Parshas Toldos
1. In the Ramban on the Torah, he writes regarding the wells of Yitzchak: “The Torah relates at length about the wells, and in the plain sense of the story there is neither benefit nor great honor for Yitzchak, for he and his father did the same thing. But there is a hidden matter within it, for it comes to inform about the future: for a well of living water alludes to the House of G‑d that the children of Yitzchak will build. Therefore, it mentions a well of ‘living water’ (be’er mayim chayim), as it says, ‘the source of living waters is G‑d.’ He called the first one Esek, which alludes to the First Temple… The second he called Sitnah… and that is the Second Temple… The third he called Rechovos, which is the future Temple that will be built speedily in our days, and it will be built without strife and quarrel, and G‑d will broaden our borders… And it is written regarding the Third Temple, ‘and it will be broad and extend upward, upward, and we will be fruitful in the land.’”
Now, the allusions regarding the three Batei Mikdash (Temples) by the Patriarchs are also found elsewhere, as it is stated in the Sifri (and in the Midrash) that “so you find by Avraham, that he saw it built, he saw it destroyed, and he saw it… built and perfected in the future to come (as it is written, ‘And Avraham called the name of that place, G‑d will see… will be seen’). So too you find by Yitzchak, that he saw it built [and saw it destroyed, and saw it built] and perfected in the future to come (as it is written, ‘See, the fragrance of my son is like the fragrance of a field which G‑d has blessed’)… So too you find by Yaakov, that he saw it built, saw it destroyed, and saw it built and perfected for the World to Come (as it is written, ‘How awesome is this place! This is none other than the House of G‑d’).”
However, it can be said that in the allusion of the wells as explained by the Ramban, there is a novelty compared to the vision of the Temples by the Patriarchs as alluded to in the verse (as expounded in the Sifri, etc.) [in addition to the very point that in the Ramban’s explanation, a lengthy story in the Torah is explained, which “in the plain sense of the story has no benefit”]:
a) The allusion in the Sifri (and Midrash) tells us only in a general way, “he saw it built, destroyed, and built, etc.,” without specifying and detailing that they saw the First, Second, and Third Temples;
whereas in the allusion of the wells, all three Temples are specified (alluded to in the content of the names of the wells—Esek, Sitnah and Rechovos—as explained in the Ramban).
b) In the Sifri (and Midrash), the allusion is only that the Patriarchs saw the Temples, whereas in the matter of the wells, it is in the category of “the deeds of the fathers are a sign for the children”—that the act of Yitzchak in digging the three wells was a sign and a cause—a granting of strength—for the work of the children, the building of the three Temples.
2. This can be explained based on the well-known principle that all the deeds of the Patriarchs, especially those explicitly recounted in the Torah, are (like all matters of Torah) with utmost precision. It is thus understood that the fact that the three Temples are alluded to in the deeds of the Patriarchs specifically regarding Yitzchak—even though we find (as above) that all the Patriarchs saw the Temple built, destroyed, and built—is because here it is speaking of a unique aspect of the Temple that pertains specifically to Yitzchak.
It can be said that this point is emphasized in the fact that in the deeds of Yitzchak there is a specific allusion to each individual Temple, not just in a general way of “built, destroyed, and built” (as in the fact that the Patriarchs saw the Temple), because here the subject is not what is common to all the Temples, but rather the unique quality and content of each one, which results from the fact that each was made and built in a manner different from the others. Therefore, it is alluded to specifically (not in the fact that they saw the Temple, but) in the deeds of the Patriarchs—and within the deeds of the Patriarchs themselves—in the digging of the wells by Yitzchak.
3. This will be understood by first adding explanation regarding the connection between the Temples and specifically the digging of wells:
In the laws of mikvaos (ritual baths), we find (in general) two types: a mikveh of collected water—which is made by human action, and a spring, which is from Heaven, with no human involvement.
Regarding the above-mentioned wells, we find the following: they are made through the digging of a person, with effort and toil; on the other hand, the emergence of the water in the well does not come through human action, but rather, through his work in digging and removing the earth, the waters that are under the ground burst forth into the well.
It should be noted that this has practical halachic implications: “Wells that are made by human hands, from which spring water emerges—even though their waters do not flow outward—have the status of a true spring,” because “in the existence of the water, there is no involvement of human hands at all; rather, he dug in the ground to reveal the water (even though it was through a person’s action that the water was revealed), it is obvious that it has the status of a true spring.”
One can say that the same concept applies regarding the Beis HaMikdash and its construction: The ultimate purpose of the mitzvah to make the Mishkan and the Beis HaMikdash is—“And they shall make Me a sanctuary and I will dwell among them”—the content is the Shechinah of Hashem that rests within them (which comes from Heaven), and at the same time, we are commanded, “And they shall make Me a sanctuary,” and before the “I will dwell,” there must be the act and effort of a person—“and they shall make.” One can say even more: this obligation of human action is not only regarding the building, serving merely as a preparation for the holiness that then rests upon it automatically, but rather, we are commanded “And they shall make Me a sanctuary,” meaning that even the actual resting of holiness upon the Mishkan and the Beis HaMikdash comes through the action of the Jewish people (as will be explained below)—
Similar to the digging of the wells: even though the main existence of the well (the water) is from Heaven, nevertheless, the Torah connects it with the act of digging by the person. And the digging establishes the ownership of the digger over the water—“the water is ours.”
4. One can say that this definition in the mitzvah of building a “sanctuary”—that its construction and sanctity must specifically come through the action of the Jewish people—also has halachic relevance:
a) The Rambam rules: “Everyone is obligated to build and to support it themselves and with their money—men and women, just as in the sanctuary of the desert.” One must examine the content of this obligation, for the mitzvah of building a “sanctuary” is one of the mitzvos that is an obligation upon the community—not the obligation of each individual—and what does it mean that “everyone is obligated to build,” etc.? Furthermore, it is well known that there is discussion regarding the fact that women are obligated to build and support it themselves, etc. (as it is written, “And the men came upon the women,” and “Every woman who was wise-hearted spun with her hands”)—yet the building of the sanctuary is a positive time-bound commandment, for “the sanctuary is not built at night, as it says, ‘And on the day the Mishkan was erected’—by day it is erected, not at night.”
It can be explained that in “everyone is obligated,” the Rambam does not mean that this is a personal obligation (chovas gavra), but rather that it is a law in the object (cheftza) of the sanctuary, similar to the law stated in the same halacha: “We do not cancel the Torah study of schoolchildren for the building,” for although this was already stated in the laws of Torah study, he repeats the law here to teach us that the reason we do not cancel the Torah study of children is not only because of the obligation of Torah study, which is not overridden even for the building of the Beis HaMikdash, but that this is a law in the building of the Beis HaMikdash itself—that even from the perspective of the Beis HaMikdash, there is no place to cancel the Torah study of children for its construction (especially if one says that the Torah study of children assists in the fulfillment of the building of the house). Similarly, the law that “everyone is obligated to build and support it themselves and with their money—men and women” is not a personal obligation to fulfill the mitzvah of “And they shall make Me a sanctuary” (which is upon the community), but rather it is an obligation from the perspective of the sanctuary itself, that the definition of the building of the sanctuary requires that its construction be through the community—“and they shall make”—the action of the entirety of Israel (and therefore it applies to all Jews, men and women).
b) Just as this applies regarding the act of building, so too it applies regarding the location of the building, its form, etc., upon which its sanctity depends—even though the “I will dwell” (the holiness in that place) comes from Heaven, there must first be the fulfillment of the mitzvah “And they shall make,” a preparation by human action.
One can say that this includes even more: “that he should seek out,” that he should toil to find the place, etc. As it says in the Sifri: “One might think you should wait until a prophet tells you; therefore it says, ‘Seek out His dwelling and come there’—seek and find, and then the prophet will tell you.” This is because the intent and purpose of the command “And they shall make Me a sanctuary” is that the sanctuary (should not be a free gift from above, but rather) should come through the action and toil of a person, in a manner of “seeking”—similar to a “well,” which comes through the involvement of human hands, through work and toil, the digging of wells.
5. Based on this, we can understand the innovation in the Temples compared to the Mishkan that Moshe made in the desert, as well as the difference between the Temples themselves:
Regarding the Mishkan it is stated, “And you shall erect the Mishkan according to its manner as you were shown on the mountain”—that is, G‑d showed Moshe the order of its erection; thus, the action (“And they shall make”) regarding the Mishkan was not in a manner of “seeking,” for its construction came through what G‑d taught and showed him. Therefore, the “And they shall make” was not fulfilled in its entirety—meaning, an action involving toil and “seeking” (similar to the digging of wells).
However, regarding the First Temple, although it is stated, “All this in writing, by the hand of the L‑rd upon me, He gave me understanding,” nevertheless, the building of the Temple was carried out by human beings, and with tremendous effort (both in number and in the length of time). Furthermore, the construction was done by Shlomo and not by David (to whom the prophecy was given). Even regarding David, who said, “All this in writing, by the hand of the L‑rd upon me, He gave me understanding,” the Sifri continues after the above teaching, “Seek out His dwelling and come there—seek and find, and then the prophet will tell you”—“And so you find with David: ‘Remember, O L‑rd, for David, all his affliction; how he swore to the L‑rd, vowed to the Mighty One of Yaakov: I will not enter the tent of my house… I will not give sleep to my eyes… until I find a place for the L‑rd, a dwelling for the Mighty One of Yaakov.’” That is, David exerted himself and toiled to find the place of the Temple, and only afterward was it told to him by the prophet (as the Sifri continues).
One can say that this is one of the reasons why the Mishkan was a temporary dwelling, as it is written, “I have not dwelled in a house… and I have moved about in a tent and in a Mishkan,” and as the Rambam writes, “And it is already explained in the Torah, the Mishkan that Moshe Rabbeinu made was temporary,” whereas the Temple was a permanent dwelling. As the Rambam writes, “Once the Temple was built in Jerusalem, all other places were forbidden… and there is no house for all generations except in Jerusalem alone and on the Temple Mount.” For the aspect of permanence in the Temple depends on the action of the Jewish people, in a manner of “seeking”—in the preparation of the holiness as above, and in a very great actual building, and this was (primarily) in the Temple, not in the Mishkan.
6. Now, within this concept of the Temple—the action and accomplishment of man—there is an advantage in the Second Temple over the First:
a) The act of building did not come through a revelation (and “showing” by) G‑d (as in the Mishkan), nor through the instruction of a prophet (as in the First Temple), but rather through the command of Koresh (and he himself participated in the building).
b) Also, the form of the building was not as clear as in the First Temple, as the Rambam writes, “(The structure that Shlomo built is already explicit in Melachim, and likewise) the structure of the future Temple, although it is written in Yechezkel, is not explicit and clear, and the people of the Second Temple, when they built in the days of Ezra, built it like the structure of Shlomo and in the manner of the things that are explicit in Yechezkel.”
Thus, in the Second Temple, the “seeking” (“seek and find”) regarding the details of the building was even greater than in the First Temple (and one can say that there, the “seek and find” was only regarding its location, whereas in the Second Temple, they had to seek, etc., regarding the details and form of the building).
And since the aspect of permanence in the Temple depends on the action and accomplishment of the Jewish people—“And they shall make Me a sanctuary”—in a manner of labor and toil as above, and this was more so in the Second Temple than in the First, therefore, “Greater will be the glory of this latter house than the first,” for it was greater in its structure and in its years, more permanent than the First Temple.
According to this, it is understood why the “sign for the children” regarding the three Temples is specifically in the actions of Yitzchak (even though the digging of wells was done earlier by Avraham, as is explicit in the verses, and in the words of the Ramban, “he and his father did them alike”)—for the main aspect of action, toil, and service is specifically the innovation and quality of Yitzchak. As is known, the qualities of the three Patriarchs correspond to the three pillars: Torah, avodah (service), and acts of kindness. Avraham’s trait is kindness, Yitzchak—avodah, and Yaakov—Torah. Kindness and Torah are (generally) an influence from above, whereas avodah is the elevation and drawing close of a person to holiness.
One can say that for this reason (as explained by our Sages), the First Temple corresponds to Avraham and the Second Temple to Yitzchak, for the main aspect of “And they shall make”—the action and service of man—was specifically in the Second Temple.
7. However, we need to understand:
How does this fit with what was explained above—that the main aspect of permanence in the Temple is connected and dependent specifically on “And they shall make Me a sanctuary,” the action and deed of man—with what the Ramban explains there, that the third well which “they did not quarrel over” corresponds to the Third Temple, for only regarding it is it said “it will be broad and expansive,” that it will exist with eternal permanence (which is the true and complete aspect of “permanence”)? The eternity of the Third Temple is because it is (in the language of the Zohar) “the building of the Holy One, blessed be He,” and as explained by Rabbeinu Bachya here: “And the reason that he mentioned G‑d’s Name by the third well and did not do so by the first two may be because the first ones were the work of flesh and blood, by Shlomo and Koresh, but the third will be the work of G‑d and a heavenly construction, and destruction will not have power over it; therefore, he mentioned G‑d’s Name regarding it.”
That is, the First and Second Temples, which are “the work of flesh and blood” (“the building of man”), do not possess the aspect of eternity, and specifically the Third Temple, which will not be “the work of flesh and blood,” will have the aspect of complete permanence and eternity.
The simple reason for this is: since a person is finite (and especially since from the moment he is born he begins to wither), his handiwork is not eternal; whereas the work of G‑d, Who is not subject to any change whatsoever, G‑d forbid, as it is written, “I, G‑d, have not changed,” so too His handiwork is eternal.
But there is still a lack of explanation: How is it possible that the First and Second Temples, in which there was a greater aspect of action and fulfillment of the mitzvah by the Jewish people (“And they shall make Me a sanctuary”)—do not possess this advantage (of eternity), while the Third Temple, in which it would seem there is a lack in the complete fulfillment of the mitzvah of “And they shall make Me a sanctuary,” will have this advantage?
One can explain this as follows:
The fact that the Third Temple “will be the work of G‑d and a heavenly construction and therefore destruction will not have power over it” is because it comes as a result of the deeds and service of the Jewish people beforehand, throughout the (lengthy) time of exile. This is the highest and most complete level in the matter of action and service (and one can say—even higher than the service and action involved in the building of the First and Second Temples). Therefore, it is specifically this service that causes and brings about that the Temple will be the work of G‑d, existing with eternal permanence.
This is similar to what our Sages say (regarding the redemption to come in general), “If they merit—I will hasten it,” that when the service of the Jewish people is complete, “if they merit,” then the redemption comes in a completely different manner, “I will hasten it,” beyond the natural order.
And so too regarding the building of the future Temple—that since it comes after the service of the Jewish people throughout the length of this final exile, through which the Jewish people have been refined, refinement after refinement, as we see that Jews study Torah and fulfill mitzvos with literal mesiras nefesh (self-sacrifice), and even in places where G‑d has granted and succeeded that there are no decrees against Jews, there are still obstacles and hindrances from mockers, and one must stand with great strength not to be ashamed before the mockers, and to strengthen themselves in their faith and Torah, even in the eyes of the nations—this mesiras nefesh brings about that G‑d Himself will build the Third Temple.
That is, the fact that the action of man (“And they shall make”) brings about the permanence in the Temple is because the greater the action of man, the more the Shechinah dwells within it.
8. For further clarification:
The ultimate completion of a person’s service is when his service is in such a manner that he does not consider himself a separate entity at all, and all his actions are the actions of G‑d, and the Shechinah dwells in its fullness in the work of his hands. As it says in the Gemara, “The deeds of the righteous are greater than the creation of heaven and earth… Regarding the work of their hands it is written, ‘A place for Your dwelling You have made, O G‑d; the sanctuary, O L‑rd, which Your hands have established,’” and Rashi explains, “The sanctuary is the handiwork of the righteous.” Nevertheless, the verse says, “the sanctuary, O L‑rd, which Your hands have established,” and it is explained in the Shita Mekubetzes that this is not a contradiction, for “the deeds of the righteous are called the deeds of G‑d.” One can explain this to mean that a tzaddik is not a separate entity, and therefore the handiwork of the tzaddik is itself the handiwork of G‑d.
And it can be said that this concept—that the handiwork of a person (a tzaddik) is considered the handiwork of the Holy One, blessed be He—is primarily when a person’s service is like that of a servant. For according to Torah (the Torah of Truth), a servant is not a separate entity; “whatever a servant acquires, his master acquires,” to the point that all the work of the servant is called by the name of the master. Similarly, the defining feature of a servant’s service, in every time and place (which shows that this is its source, etc.), is acceptance of the yoke—not because of his understanding of the greatness of the master or the benefit of the service, nor because of a feeling in his heart toward the service, but simply because he has accepted upon himself the yoke of the master, and his service is in order to fulfill the will of the master.
This is the novelty of the Third Beis HaMikdash compared to the previous Temples (and therefore it is specifically this one that will be “the work of G‑d”): For although in the First and Second Temples there was also service and action, nevertheless, since the service of G‑d then was with deep understanding and comprehension of the greatness of G‑d—which leads to love and awe of Him, etc.—and the intellect covers and conceals the essence, the service was openly an intellectual service, in which the person’s own being (his intellect and the feeling of his heart) was involved. Therefore, it was not openly “the building of G‑d.” Only through the service during the time of exile, when the primary service is through acceptance of the yoke of Heaven, like the service of a servant, is there the completion and true “deeds of the righteous,” which are the handiwork of the Holy One, blessed be He. Therefore, this brings about the revelation that G‑d Himself will build this House—“G‑d will build the House.”
9. Parshas Toldos is read every year in proximity to Rosh Chodesh Kislev (on Shabbos Mevarchim Chodesh Kislev, as in this year, or in the first days of the month)—whose conclusion and seal is the days of Chanukah—and in them as well we see the content of the above:
It is well known what the Ramban says on the verse where the Holy One, blessed be He, says to Aharon, “Yours is greater than theirs, for you kindle and prepare the lamps,” that this refers to the Chanukah lights, “which are never nullified,” for the sacrifices are only when the Beis HaMikdash stands, but the Chanukah lights are even during our exile.
The reason that the Chanukah lights possess this quality of eternity is explained in many places: because these lights came about through the mesiras nefesh (self-sacrifice) of the Jewish people in the time of the Chashmonaim. Even though the Greek kingdom “decreed harsh decrees upon Israel and abolished their religion and did not allow them to engage in Torah and mitzvos,” nevertheless, the Jews gave up their lives.
And since the lights came about through the ultimate service of the Jewish people—mesiras nefesh—therefore, the Chanukah lights are never nullified; they exist even during the time of exile.
However, in the days of Chanukah, this eternity was achieved only regarding the lights of the Mikdash. But after the lengthy service of this final exile, it will be so regarding the entire Mikdash: the building of the Third Temple will be in ultimate perfection, in such a way that it is entirely called by the name of the Holy One, blessed be He—“G‑d will build the House”—and it will be an eternal building forever, “the sanctuary, O L‑rd, which Your hands have established.”
(From talks of Shabbos Parshas Chayei Sarah 5730, 5747)
Key Lesson
Yitzchak’s three wells allude to the three Temples. A well is dug through human toil, yet its water comes from Heaven; so too, “And they shall make Me a sanctuary” requires the action and toil of the Jewish people. The Third Temple will be G‑d’s own eternal building precisely because of the service of this long exile: Jews studying Torah and fulfilling mitzvos with mesiras nefesh, accepting the yoke of Heaven like a servant, unashamed before the mockers. That service brings about “G‑d will build the House.”