המלאכה אמר הקב"ה עלי לשלם, מה שלם לו הקב"ה חנוכת חשמונאי

Why was the Mishkan in storage for three months?  It is not because they were traveling.  They came to Har Sinai on Rosh Chodesh Sivan the first year after Yetzias Mitzrayim (Shemos 19:1) and didn't leave until the twentieth of Iyar of the second year, a month and a half after they assembled the Mishkan (Bamidbar 10:11).

In fact, the long wait did bother the people.  The Tanchuma says that people decided on their own to put it together, and it didn't stand.  They thought that either it was missing pieces or badly done.  So that's why in 39:33 it says they brought it to Moshe, and it lists all the parts, and he said it was perfect.  The people were puzzled; why, then, isn't it standing when we try to put it up?

So Hashem told them there was nothing wrong with it, it isn't standing not because of some flaw.  It was Hashem's will that they not be able to assemble the Mishkan until Nissan so that it would be first put up on Yitzchak's birthday- לערב שמחת המשכן בשמחת היום שנולד בו יצחק אבינו.

This is the Tanchuma.

ולמה כתיב כאן כמה פעמים, כאשר צוה ה' את משה. לפי שהרהרו ישראל אחרי משה בשעה שהיו מעמידין המשכן ולא היה עומד, אמרו, שמא דבר קל אמר לו הקדוש ברוך הוא למשה לעשות לו במשכן, ומשה מעצמו הכניסנו בכל הטורח הזה. לפיכך אמר הקדוש ברוך הוא, הואיל והרהרתם אחריו, הריני כותב שמי על כל דבר ודבר שאני צויתי אותו. לכך כתיב, כאשר צוה ה' את משה בכל פעם ופעם. אמר הקדוש ברוך הוא, אם בקש אדם להרהר אחרי משה, יהרהר אחרי שאני אמרתי לו כל זאת ושיעשו לי המשכן.

ואימתי נאמר לו למשה לעשות את המשכן, ביום הכפורים. לפי שעלה משה להר שלש פעמים ועשה שם מאה ועשרים יום, מששה בסיון שעלה לשם עד יום הכפורים שהוא עשרה בתשרי. ואותו היום נאמר, וינחם ה' (שמ' לב יד) על מעשה העגל. אותו היום אמר לו, סלחתי כדבריך (במדב' יד כ). ואותו היום נאמר לו, ועשו לי מקדש (שמו' כה ח). ובו ביום אמר לו, וסלחת לעונינו ולחטאתנו ונחלתנו (שם לד ט), היום הזה תנחילנו סליחה לדורות. ובו ביום אמר לו הקדוש ברוך הוא, כי ביום הזה יכפר עליכם (ויק' טז ל). ועשו את המשכן בחדוה ובשמחה. ולכמה חדשים נגמרה מלאכת המשכן. רבי שמואל בר נחמן אמר, בשלשה חדשים נגמרה מלאכת המשכן, תשרי, מרחשון, כסליו. והיה מונח ומפורק טבת ושבט ואדר. והעמידוהו באחד בניסן, שנאמר, ביום החדש הראשון באחד לחדש תקים את משכן אהל מועד. רבי חנינא אומר, באחד באדר הי' נגמרה מלאכת המשכן. למה. שהמלאכה שנעשית בקיץ ביום אחד, נעשית בחורף בשני ימים, וכדברי רבי שמואל בר נחמני שאמר, שנעשה המשכן בשלשה חדשים. למה לא עמד מיד. אלא מפני שחשב הקדוש ברוך הוא לערב שמחת המשכן בשמחת היום שנולד בו יצחק אבינו, לפי שבאחד בניסן נולד יצחק. אמר הקדוש ברוך הוא, הריני מערב שמחתכם שמחה בשמחה. והיו ליצני הדור מרננין ומהרהרין ואומרין למה נגמרה מלאכת המשכן ואינו עומד מיד. ולא היו יודעים מחשבתו ועצתו של הקדוש ברוך הוא. ועל זה אמר דוד המלך, כי שמחתני ה' בפעלך במעשה ידיך ארנן (תהל' צב ה). כי שמחתני ה' בפעלך, זה אהל מועד. במעשה ידיך ארנן, זה בנין בית המקדש שיבנה במהרה בימינו. מה גדלו מעשיך ה', מאד עמקו מחשבותיך (תהלים צב ו), שהיית חושב לערב שמחה בשמחה, יום שנולד יצחק אבינו. ואותו היום נטל עשר עטרות, כדאיתא בסדר עולם וגו'. ולפיכך, איש בער לא ידע (שם שם ז), אלו הליצנין והטפשין שבדור שלא היו יודעים מחשבתו של הקדוש ברוך הוא. וכסיל לא יבין את זאת (שם), שלא היה יכול אחד מהם להקימו, ולא בצלאל ולא אהליאב ולא החכמים העושים את כל מלאכת הקדש, כדי שיבא משה ויטול את שלו, לפי שהיה מצטער שלא עשה בו כלום. לפיכך, ויקם משה את המשכן וגו', ולא בצלאל ולא אהליאב ולא החכמים העושים. וכתיב, ויהי ביום כלות משה להקים את המשכן (במדב' ז א). כיון שהוקם המשכן, מיד ירדה שכינתו לתוכו, שנאמר, ולא יכול משה לבא אל אהל מועד כי שכן עליו הענן וכבוד ה' מלא את המשכן. וכתיב, כי ענן ה' על המשכן וגו'. לקיים מה שנאמר, אך קרוב ליראיו ישעו לשכון כבוד בארצנו (תהלי' פה י). אמר הקדוש ברוך הוא, בעולם הזה היתה שכינתי ביניכם ולעיניכם, שנאמר, ומראה כבוד ה' וגו' (שמ' כד יז). ולעתיד לבא, שכינה אינה זזה מכם לעולם, שנאמר, ושכנתי בתוך בני ישראל ולא אעזוב את עמי ישראל (מלכים- א ו יג). ברוך ה' לעולם אמן, סלה:

What is the special connection davka to Yitzchak Avinu?

There are many drashos that address this question, including the Sfas Emes, last piece in Pekudei, and Harav Freidlander on Moadim II page 43.  In my opinion, admittedly subjective, I find the explanation given by Rabbi Eliezer Breitowitz, Rosh Yeshiva of Darchei Torah in Toronto, to be most convincing and satisfying, in that it relates specifically to the concept of Yitzchak as a Korban on the Har HaBayis, not to his general characteristics.

Rabbi Breitowitz says that all of our Korbanos are connected to Akeidas Yitzchak.  Through the Akeida, Avraham and Yitzchak created and established the unique prototype of the Avoda of Korbanos, a concept that did not exist prior to that moment, as we will explain.

In Breishis 12:13, the passuk says

וישא אברהם את עיניו וירא והנה איל אחר נאחז בסבך בקרניו וילך אברהם ויקח את האיל ויעלהו לעלה תחת בנו

Rashi-

תחת בנו: מאחר שכתוב ויעלהו לעולה, לא חסר המקרא כלום, מהו תחת בנו, על כל עבודה שעשה ממנו היה מתפלל ואומר יהי רצון שתהא זו כאלו היא עשויה בבני, כאלו בני שחוט, כאלו דמו זרוק, כאלו הוא מופשט, כאלו הוא נקטר ונעשה דשן:

instead of his son: Since it is written: “and offered it up for a burnt offering,” nothing is missing in the text. Why then [does it say]: “instead of his son” ? Over every sacrificial act that he performed, he prayed, “May it be [Your] will that this should be deemed as if it were being done to my son: as if my son were slaughtered, as if his blood were sprinkled, as if my son were flayed, as if he were burnt and reduced to ashes.”
The source is the Tanchuma in Shlach:

וישא אברהם את עיניו וירא והנה איל (בר' כב יג). שכך שנו רבותינו, אילו של אברהם נברא מששת ימי בראשית [בערב שבת] בין השמשות. באותה שעה נטלו אברהם ויעלהו לעולה תחת בנו. כיון שאמר, ויקח את האיל ויעלהו לעולה (שם), חסר המקרא כלום. מהו תחת בנו (שם). אמר אברהם, רבונו של עולם, הריני שוחט את האיל, כך תהיה רואה כאלו בני שחוט לפניך. נטל דמו, אמר, כך תהא רואה כאלו דם יצחק זרוק לפניך. נטל את האיל והפשיטו, אמר לו, כך תהא רואה כאלו עור יצחק הופשט לפניך על גבי המזבח. שרפו, אמר לו, כך תהא רואה כאלו אפרו צבור לפניך על גבי המזבח.

Chazal often say that Hashem sees the ashes of Yitzchak on the Mizbei'ach.  But Yitzchak wasn't sacrificed, the ram was, so why does it say that Hashem see's אפרו של יצחק?   Usually, people answer the question by saying מחשבה טובה הקדוש ברוך הוא מצרפה למעשה.  But it's much more than that.  The point of this Tanchuma is that the line between what defined the entity called "Yitzchak" and the entity called "The Ram" was not absolute, just as זכור ושמור בדיבור אחד נאמרו מה שאין יכול הפה לדבר ומה שאין האוזן יכול לשמוע.  Because of Avraham's tefilla, it was both Yitzchak and the Ram that were on the Mizbei'ach.

This is the great accomplishment of the Akeidas Yitchak.  One would think that if there were a classic example of מצוה שבגופו that you can't do through a Shaliach (קצות שפ"ב), it would be self-sacrifice- you just can't outsource self-sacrifice.  The chiddush of the Akeida, the fulfillment of Avraham's and Yitzchak's tefilla, that they earned through their willingness for Yitzchak to be the korban, was that korbanos can be the vicarious sacrifice of the man bringing the Korban.

The Korbanos brought by Kayin and Hevel and Noach were different.  First, they were meant as a way to offer thanks to Hashem, as if they were showing Hakaras Hatov by giving Him a gift, or sharing a meal with Hashem.  And even if they intended the korban to be a replacement for their own life, it was an empty gesture, because, as we've said, symbolic self-sacrifice is absurd.  Imagine a person that would say, "Lord, I am so besotted with love for You, that I want to show my dedication and love by inflicting terrible pain upon myself!  By crippling myself!  By killing myself!  But since to do so would interfere with my continued ability to serve You, I'll take an animal in my stead, and boy, is he going to suffer."  That would not be avodah, it would be comedy; more pathology than theology.  But at the Akeida, Avraham and Yitzchak actually were on their way to doing exactly that; they physically demonstrated their desire to fulfill Hashems' will when it required their self-sacrifice and the sacrifice of one more precious than themselves.  After that penultimate act, the only thing that remained undone was the final act, the pe'ulah.  For the Pe'ula, Hashem accepted the animal in their place.  From that point, Hashem said that our Korbanos can have that meaning as well, our Korbanos can be viewed as a re-enactment of the Akeida.

How did Avraham and Yitzchak Avoseinu know to do this?  Because, as the Tanchuma says, when Hashem said to take the Ayil, Avraham said ?ריבונו של עולם, לחנם אמרת לי קח נא את בנך  They realized that the whole intent was to arrange that the hakrava of the ayil should be a vicarious- not just symbolic, vicarious- hakrava of Yitzchak.

The location of the Akeida was, of course, the Har HaBayis, the world's locus of Avoda.  The Gemara (Zevachim 62a) asks, how did the Anshei Knesses HaGedola know where to build the Mizbei'ach?  One of the answers is that he saw the ashes of Yitzchak piled there- two thousand years later.  The spiritual effect of the Akeida remains forever.

בשלמא בית מינכרא צורתו אלא מזבח מנא ידעי אמר רבי אלעזר ראו מזבח בנוי ומיכאל השר הגדול עומד ומקריב עליו ור' יצחק נפחא אמר אפרו של יצחק ראו שמונח באותו מקום

This supports and explains the rule we proposed elsewhere- that by the Korban of a Yisrael- davka by the korban of a Yisrael, which has the din of סמיכה, the exclusion of the korban of a מומר, and the din of אנשי מעמד- the Makriv, the owner, is part of the Korban.

One might think that this could apply to a shechita korban, to an animal, but not to a korban made of flour and oil, the Korban Mincha.  But the Gemara (Menachos 104b, and brought by Rashi in Vayikra) corrects that error;

אמר ר' יצחק מפני מה נשתנית מנחה שנאמר בה נפש אמר הקדוש ברוך הוא מי דרכו להביא מנחה עני מעלה אני עליו כאילו הקריב נפשו

Note
(Just for the sake of honesty, I want to point out that the Yalkut I brought above is in Melachim in the perek dealing with Shlomo HaMelech's inauguration of the Beis HaMikdash, and the Yalkut says that while the Mishkan opened in Nissan, the month of Yitzchak, the Beis HaMikdash was opened in Tishrei because it is the month of Avraham Avinu's birthday.

מהו בירח בול בירח מבול חסר מ' כנגד ארבעים יום, שאע"פ שנשבע הקב"ה כי מי נח זאת לי אעפ"כ מ' יום בכל שנה היו אותם הימים עושים רושם בעולם עד שעמד שלמה ובנה את בית המקדש ופסקו אותם מ' יום לפיכך כתיב חסר מ' כנגד ארבעים יום שפסקו. משנעשה הבית בירח בול נעשה נעול (ג) י"ב חדש והיו הכל ממלמלים על שלמה לומר לא בנה של בת שבע הוא היאך הקב"ה משרה שכינתו לתוך מעשה ידיו והקב"ה חשב לערב שמחת בית המקדש בחדש שנולד בו אברהם, בירח האיתנים זה חדש תשרי ולמה קורא אותו ירח האיתנים שנולד בו אברהם שנאמר משכיל לאיתן האזרחי. וכיון שנפתח בחדש מועדות והקריב הקרבנות וירדה האש אמר הקב"ה עכשו נשלמה המלאכה שנאמר ותשלם כל המלאכה, ועל זה נאמר עמקו מחשבותי

This is not inconsistent with what I wrote above.  Avraham and Yitzchak were equal partners in the Akeida.  But to figure out why the Mishkan was associated with Yitzchak and the Mikdash with Avraham would only distract from this vort and is not something I want to do now.)


II

.  If Hashem intended for the Mishkan to be assembled only in Nissan, why was Klal Yisrael told to start building three months earlier than necessary?

                a.  I would suggest two answers.
                        i.  It was necessary in order to make it clear that they were forgiven for the sin of the Eigel-it was called Mishkan Ha'eidus because it was eidus that there was a kappara.
                        ii. In order to give them a physical way to express their hispa'alus on their mechila.  The reason I say that it is important to give physical expression to his'orerus is the Ramban and the Kedushas Levi, who say that if a person has a great his'orerus, a hispa'alus, and he doesn't immediately do something with it, it can become spiritually ruinous:
Kedushas Levi in Naso/Shavuos:

הוא ע״פ דברי הרמב״ן שפירש על פסוק מה תעירו ומה תעוררו את האהבה עד שתתפץ (שיר השירים ב.ז). ופירש כשמגיע לאדם איזה התעוררות של יראה ואהבה להבורא ברוך הוא אזי תיכף ומיד יראה לעשות לה כלי, היינו שיעשה תיכף איזה מצוה. דהיינו שיתן צדקה או ישב תיכף ללמוד וכדומה. כי ידוע שהתעוררות הבאה אל האדם בפתע פתאום הוא אור הנשפע עליו מלמעלה ונקרא בחינת נשמה. אזי צריך האדם להלבישה בגוף בכדי שיהיה לה חיזוק ובסיס שלא יהיה מוטה חס ושלום. כידוע למביני מדע. וזה פירוש הפסוק: מה תעירו ומה תעוררו את האהבה עד שתחפץ. כי חפץ הוא מלשון כלי ההיינו התעוררות ההוא שבא אל האדם צריך תיכף ומיד כלי. וזהו עד שתחפץ.

Ramban in Emuna U'bitachon:

ודע כי כל זמן שאדם מחשב בתוך לבו שמו של הקב״ה או אחד מנפלאותיו יש לפניו התעוררות כפי מחשבת מעלת החושב... וקרוב לענין זה מה שאמר הכתוב: אם תעירו ואם תעוררו את האהבה עה שתחפץ. ואם לא היה כח באדם לעורר הדברים לא היה משביעם שלא לעשות. ופי׳ עד שתחפץ, עה שתצא מן הכח אל הפועל... וזהו עד שתחפץ. שתעשה חפץ על ידי הסיבה ההיא. מלשון רז״ל לאנקוטי חפצא בידיה (שבועות לח.ב) כלומר כלי

              b.  Chaim B. directed us to a sefer Be'er Yosef from Rav Yosef Salant, that discusses this, and he asks better- "Why was there such siyata dishmaya that enabled the work to be completed so quickly if it wasn't needed for another three months?"

If the writer would have proven his assertion that it was a six month job that was miraculously finished in three, he would have a really strong kashe, but he doesn't prove it.  But that doesn't matter.  Something needs an answer, either my kashe or his, and he says something interesting and good that also answers my question- namely, if Hashem intended that the Mishkan be erected on Rosh Chodesh Nissan, why was the tzivui given so long before.

The gist of his answer is that impatience contributed to the sin of the Eigel.  They wanted immediate spiritual direction and focus, and because of their פחיזות ובהלה they made a very bad decision to make the Eigel.  In a sense, it's like a person that's consumed with passion, a חולת אהבה, that makes bad decisions.  Hashem wanted to teach them that you have to calm down and wait for instruction, even when motivated by a passionate desire for spirituality.  I think it's an interesting answer- everyone knows that that passion can impair the Seichel and judgment.  He says that this is true even if the passion is for Avodas Hashem.  You have to learn to control that as well.

His answer is not inconsistent with the Tanchuma we brought.  Hashem wanted to teach them patience, and that's why the tzivui was so early.  If it were  just a matter of putting it up in Nissan, the tzivui could have been in Shvat instead of Tishrei.

ואפשר לומר בזה, כי ידוע ממדרשי חז״ל (הובא בדברינו לעיל בפ׳ ויקהל לה א־ה), שהמשכן היה כפרה על עוון העגל, והנה בענין עוון העגל כבר כתבו הראשונים בספר הכוזרי, וכעין זה כתבו הר״א בן עזרא והרמב״ן, שכוונתם היתה לעשות איזה דבר מוחשי שתשרה שם השכינה ויכוונו את עבודתם אל השכינה השורה שם, וכיון שראו שכבר בא שש שעות על היום ועדיין משה לא בא ואין להם מי שיורה להם הדרך, לא היו יכולים לעצור את תשוקתם העזה להשראת השכינה, ומרוב פחזותם עשו את העגל בכוונה ששם תשרה השכינה, ובחרו בשור שהוא אחד מהחיות הנושאות את הכסא, וזה היה עיקר חטאם מה שעשו בעצמם מבלי צווי הי ולא המתינו עד שיבוא משה מן ההר ושהוא יעשה מה שצוה השם, וכמו שאמר הפייטן (בסליחות יז תמוז) לרועי לא המתנתי שש ונשתברו הלוחות

 ולכן כיון שהמשכן בא לכפרה על חטאם זה, לכך היה צריך להיות כאן בהקמת המשכן תשובת המשקל כנגד החטא שלהם, ולעומת שהיו נחפזים ומבוהלים אז במעשיהם להשראת השכינה מבלי צווי הי, ובגלל זה נכשלו ונפלו בתהום רבה ויצא מהם העגל הזה, לכך כדי שיתקנו עכשיו בעשיית המשכן את אשר עוותו אז, - עשה הקב״ה שיגמר המשכן עם כל כליו בעוד שלשה חדשים לפני זמן הקמתו, ויהיה מונח ומקופל כל דבר ודבר הכל בתכלית שלמותו, והכל מכוון ומדוייק כאשר צוה הי בלי גרעון כלל, כדי שכולם ישתוקקו בכל יום ובכל שעה להקמתו ושתשרה השכינה ביניהם, וככה יעברו משך שלשה חדשים עד אשר יבוא צווי הי שיקימוהו, ורק אז יקימו אותו, ושרק אז תשרה בו השכינה, כדי ללמוד לדעת, שאין לעשות שום דבר גדול או קטן, אף אם הכוונה היא לעבודת הי, מבלי שיהיה על זה צווי מהקב״ה, וכל הזמן היו ישראל צריכים לעצור בעד חפצם ותשוקתם העזה שהיתה בוערת בלבם כשלהבת אש לאמר, מתי יתכונן המשכן ומתי תרד השכינה עליו, הרי הכל כבר מוכן ומזומן ולא חסר שום דבר, אלא שאין לנו רשות לזוז אפילו זיז כל שהוא עד אשר יבוא  על זה דבר הי, ובמה שכבשו את תאוותם והמיית לבם הגדולה הזאת משך שלשה חדשים, והיו מחכים בסבלנות הגדולה עד ר״ח ניסן, שאז זכו לשמוע ממשה רבינו שהקב״ה צוה להקימו, וכשהוקם המשכן אז נשלמה הכפרה בתכלית על חטאם הקודם שנכשלו בו ע״י פחזותם ובהילותם; ולכוונה זו עשה הקב״ה שסייע בידם בעבודת המשכן שיגמר במהרה, ויהיה מונח ומקופל 

משך זמן של שלשה חדשים, ואף שעל ידי זה היה מקום גם לאיזה מהם שיתלוצצו על זה, כדאיתא במדרש הנ״ל, אבל ישרים דרכי ה׳ וצדיקים ילכו בם וגו׳, וילמדו איך לתקן את מעשיהם לטובה.

Coincidentally, the Netziv addresses the same issue regarding the passuk in our parsha in 39:43, where Moshe gave the the Bracha for Hashra'as HaShechina.  In Vayikra 9:6, he brings from a Medrash that Moshe warned them that undisciplined desire for Ruchniyus is from the Yetzer Hara, and that people should seek the advice and blessings of gedolim before being carried away even by what seems to be dveikus and hispaalus.

              

              c.   Another wonderful answer to these questions is in the Gaon in Shir HaShirim.  Coincidentally, the expression that I used above to explain what Rav Salant said was the problem, the intensity of a חולת אהבה, the Gaon says was the intended result of the delay.  It's not at all a contradiction, just an interesting coincidence.  I found the Gaon at a very nice website from Australia, http://torahdownunder.blogspot.com/   The Gaon goes as follows.

The passuk in Shir HaShirim (2:3) says: כתפוח בעצי היער כן דודי בין הבנים בצלו חמדתי וישבתי ופריו מתוק לחכי.  The Gaon explains that the shade is refers to Yetzias Mitzraim and the fruit refers to matan torah.  Passuk ד׳ continues with references to the degalim given to the shevatim and the mitzvah to make the Mishkan.  In possuk ה׳ it says

סמכוני באשישות רפדוני בתפוחים  כי חולת אהבה אני   

The Gaon translates 

סמכוני באשישות: כמו שעושין לחולה והם כוסות מלאות יין ושאר משקין המסעדין את הלב 

Support me with jugs of wine:  As they do for an ill person. Ashishos are cups full of wine and other beverages which satiate the heart .

  רפדוני בתפוחים: סבבו את רפידתי בתפוחים שאחזק את לבי מריחם, כי חולה מחמת אהבה אני  

Surround me with apples; Surround my couch with apples so that I should strengthen my heart from their smell, for I am sick from love.

 The Gaon explains the mashal:

 והענין קאי על זמן שנגמר המשכן קודם חנוכתו וחמדתי אל האהבה שהוא פרטיות מכל התורה כמו שכתוב וידבר ה׳ אל משה מאהל מועד  

The passuk is talking about the time when the Mishkan had been completed before it was inaugurated.   Klal Yisrael said "I coveted the love of Hashem, which are the details of the Torah that were revealed to Moshe in the Mishkan, as the passuk says,  ‘And Hashem spoke to Moshe from the Ohel Moed’.  

ואשישות ותפוחים הם הקרבנות שהקריבו קודם ירידת השכינה אל אהל מועד. ואשישות הם הנסכים. וריח התפוחים הוא ריח המנחות.

 The jugs of wine and apples refer to the Nesachim and Menachos which Klal Yisrael brought while they were waiting for the Hakamas HaMishkan.

It seems from the order of the pessukim in Shir ha’Shirim that just as Yetzias Mitzraim and Matan Torah were a required for the shechinah to rest on Klal Yisrael, so too it was necessary for there to be a hiatus between constructing the mishkan and the inauguration of the Mishkan for the Bnei Yisroel to achieve Hashra’as Ha’Shechinah.

Why is this?

The Gaon explains in passuk 3:  

כשנופל לאדם חלק טוב בלי חימוד לה אינו מעלה וכן להיפך אם חומד ואינו מגיע גם כן אין טוב  

In order to appreciate and enjoy something, a person has to want it before they receive it.   If they receive something which they never desired they will have no feeling for it.   The reverse is also true, if a person desires something and does not get it, this is also not good (alluding to Mishlei 13:12, תוחלת ממשכה מחלה לב and 13:19, תאוה נהיה תערב לנפש.)

Hashem told Moshe to delay the Hakamas Hamishkan from the 25th of Kislev till the 1st of Nissan so that the Bnei Yisrael would be distressed that they were unable to assemble the Mishkan and would be consumed by a burning passion from waiting so long once everything had been made ready.   Through this they were able to fully appreciate the Hashra’as HaShechinah of the Chanukas Ha’Mishkan.

************

So: For the question “Why was is necessary that they begin building the Mishkan in Tishrei, finish it in Kislev, and wait three months before putting it up?  we we now have several answers.

1.      Hashem wanted to give them a sign that there was a real kappara on the Eigel.
2.      When they were forgiven for the Eigel, they needed some physical way to immediately express and concretize their hisragshus for the kappara.
3.      They needed to learn to control enthusiasm and passion, even when it is motivated by Ahavas Hashem.
4.      Hashem wanted their desire to build to a madreiga where they felt, as it says in ידיד נפש ,

הדור נאה זיו העולם, נפשי חולת אהבתך
אנא, אל נא, רפא נא לה, בהראות לה נועם זיווך

Pekudei. The Most Important Ingredient in Bringing the Shechina

Brief outline:   
מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו
The Rambam applies the rule of מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו in three places: in one, he says "mitzvah," and in the other two, "chiyuv."
Use the Tosfos Ri'd to say that some mitzvos have an aspect of  מצוה שבגופו, although technically they are not מצוה שבגופו. 
These are the mitzvos where, more than mitzvos in general that are mekadesh us, the תוצאה is the תועלת of being mashreh the Shechina on us as individuals. 
The Rambam holds that in the case of these hybrid mitzvos, מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו generates chiyuv, not just mitzvah.
A general overview of the rules of  מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו.

Pekudei ends the series of Parshios that describe the instructions for, the funding of, and the realization of the construction of the Mishkan.  The Mitzva to build the Mishkan is synonymous with the Mitzva to build a Beis Hamikdash.  This mitzva applies to us today and forever; when we will finally have a Beis Hamikdash, this mitzvah will be to maintain it.

The Rambam frames the mitzva thus:

והכל חייבין לבנות ולסעד בעצמן ובממונם אנשים ונשים כמקדש המדבר.

All are obligated to build and to assist, with their person and with their money, men and women, just as was true for the Mishkan of the Desert.

Note that the Rambam says בעצמן, with their person.  Apparently, the Rambam is teaching us that the mitzva of building the mikdash cannot be entirely delegated: one must do it at least something personally and physically.  

Where did the Rambam get this?  There is no Chazal that says this explicitly.  So the Rambam must be based either on some diyuk, an analytical derivation specific to Binyan Beis Hamikdash, or on some general rule.  The most likely explanation is that the Rambam is based on the general rule

מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו

A Mitzvah is better done by the person rather than his agent.  Mitzva bo yoser mibishlucho.

The problem is that this is a preference, not an obligation, and if this is what the Rambam means, he shouldn't have said chayav/obligated, he should have said Mitzva, preferable.

The Rambam does use this same expression in another application. 30 Shabbos 6:

אע"פ שהיה אדם חשוב ביותר ואין דרכו ליקח דברים מן השוק ולא להתעסק במלאכות שבבית חייב לעשות דברים שהן לצורך השבת בגופו שזה הוא כבודו. חכמים הראשונים מהם מי שהיה מפצל העצים לבשל בהן. ומהן מי שהיה מבשל או מולח בשר או גודל פתילות או מדליק נרות. ומהן מי שהיה יוצא וקונה דברים שהן לצורך השבת ממאכל ומשקה אף על פי שאין דרכו בכך. וכל המרבה בדבר זה הרי זה משובח: 

Even a dignified person who does not publicly shop or do housework is obligated to physically make preparations for Shabbos for this is his honor.  (examples follow-great Talmidei Chachamim that split kindling, one that cooked or salted meat, or made wicks, or went to the store and bought food and drink for Shabbos.)  And doing ever more is ever more praiseworthy.

We know exactly from where the Rambam got this halacha: Shabbos119a and Kiddushin 41a, almost verbatim.  The Gemara in Kiddushin brings the stories about preparing for Shabbos to illustrate the rule of מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו, a rule that appears only there in Kiddushin, and which is explicitly applied only to two cases- Kiddushin/betrothal and preparation for Shabbos.

So its clear that the Rambam does use the word Chayav when he is referring to מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו.  This is puzzling, because it is clear in the Gemara in Kiddushin that מצוה means preference, not obligation.  The Mishna says one can be mekadesh with a shliach, and the Gemara says that although betroth a woman via a representative, it is preferable to do it yourself because of מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו.  Then, alternatively, the Gemara says that there might be an actual issur in sending a shliach, because one must see a woman before betrothal.  The Gemara says that the difference between the two explanations is that the second approach is one of Chiyuv/issur, and the first is one of mitzvah.   So the Rambam is puzzling.

The Mishna Berura (Biur Halacha in 250 D"H Yishtadel) notes that when the Mechaber quotes the Rambam, he uses the word Yishtadel (he should endeavor) instead of Chayav (he is obligated.)  The Mishna Berura says that it is possible that the Rambam himself didn't really mean Chayav, he just meant that it's very important, because if it weren't, these great Chachamim wouldn't leave their learning to do these things when they would be done by others anyway.  But he ends with a Tzarich Iyun, because we know that when the Rambam says Chayav, he probably means chayav. 

(The Aruch Hashulchan is even more interesting.  He says (250:3) that  מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו is a hiddur, and you can be yotzei this hiddur by having your spouse do it, because Ishto K'Gufo!  I'm not sure whether this is because of a high regard for the concept of Ishto K'gufo, or because of a low estimation of MBYM.)

But now that we've pointed out the same anomaly in the Rambam in Beis Habechira, it's hard to believe that he meant Chayav as "very important."  This is particularly interesting, because in the primary application, that one should be mekadesh personally, the Rambam does not say Chayav!  The Rambam in 3 Ishus 19 says

מצוה שיקדש אדם את אשתו בעצמו יותר מעל ידי שלוחו. וכן מצוה לאשה שתקדש עצמה בידה יותר מעל ידי שלוחה.

 It is a Mitzva to be mekadesh personally rather than through a shliach.

What happened to Chayav?  Of course, the answer is that  מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו is just mitzvah, not chayav.

So it has become harder to accept the Mishna Berura's suggestion.  If the Rambam uses מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו only three times, and two of those times he says chayav and once he says mitzvah, it's most likely that when he said chayav he meant chayav and when he said mitzva he meant mitzva.  So, what does the Rambam have in mind?  Why would מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו sometimes mean Mitzva and sometimes mean Chayav?

The answer:
The Ktzos in 382 brings the Tosfos Ri'd that says there are some mitzvos that you can delegate and some that you can't.  The ones that involve your body- מצוה שבגופו- cannot be delegated; wearing tefillin, sitting in the Sukkah, and so forth.  Other mitzvos are not called מצוה שבגופו, bodily mitzvos, such as Kiddushin or designating Teruma, and are effective via shliach.

As we've seen, even among those mitzvos that can be done via shliach, the general rule of  מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו applies, and tells us that it is better to do them yourself.  But I propose that there is a third category; mitzvos that although technically are not מצוה שבגופו/bodily mitzvos, do have a צד, an aspect of bodily mitzvos. 

These are the mitzvos whose purpose is the תוצאה, the effect, on the individual or the group who does the mitzva.  The effect of these mitzvos is to be mashreh the Shechina on Klal Yisrael individually and as a people.

בתוכו לא נאמר אלא בתוכם- בתוך לבו של כל אחד ואחד 

תרומה כ'ה ח' , של"ה שכ'ה ב'  ושכ'ו ובשער האותיות אות ל' , ואלשיך שם, and see מהר'ל there.

So by Binyan Habayis, the Hashra'as Hashechina is explicit in this passuk.   But how do I know that Shemiras Shabbos is mashreh the Shechina just like the Beis Hamikdash?  Because of the Gemara in Shabbos 118b.

אמר רבי יוחנן משום רבי שמעון בן יוחי אלמלי משמרין ישראל שתי שבתות כהלכתן מיד נגאלים שנא' (ישעיהו נו) כה אמר ה' לסריסים אשר ישמרו את שבתותי וכתיב בתריה  וַהֲבִיאוֹתִים אֶל הַר קָדְשִׁי וְשִׂמַּחְתִּים בְּבֵית תְּפִלָּתִי עוֹלֹתֵיהֶם וְזִבְחֵיהֶם לְרָצוֹן עַל מִזְבְּחִי  

Reb Yochanan in the name of Reb Shimon bar Yochai:  If only Klal Yisrael would properly observe two Shabbasos they would immediately be redeemed, as it says "So says Hashem to the childless who observe my Shabbasos," and afterwards it says "and I will bring them to My holy mountain and make them glad in My house of prayer, (where) their offerings and sacrifices on my altar will please Me...."

We see that Shemiras Shabbos and the Beis Hamikdash are intimately connected, and that both bring Hashra'as Hashechina.

If you don't like the tzushtell, you can look at it from the perspective that Shabbos brings a Neshama Yeseirah.  In any case, the point is that Shabbos has an immediate and personal effect on the person who is Shomer Shabbos.

Both the Mikdash and Shabbos brings Hashra'as Hashechina to individuals.  To accomplish this, it's not enough to have it done on your behalf.  You have to do it yourself, physically; to some extent it is a מצוה שבגופו.  In these cases, the meaning of מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו is that it is a chiyuv, not just a mitzvah.  By Binyan Mikdash and Shabbos, the mitzvos bring Hashra'as Hashechina.  By Kiddushin, the kiddushin might lead to Hashra'as Hashechina if the couple creates a house of shalom and kedusha (Sotah 17a), it is certainly a precursor, but it is not the proximate cause; the Kiddushin is too early in the process to say that it is Mashreh Shechina.  So Kiddushin is really not different than other mitzvos.  Where the mitzva does contribute to Hashra'as Hashechina, then there is a general hiddur mitzvah to do it yourself, but there is not a chiyuv.


So look at it this way:   When you're building the Beis Hamikdash, and when you prepare something special for Shabbos, do not make the mistake of thinking that the cheftzah shel mitzvah, the mitzvah commodity, is the object you're working on, the kli shareis, or the cholent.  You are the Cheftza shel Mitzvah.  And if it's you, it's no different than Tefillin (Tosfos Ri'd in Ha'ish Mekadeish), and you can't mail it in.

I was reminded about this recently when I remembered a man that lived in my neighborhood.  He was a dignified man, a man who achieved great financial success, and who was very involved in community education and chesed organizations.  Every once in a while, I would find him polishing the brass rails of the Bima in Shul.  This man could have flown in a Romanian to do it every week, but he wanted to do it himself.  Yehoshua was zocheh to lead Klal Yisrael (Bamidbar Rabba 21:14) because he insisted on setting out the benches in the yeshiva himself.  In Kelm, there was an annual lottery to determine who would have the honor of emptying the trash can that stood in the Beis Medrash.  Let's all remember that chavivus mitzva means that every once in a while you roll up your sleeves and do it yourself.


General discussion of  מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו (hereinafter MBYM):

Does MBYM apply to all mitzvos?  

• Mechaber OC 260:2 and Magen Avraham SK 1- Yes.  Shaarei Teshuva OC 250 in name of Tosfos Shabbos- Yes, even to prepare the Seuda for a Bris or a wedding.  Yoreh Deah 305:10, Reb Akiva Eiger and the Gaon both say that lechatchila all mitzvos should be done by you and not a Shliach.  (By the way, a close relative of mine is married to Reb Reuven Feinstein's daughter, and when I was visiting the Yeshiva of Staten Island, I surprised Reb Reuven and his Rebbitzen as they were setting the tables for a grandchild's bris.  I asked why they were doing it, when there were literally hundreds of others that would be thrilled to take over from them, and Reb Reuven told me "מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו". ) 

• The Tshuvos Or Zarua (Siman 11), however, says that in all mitzvos where the purpose is "to bring about a condition," it doesn't matter at all who does the act.  The examples he gives are Milah on a son, teaching your son Torah, building a Sukkah, having someone else put tefillin on you, and having someone else putting a tallis on you.  (I have no idea how the Or Zarua learns the Gemara in Kiddushin.  Preparing Shabbos meals and doing Kiddushin are perfect examples of "bringing about a condition," and despite that, the Gemara applies the rule of MBYM.)  The Chochmas Shlomo in OC 260 also holds that MBYM only applies to Kiddushin and Shabbos, and argues with the Magen Avraham, and says that the Minhag to bake matza yourself is based on something completely different.

Does MBYM mean you have to do the whole thing yourself, or only start the mitzva yourself?

• The Pri Megadim on the Magen Avraham 432 SK 5 that says that מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו applies to Bedikas Chametz says that if you start by yourself, you can delegate the rest of the house, and it's not a problem.  What matters is that you started by yourself.  This is really self evident, inasmuch as the Gemara in Kiddushin and Shabbos don't say that you have to make the whole Shabbos yourself.  It just says that you should do one of the initial steps of preparation- singeing the skin, salting the fish, etc.

If you did use a Shliach, can you fix things later?

• The Bendiner Illui, in his Gilyonei Hashas in Kiddushin 41, brings that there is a minhag that if you're mekadeish with a shliach, then when the woman shows up, to be mekadeish her yourself.  Some say it's a meaningless minhag, but he explains it's like Hekdesh Illui miderabanan where your aris was mafrish teruma.  I would shtell tzu the mitzva to be makdish the bechor even though it's kadosh mei'rechem (Erchin 28b-29a) where it's clearer.

Does it apply to Hechsher mitzva?

• Magen Avraham in 453 says that because of  מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו some people go to see the grinding of their Matza, even though it's only a hechsher.  
• The Netziv in Sheiltos 169 says that for a general hechsher, there's no din of מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו.  But if the Hechsher is mentioned in the Torah, then there is a din of מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו.  Examples- building the sukkah, the Shimur of Matza, and making Tzitzis. 
• Pnei Yeshoshua in Brachos 18 says clearly that there's no din of מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו on Hechsher mitzva, like digging a grave. 
• But a careful reading of the Ran in Kiddushin 41 and the Yam shel Shlomo there shows that they hold that MBYM does apply to Hechsher Mitzvah.

Is there any difference between  מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו and the din of זה קלי ואנוהו, that is, הידור מצוה?  

• Maybe the din of מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו is based on הידור.
• Maybe not.  Maybe it's just a svara, as Rashi there indicates, about greater schar.
• If it is, then maybe it should be talui in the machlokes Rashi and Tosfos in the beginning of Lulav Hagazul in Sukka 29b, whether the psul gamur of yaveish is based on the general din of hiddur (Rashi), that every mitzvah that is totally lacking hiddur is 100% passul,  or on a specific requirement of hiddur by esrog and therefore by lulav (Tosfos), because ve'anveihu can't possibly result in a psul gamur.  This might also yield an explanation of the Rambam, if delegating some mitzvos results in an absolute lack of hiddur.

What is more important, מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו or הידור מצוה?

• The Chayei Adam in 68 talks about whether better to write a Sefer Torah or Mezuza or Tefillin by yourself kosher but poorly, or hire an expert Sofer who will write with Hiddur.  He paskens that מצוה בו יותר מבשלוחו is more important than הידור מצוה, which is obviously not the opinion of the Aruch Hashulchan in 250:3 that I mentioned above.

******************************************

What does נישואין (Nisu'in) mean?

I spoke at a Sheva Brachos yesterday, and one of the things I talked about is the word "Nisu'in."  נישואין means marriage; it is the second stage of the Eirusin and Nisu'in marriage process, and it finalizes the marriage.  I want to know the meaning of the word itself.

I mentioned this question at the table Friday night, and Someone answered that it means "to become burdened," from רחיים בצווארו, a millstone around the neck, an idiomatic expression used in the Gemara to refer to the responsibilities of marriage.  This Person meant that נישואין/marriage is like שאת וספחת  by Metzora, two types of skin growths that symptomize Leprosy.  I asked This Person which of the parties is thus burdened, and she answered "The one who was chased."  Very funny, but I don't think that's the only answer, at least I hope not, and it's certainly not something you want to hear from one of your parents.  (Full disclosure: see Yevamos 63b:  אשה רעה צרעת לבעלה מאי תקנתיה יגרשנה ויתרפא מצרעתו)

אירושין, which is spelled ארוסין in the literature, Eirusin, is easier.  It's pretty obvious that Eirusin comes from the same shoresh as ארשת  שפתיו, which means speech or words; so, eirusin means to give your word, to agree or to pledge to marry.  The agreement is made binding through the kinyan, and the woman becomes prohibited to all other men, but the essence is the promise.  The word is identical with the English 'Troth,' which means to promise or to pledge.  Eirusin=betrothal.  Simple.  But what does Nesuin mean?  If you'll look around on the web, you'll see hundreds of people that say it means 'elevation.'  If anything, that's a raya that it doesn't mean that.  One clown makes an assertion, puts it on a website, and every lazy ignoramus assumes it's correct.  For a drasha, it's ok-- כל אדם שאין לו אשה שרוי בלא שמחה בלא ברכה בלא טובה... במערבא אמרי בלא תורה"—“ (Yevamos 62b.)  Or maybe it means the elevation of simcha.  But for pshat, I highly doubt it.


In any case, the question is particularly timely, because in the three parshios, Ki Sisa, Vayakhel, and Pikudei, we find the word used remarkably often, and in many different ways--

כִּי תִשָּׂא אֶת רֹאשׁ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל

כָּל אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר נְשָׂאוֹ לִבּוֹ וְכֹל אֲשֶׁר נָדְבָה רוּחוֹ אֹתוֹ, 

 וְאֶל כָּל אִישׁ חֲכַם לֵב אֲשֶׁר נָתַן ה'  חָכְמָה בְּלִבּוֹ כֹּל אֲשֶׁר נְשָׂאוֹ לִבּוֹ לְקָרְבָה אֶל הַמְּלָאכָה לַעֲשֹׂת אֹתָהּ,
אשר נשא לבן אותנה בחכמה, 

 נֹשֵׂא עָו‍ֹן וָפֶשַׁע וְחַטָּאָה,

 אַהֲרֹן וְכָל הַנְּשִׂאִים בָּעֵדָה

and many, many, more.

Please note that in musaf of Yom Tov, we also says "והשיאנו ה' אלוקינו את ברכת מועדיך." And there's  
וַיִּשָּׂא מַשְׂאֹת מֵאֵת פָּנָיו אֲלֵהֶם וַתֵּרֶב מַשְׂאַת בִּנְיָמִן מִמַּשְׂאֹת כֻּלָּם where it means a gift,
and ישא מדברותיו,
and  הֲלוֹא אִם תֵּיטִיב שְׂאֵת
and שאת וספחת
and others.  So, please tell me what you think it means in the context of getting married.  And please, I already did the drushy thing (Marriage is a gift  (מַשְׂאַת) from the Chasan to the Kalah, and from the Kalah to the Chasan, and from Hashem to both of them; Marriage is an opportunity to elevate (כִּי תִשָּׂא) yourself by learning to love another person more than yourself; Marriage is when you take on responsibility for a family; Marriage is when you have to listen to your heart (נְשָׂאוֹ לִבּוֹ) as well as your mind;  חתן דומה למלך and the word נישואין comes from נְּשִׂאִים because the Chasan and Kallah become a king and a queen (נְּשִׂאִים), and so on).  I'm looking for something rational.

In a salute to ingenuity, and since it's still Adar, let me point out that Devora in the comments suggested that nisuin is related to  נסיון, nisayon, a test.  Every marriage is a test. Rabbi Dr. SMS suggested in a conversation that Eirusin is related to ארס, eres, poison.  Also, see great unknown's law- "The Conservation of  Golomus" based on the Gemara in Sanhedrin.  These are people who, when I ask why we learn the dinim of kidushin from the dinim of buying a plot of land for a grave, don't understand what the kashe is.

AFTER THE UPDATES, YOU WILL FIND AN CONCISE VERSION OF THE COMMENTS THAT CAME IN ON THIS TOPIC.  I ATTEMPTED TO EDIT THEM FOR LOGICAL FLOW.  THESE COMMENTS ARE HEREWITH MADE A PART OF THIS POST, AND WILL IMPROVE YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE TWO UPDATES THAT PRECEDE THE EDITED COMMENTS.

UPDATE:
1.  Eli points out that the roots with the shin smalis and the shin yemanis have completely different meanings, so it's not likely that nisu'in would be pronounced with a smalis if it came from Nasha; it is more likely that the Midrash is homiletics, not etymology.

2.  More comments that came in on the topic (though I would prefer getting them in the comment section, I am happy to hear from you through any media):
a.  The Gemara in Sanhedrin 31b uses the root to mean "compel."

השיאוהו ויראה פנינו בטבריא. הכריחוהו והזקיקוהו לבוא כאן

b.  A connection to the expression "נושא בעול עם חבירו", which means to accept their burdens and duties as if they were your own.

UPDATE:
LKWD GUY sent me a little note, to look at Rashi Sotah top of 9b.  What do you know! Another Rashi I forgot!  (And thank you Eli, for twisting the knife by pointing out that Rashi says exactly the same thing on top of Shabbos 146a.  I wonder what life would be like if I had a good memory.)

נחש הקדמוני נתן עיניו בחוה ובא עליה. והיינו דכתיב (בראשית ג) הנחש השיאני- לשון תשמיש ונשואין הוא

Now that we decided that Nisuin means "taking on," here we have a Rashi that throws the entire discussion up in the air again.  I could, of course, argue that Rashi is not referring to the denotation of the word "nisu'in" but instead to its connotation, but I need a while to convince myself that this might be true.  (writing a year later, I've decided that Rashi is purely Drush, it's homiletic and not interpretive.  But it's interesting that Rashi relates the word Hishi'ani to Nisu'in, since Hishi'ani primarily means deluded me, and so I suppose Nisu'in means delusion.  But that's just drush, right?  We all go into marriage with an completely accurate knowledge of whom we're marrying, right?)

LATER UPDATE:
I learned of a Tiferes Yisrael in Yevamos 7th perek comment #7 who asks this question, and, in Drush mode, suggests many of the answers that appear here, including some that I made fun of, and additional explanations as well. 

בת ישראל שניסת

[נ"ל לפעמים נקט שנשאת ופעמים שניסת, ע"ש ב' בחינות שבאשה, לעזר וכנגדו, בזמן שהיא לו לעזר. היא לו כמתנה, כמו וישא משאות מאת פניו, ובזמן שכנגדו היא לו לנסיון, או איפכא בזמן שלעזר היא כנס מתנוסס לבעלה, ואם לאו, היא כמשא עליו. או נ"ל דנישאת הוא ע"ש לא תשא שם ד"א לשוא, ובל"א "אנגעשווארען ווארדען", כמ"ד כי ה' העיד בינך ובין אשת נעוריך, וניסת הוא לשון למען ענותך לנסותך, שגם היא מורגלת ע"י הנשואין בדברים קשים, והם אעפ"כ להיטיב באחרית, כדכתיב הרבה ארבה עצבונך. ואח"כ תגל האם בפרי בטנה]:

AND here are the edited comments.

Eli said...

First it should be noticed that נישואין is not symmetric (grammatically), it's the man who is נושא and the woman נשאת, so the answer to your query to That Person is self-evident.  נשא in Tanach can mean many things, but the four common meanings are (a) to carry (b) to take (or, better translated, get hold on something) and, (probably derived from (a) and (b)), (c) to suffer (d) to forgive. As much as (c) and (d) might seem relevant, I guess the meaning here is (b). Just recall that the alternative form in Tanach to לשאת אשה is לקחת אשה.

Barzilai said...

You know, Eli, I thought about nisuin as 'taking', but I thought it was odd that we distinguish between the two steps of marriage by calling one eirusin and the second nisuin, while in Chumash, ki yikach refers to eirusin. It's odd that likuchin and nisuin are different forms of the same word. Unless the "taking" of nisuin is more firm or permanent that the "taking" of likuchin. But then there's the shitta of Rabbeinu Nissim Gaon (brought in Tosfos Kiddushin 10 d'h Kol) that the word kicha (which we use for a gzeirah shavah to learn ha'ara'ah from arayos) refers to NISUIN, not EIRUSIN. That would make life easier. But, as Tosfos says there, Rabbeinu Nissim is very shver, because in all of Shas Kicha kicha from Sdei Efron means Kiddushin, not Nisuin. Still, I agree with you. It's like כאשר ישא האומן את היונק. You are taking someone to yourself, not just 'taking,' but committing yourself to follow through with full dedication. 

 

lesser unknown said...

i would argue/comment that eli left out the common meaning of the root of the word nissuin of "to elevate or to lift". and that to lift something includes the meanings of both to carry and to take. granted this is a bit of a semantical distinction, but i feel entitled considering the whole context here. In regard to the difference between kiddushin and nissuin, i was grappling with this a few months ago, as my yeshiva is currently learning kesuvos. Where I left off, is that kiddushin is not so much taking her to you as much as removing her from others, where nissuin is the actual taking of her to you as one entity/partnership.

 

Barzilai said...

I think Eli's (a), to carry, is close to your elevate. As for the difference between eirusin and nisu'in, I always explain that an arusa is an eishes ish for the whole world except for the chassan. This is like buying an option on a property; you don't own it yet, but nobody else can buy it. I will be happy to hear what you have in the Rambam.   (I like lesser unknown's approach of Likuchin being taking in the sense of taking away, and Nisu'in also being taking in the sense of taking for yourself.)

Chaim B. said...

On the Rambam's definition of nesu'in: http://divreichaim.blogspot.com/2007/11/rambams-definition-of-marriage-yichud.html http://divreichaim.blogspot.com/2007/11/rambams-definition-of-nesuin.html "an arusa is an eishes ish for the whole world except for the chassan" Achilas terumah? Get? But of course you will just tell me any halacha I conjure up stems from the idea of having an option, not from real ishus status.

Barzilai said...

Chaim, I like the posts from 2007, that even the Rambam will agree that chupa lipsulos shafs a greater degree of ishus than just eirusin, but it's not mattir bi'ah. I suppose that this can be true specifically according to the Rambam that even if she's meyuchedes to one man, like a pilegesh, it's still znus and an issur de'oraysa. So, having said that, you yourself are agreeing that ishus is incremental-- even ishus of nisuin. So what's wrong with saying that she's an eishes ish to the whole world but not to the husband? As far as hetter bi'ah, she's not muttar to her husband, but as far as ishus regarding other people, that degree of ishus is there. Of course it's not just an "option to buy." The kinyan of eirusin does create some madreiga of ishus. But as far as "eishes ish," she's not his eishes ish. For other people, she's an eishes ish and chayav missas beis din for znus. By the way, you know that the Rogotchover holds that every married woman is assur midin eishes ish even to her husband, except for the din hutrah for her husband. That's whats missing in an arusa- the hutra.

lesser unknown said...

First a correction from my earlier post. The Rambam, in 10:1, says that nisuin is "bringing her to your home, yichud, and yafreshena lo". I remember having trouble with what exactly those last two words meant. I was remembering incorrectly that they were a part of kiddushin, which is what I was referring to before, but clearly I was wrong. Which still leaves me with a question as to what he means by this... Now to comment on other points: I don't understand exactly what you mean by your option plan. Are you implying that there is no marital connection between them, even in regard to themselves? On a d'oraysa level they are allowed to have biah before nissuin. The Rambam (in the previously mentioned halacha) mentions that it is only an issur soferim with malkos mardus. In addition in yehuda, he couldn't claim ta'anus besulim since they regularly were misyachaid in her father's house and likely had biah already. Which is hard to hear if it was an issur d'oraysa, or even a lack of any ishus d'oraysa between them. And while I wouldn't ask from trumah or get like Chaim did, since an eved can also have trumah and needs a get, alternatively, after erusin she falls under the category of kinyan kaspo for trumah and a get is needed to matir her to others even if she isn't really an eishes ish for him. But the fact that he can be matir her n'darim or become tameh to her if he is a cohen might be better examples that show a real relationship. I don't remember seeing it, but if he is pasul as a witness after kiddushin, that would also show an intrinsic connection, more than just a bought future option... I didn't click the link that chaim posted, it is after midnight here, but from the end of 10:6 in the Rambam it seems clear he holds that chuppah with a niddah is better than nothing, and creates a level higher than erusin. I apologize if I'm just repeating what is already stated in the other link. Lastly, I would point out again that I do not think there is an intrinsic issur to be with ones erusa, but rather erusin would technically permit biah, but chazal imposed an external prohibition on them. I would appreciate (and not be surprised) if you can prove me wrong on this point.

lesser unknown said...

I forgot to mention in my last comment that the aruch ha'shulchan has a novel understanding of the Rambam, which removes the need to say that there are multiple degrees of nissuin. It is in even ha'ezer 61:4 (and also in sif 5 he further explains it)

Eli said...

Thank you, LU, elevate too. I also think my "suffer" should better be translated "burden" or something similar, as in ונשא עוונו. Yet, the relevant one for the present is "get". Re: RNG, it's actually the Tosfos that is shver. It's clear that in Tanach קיחה means the whole process of marriage, if not just Nissu'in: (a) we find Kicha before Matan-Torah, so it must be just מכניסה לביתו, the first instance I believe is ויקחו להם נשים מכל אשר בחרו, and many others follow. (b) The pasuk clearly says מי האיש אשר ארש אשה ולא לקחה. As for understanding Tosfos, I guess what he means is not that the word Kicha in Tanach cannot mean Nissuin, but just that the *גזרה שוה* of Kicha does not refer to Nissuin.

Barzilai said...

LU, let me apologize for a possible misconception. I edited the post to say that the line so often repeated on the net about nisuin meaning elevation, and characterizing it as something a clown would say before you brought it up. Of course, you also didn't mean to say that's pshat in nisuin. Chaim B. did discuss exactly what you said, that even according to the Rambam, chupas niddah creates more ishus than eirusin. When I used the 'option' comparison, it was not meant as a perfect model. It's more like an option with a letter of intent. In the context of marriage, this creates a relationship such that she is considered to be a member of his household, a wife-in-waiting. Eli, nice that you pointed out מי האיש אשר ארש אשה ולא לקחה. I'm convinced that you're right about nisuin being another form of likuchin, a stronger form, meaning more commitment. Forgive the mashal hedyot, but there's a famous line that speaks to the distinction: “The difference between involvement and commitment is like ham and eggs. The chicken is involved; the pig is committed.”

great unknown said...

עי' טעם המלך ס"ק י"ד משכ' על החופת חתנים פרק י' בשער המלך דחופה אין לה מקור מן התורה. וכמובן היו אלה שלא בדיוק הסכימו - וכלשון הברוך טעם" שקר ענה in any case the gemora sanhedrin 22b says that a woman is a golem until she gets married; the marriage corrects that. however, note that there is conservation of golemkeit. guess whom marriage converts into a golem.

Barzilai said...

That's strange. Bishlema you say that there are many alternative definitions of chupa, that's one thing. But this is something else entirely. Unless he means the canopy thingy. That I can hear. It would be nice to see someone that says that it's chukos ha'amim.

lesser unknown said...

gu: 1) I am assuming that you are kidding, but unfortunately since sarcasm/witty humor does not convey well through blog comments, in case you are being serious, I would argue that the gemara in sanhedrin you quoted is not at all referring to marriage itself, but rather the biah rishona, as evident by a) the pasuk the gemara brings down as a proof b) the maharsha on this gemara and c) the tosefos in kesuvos 4a that brings down this gemara as the reason that biah rishona is called bias mitzvah. 2) I thought it was before marriage, during courtship and engagement, that a man turns into a mindless fool. After marriage (or maybe at least after shana rishona) he begins to get some of his chochma back. although, maybe I am just in denial... The simplest translation is to take, as he is taking her to him as a wife. But at the same time, why is the root word of nasah being used instead of just the root of kicha? Because there is some form of elevation, at least potentially, going on here. Similar to a nasi, that doesn't become elevated by being a leader and doesn't elevate others by becoming a leader, there is intrinsic potential in this relationship for elevation. By fulfilling the role and responsibilities entailed the nasi becomes a better person that he could have been without the yolk of the masses upon him, etc... same as with marriage. there is great potential for growth because of the marriage that was not there when both are single. Especially considering that his Toarh isn't complete, his happiness isn't complete etc. as the gemara in yevamos (I think) says.

Barzilai said...

You know, I kind of agree that certain words become popular because of an inherent duality of meaning. It is possible that Nisuin was chosen because of its additional connotations, though I'm pretty convinced that its fundamental meaning is "taking," as Eli illustrated.

great unknown said...

the meaning of the word golem is basically unformed raw material. the wife is formed by the commitment of marriage (and hence is elevated into usefulness [i.e., kli status]), whereupon she immediately (if not sooner) proceeds to re-form the suddenly raw critter she just married. although as a great neo-platonic philosopher once said: the three most important words in a marriage are not, "I love you," but rather, "he'll never change." I think her name was broomhilda.

lesser unknown said...

GU: How would you fit that idea of her elevation due to her commitment to marriage into the pasuk the gemara quotes "ki BOALAYICH osayich"? And to the tosefos in kesuvos 4a which uses this gemara in sanhedrin to explain why biah rishona is called b'elas mitzvah and the maharsha on this gemara in sanhedrin which (if I remember correctly) clearly explains her golem/unfinished status referring to her inability to conceive while a besulah?

lesser unknown said...

I quickly scanned through both the Toras Moshe and the Chasam Sofer on Chumash in the beginning of Miketz and in Vayichi, and I cant find the point you are trying to make. Can you give me a hint?

LkwdGuy said...

See Sotah 9b first rashi.

Barzilai said...

lkwdguy, I see. This needs to be in the post gufa, and that's where I put it. See the end of the post. Yasher koach for your laconic comment.

Eli said...

My appreciation to LkwdGuy's impressive Bekiuss notwithstanding, it should be noted that הנחש השיאני is with right-Shin while נישואין is left-Shin (i.e. sin). While pronunciation of both might be similar, depending on your family tradition, they belong to completely separate roots. נשא with a right-Shin means to seduce/incite, as in זדון לבך השיאך or השא השאת לעם הזה etc. Obviously not all occurrences of this root can be related to נישואין. Thus, it seems the midrash brought in Rashi Sotah (and Shabbos 146a too, also first in Daf(!))is a midrash based on the similarity in written form of both words, but should not be taken as an interpretation of the word נישואין itself.

Barzilai said...

Metzudas Tzion on Yeshaiya 9:4 explains 'sa'on' to mean the same as 'sha'on,' and again in Yeshaiya 10:13 saying that 'shoshati' means the same as shosati'. Besides Rav Hirsch's use of this tool, I believe that many rishonim use it as well. Though it could be that davka Yeshaiya was a Litvak from Shevet Efraim.

Eli said...

actually Yeshaiya 10:13 *says* Shosati (with Sin), but 9:4 is a case in point. Yet, as we find across Tanach more than ten places where נשא with Shin means one thing, completely different than the many meanings of נשא with Sin, I think it's unlikely to merge them together.

Barzilai said...

There are times, though, when you have to be careful to use the right letter. I remember thinking about the pitfalls of being a Litvak one Rosh Hashanna. ותגער בשטן לבל ישטינני