Parshas Vayakhel- Holy Intentions
“Kavanah”, “intention”, is of crucial value. When performing any deed, it can be the difference between virtue, and lack thereof. Two people can implement the same action, yet one may be held in great esteem, the other liable for sin. Often, it is difficult as an external observer to ascertain the focus of another’s deeds. This week’s Parsha illustrates a scenario where this was indeed possible.
In Vayakhel, Moshe encouraged the Jewish people to bring the necessary items for the construction of the Mishkan. The pesukim testify that the Jews acted with alacrity, and fulfilled these commands. Both the men and women participated in these donations. The verse illustrates that they approached to donate their golden jewelry in the words “vayavo’u ha’anashim al hanashim…”, “and the men came on the women” (35:22). This is a strange terminology. If it meant to imply both men and women donated, it should have stated “with”, not “on”.
Why does the verse use this irregular wording? What can we derive from this?
Rabbenu Bechaye explains that the word “on” implies that the women took initiative, and were considered more laudable, in donating their golden ornaments. Women naturally treasure their jewelry more than men, and therefore their actions were considered loftier. The verse therefore states that the men came “on” the women, implying that the men were secondary in the significance of their donations.
Rabbeinu Bechaye continues, that this was in stark contrast to the reality that occurred when the Jews sinned with the golden calf. The women refused to give their gold to that collection. The men utilized their own ornaments. However, now the women donated wholeheartedly.
He concludes, that the Pirkei D’Rabbi Eliezer teaches, that in the merit of their donations, women merited to receive a unique mitzvah. The Mishkan was erected on Rosh Chodesh Nissan. They were given the mitzvah of Rosh Chodesh to a greater degree than their male counterparts.
This explanation seems difficult on multiple levels. Why does Rabbeinu Bechaye contrast their donations in Vayakhel, with their virtue earlier? Furthermore, Pirkei D’Rabbi Eliezer states that they were granted the mitzvah of Rosh Chodesh because they refused to give their ornaments at the time of the eigel. It was not due to their donations for the Mishkan. How can we explain this assertion of Rabbeinu Bechaye?
Rabbi Avraham Bukspan, a great Torah scholar and source of immense wisdom, shared a beautiful idea. The women did indeed refuse to donate their jewelry for the construction of the golden calf. However, as an objective observer, the intentions driving them was not readily apparent. They may have righteously argued with the entire agenda, believing it to be against the will of Hashem. Alternatively, they could have been selfish, wanting to retain their golden ornaments. Months later, when the donations to the Mishkan began, the women took initiative in donating their gold. This action of supporting Hashem’s service with their ornaments, reflected back on the earlier event. It indicated that the women were wholeheartedly willing to part with their gold, in the appropriate work of Hashem. Their refusal earlier was completely righteous, as they disagreed with the creation of the golden calf, understanding it was against the His desire.
Thus, the mitzvah they received, Rosh Chodesh, was granted to them in the merit of their refusal to participate in the golden calf. However, it was their later deeds that clarified that the initial motivation was completely l’shem chamayim, for the sake of heaven.
Very often, it is difficult to ascertain what drives a person. Even in regards to one’s personal deeds, this is sometimes unclear. However, Hashem knows the true score. “Whether one does a lot or a little, as long as he intends for the sake of heaven.” May we merit to always focus and act in the ways that bring the greatest sanctity to k’vod shamayim!
Please email yshifman1@gmail.com with questions, comments, or to be placed on the mailing list