57 —מדוע שם משה אינו נזכר בפרשת תצוה ושאלות קשורות

B"H, Monday, Rosh Chodesh Adar Sheini 5715.

Brooklyn, NY.

Shalom u'Vrachah!

In response to your letter... regarding what you wrote about the fact that Moshe Rabbeinu's name is not mentioned in Parshas Tetzaveh—and as an addition to the answer already printed—here I will present the general matter, which will also resolve what was asked in the seforim on Baal HaTurim and what you noted in your letter.

The Baal HaTurim at the beginning of Tetzaveh writes: "Moshe is not mentioned in this parsha, unlike all other parshiyos of the Chumash from when Moshe was born; there is no section where he is not mentioned. The reason is because he said 'Mecheini Na MiSifrecha Asher Kasavta' (Erase me now from Your book which You have written), and the curse of a chacham even conditionally comes to pass and was fulfilled here."

They ask on Baal HaTurim: In parshiyos Eikev, Re'eh, Shoftim—and one can add Teitzei and Nitzavim—Moshe's name is also not mentioned. One can simply answer that Sefer Devarim begins with 'Eileh HaDevarim Asher Diber Moshe' (These are the words which Moshe spoke), which applies to the entire sefer. See Megillah (31a) Rashi s.v. "Moshe": (in Torah) it is stated in language like "I will give," "I will appoint," "I will send"—by He who has the power to do so—but in Mishneh Torah it says "Yakecha Hashem" etc. Also see Ramban at the beginning of his commentary: Moshe Rabbeinu wrote... as a third party speaking... And since this is so, Moshe's name does not appear in Torah until he was born... Do not be troubled by Mishneh Torah; for at its start it says 'Eileh HaDevarim Asher Diber Moshe'... as if to say these are words spoken by him." Also see Likkutei Torah on 'It is forbidden for a person to taste...' at the end of Parshas Va'eschanan.

There is more to add regarding Baal HaTurim's question: The term 'Mechiyah' (erasure) applies to something already written (already existing), as seen from verses like Tehillim 69:29 'Yimachu... Al Yikatevu' (May they be erased... let them not be written). See Rosh Hashanah (16b)—and even more so we find that even the manner of existence matters, as ruled in Rambam Hilchos Shabbos 11:15: One who erases is only liable if he erases writing that stands upon something enduring. But see there (halacha 9) that one who erases one letter intending to write two is liable—perhaps because above there is no lack of potential action; maybe Mechiyah by Heaven applies even to something not yet written but destined to be written.

From this answer we understand that your question also only arises because it should mention Moshe's name (even though Baal HaTurim's wording becomes difficult according to this), so it's not a question on Bereishis or other parshiyos—for besides the above reason—there's also no necessity for Moshe's name to be mentioned there. But in Parshas Tetzaveh—even though its beginning continues directly from 'Vayedaber Hashem el Moshe' at the start of Terumah—its end ('Ve'asita Mizbach Miktar') introduces a separate topic: first describing the vessels of the Mishkan and priestly garments—all prepared by Kislev 25 or Rosh Chodesh Adar (see Tanchuma Pekudei end; Yalkut Shimoni)—then comes Parshas HaMilu'im at Adar's end, then again commands about Mizbach Haketores made together with other Mishkan vessels! Thus, seemingly there should have been a separate statement for this—and whether or not there was an interruption between statements matters because each requires a calling beforehand—as stated in Sifra Vayikra beginning—that even previous statements before Ohel Moed had such a calling. Similarly in Shemos (33:19–21): 'Vayomer... Vayomer... Vayomer...' since they are three distinct matters.

This answers why omitting Moshe's name fulfills 'Mecheini Na...'—thus either no statement was written or no unique statement was made—and still further clarification is needed.

Some say Parshas Tetzaveh was said before the sin of the Golden Calf (Zohar II 195a; Ramban and Ibn Ezra at Terumah imply similarly). If so, Mechiyah would apply to something already actualized. Others say it was said after the sin (Tanchuma Terumah 8; Rashi Shemos 31:18), so Mecheini would refer to something destined but not yet actualized.

Notes:

a) That Mizbach Haketores appears last has already been addressed by commentators (see Ramban and Seforno). According to Chassidus one could say Mizbach Haketores represents inner heart—the essence above intellect—even though physically located in body—the Mishkan—not head—the Holy of Holies—and its service relates uniquely to soul’s singularity. It differs from other aspects of Mikdash—especially per Maamar Mizbach Adamah—Reshimos on Shemos attributed to tzt"z—and Maamar Ze Yitnu 258—that Mizbach Adamah/Avanim represent outer heart/illumination while Mizbach Haketores represents essence itself—not just illumination—as explained in Likkutei Torah Ki Seitzei II 62–63.

b) When were Terumah/Tetzaveh said? Seemingly it's a dispute in Zevachim (115b): Rabbi Yochanan says it's separation of firstborns; thus Mishkan command ('You shall bring near Aharon') came after Golden Calf; must say here there's no chronological order—or Rabbi says it's separation of Nezirim/Anointed Ones; then sections were written out-of-order. Zohar II 224a says even Vayakhel/gathering donations preceded Golden Calf—which seems difficult based on Zohar II 195a that after sin immediately came Vayakhel—and I don't have Zohar commentaries handy.

c) To explain why Mecheini Na was fulfilled specifically in Tetzaveh because 7 Adar always falls this week—as you wrote—is incorrect since that's not always true; this year proves otherwise. Nor can it be said it's usually so. Alternatively perhaps only here does Moshe appear right at start—to show erasure only happened due to inadvertent error...

Blessings for immediate teshuvah and immediate redemption

Summary

The Rebbe analyzes why Moshe Rabbeinu’s name does not appear in Parshas Tetzaveh, exploring textual sources and deeper meanings from both revealed Torah and Chassidus. This teaches us how every detail in Torah contains layers of significance and invites deeper study.