What is the relevance here of ascending in Kedushah?

Rashi: Lechem ha'Panim was put on [a table of marble, which looks a little like] silver before it was brought into the Heichal, and on a table (covered with) gold in the Heichal and after it was removed from the Heichal.

Maharal: Descent is a loss. Loss does not apply to the level of Kedushah.

Iyun Yakov: Why would I think that one may not ascend in Kedushah? Since it was initially Hukdash for one Kedushah, one might have thought that raising it to a higher Kedushah, this disgraces the first Kedushah. However, how can we learn from the incense pans? Perhaps that was a Hora'as Sha'ah, for a commemoration!

Can we learn that we ascend in Kedushah and do not descend from "va'Yakam Moshe Es ha'Mishkan... va'Yakam Es Amudav"?

Rashi #1: The verse begins and ends with ascent, to teach that we only ascend in Kedushah.

Rashi #2: Moshe did everything himself. The Kohanim did not help him to erect the pillars and sockets, because we may not descend. (NOTE: Eighteen verses equate Aharon to Moshe (Bamidbar Rabah 2:1). If so, Aharon could have helped him! - PF)

Daf Al ha'Daf: Birkas Aharon (Berachos 230) asked, Moshe erected and took down the Mishkan all seven days of the Milu'im (Bamidbar Rabah 12:15). How could he do so on Shabbos, if not that others helped him? (The Torah forbids only one who does Melachah by himself.) Imrei Kohen (Hagahah in Shemini 13) answers, Rashi omitted the boards, because only Moshe could erect them; so Hash-m wanted. Had they helped Moshe with them, this is not descent in Kedushah, for they are totally dependent on Moshe. The proof is from the pillars and sockets. Others could have done it themselves to lighten Moshe's toil.

Rashi #3: Initially, Moshe spread the Mishkan (curtains). He held them up with his hand, and did not lower them, until he erected the pillars and sockets.

Daf Al ha'Daf: Seforno (Shemos 40:18) says that they were held up via people, or miraculously, like Tanchuma says there. Mishneh Sachir asked, we say that it is not the way of building to build the roof, and afterwards the walls (Beitzah 32b). We learn all Melachos from the Mishkan! We learn that a linen tent is called an Ohel from the Mishkan (Shabbos 28b)! (NOTE: Rashi says that Moshe held them. Even if he was 10 Amos tall, how could he hold up curtains 40 Amos long (when connected) while erecting the pillars and sockets? Surely this was a miracle. We do not obligate one who makes an Ohel before the walls, for we do not learn from miracles, like we say (ibid. 74b) about spinning wool attached to sheep. It is considered abnormal; woman did so for the Mishkan via extra Chochmah. We learn the Melachah of spreading an Ohel on existing walls from the Leviyim, who erected the Mishkan when Yisrael camped in the Midbar, just like we learn Hotza'ah from how they loaded wagons when moving the Mishkan. - PF)

Were the incense pans Tashmishei Mizbe'ach? They took them to dispute the Kehunah!

Maharsha: Even so, they intended to be Mekadesh them for Klei Shares, like Rashi explained in Chumash "Ki Kadeshu."

How does "Asher Shibarta v'Samtam ba'Aron" teaches that the broken Luchos and the second Luchos were put in the Aron?

Maharsha: The verse below "va'Asim Es ha'Luchos ba'Aron" explicitly teaches that the second Luchos were put in the Aron. The Semichus "Asher Shibarta v'Samtam ba'Aron" teaches that also the broken Luchos were put inside.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov, 86b): There was no need to write "Asher Shibarta", if not to teach that also the broken Luchos were put in the Aron. Also, the second Luchos were written when Moshe ascended. He put them in the Aron after he descended, for it says "va'Ered... va'Asim Es ha'Luchos ba'Aron."

Why were the broken Luchos and the intact Luchos in the Aron?

Maharal: Also the broken Luchos are an attribute for Yisrael. The first Luchos were Hash-m's deed. They were a higher level than the second Luchos, which were not Hash-m's deed. Due to the broken Luchos, the Shechinah was on the Aron. Even though Yisrael's level was nullified, one who was at a high level and lost it is greater than one who never had the level. If a Chacham forgot his learning due to Ones, we do not act disgracefully to him, for he reached a great level. The Ones does not nullify it.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): When Yisrael sinned, the writing flew off the first Luchos. They became heavy in Moshe's hands, and he cast them down amidst Ones. (NOTE: If it was Ones, why do we say that Hash-m approved of breaking them? Perhaps amidst Ones, he could not hold them; Moshe chose to cast them down in order to break them. - PF) They were like a body without a Neshamah. So a Chacham who forgot his learning due to Ones, the spirituality of Torah that was in his heart left, and the case of the Torah, the body, remains. It is like broken Luchos. We honor him like a Chacham.

Daf Al ha'Daf: The questioner in Noda bi'Yhudah (1 OC 9) wanted to prove from here that a Sefer Torah that cannot be fixed, one may leave it in an Aron for Kosher Sifrei Torah. He retracted, for we cannot learn from the broken Luchos. They were exceedingly Kadosh. Hash-m made them! Noda bi'Yhudah said, this is not a reason to retract. The Gemara learned from the broken Luchos to a Chacham who forgot his learning! However, the initial proof is faulty. The Aron was made to house also the broken Luchos!

How did the broken Luchos and the [intact] Luchos fit in the Aron?

Tosfos: The Luchos were six [Tefachim] long, six wide and three thick (Bava Basra 14a). If each one was this big, in all they were six by 24. The Aron was only 15 Tefachim long according to R. Meir, who holds that each Amah is six Tefachim, and 12.5 Tefachim long according to R. Yehudah, who holds that each Amah is five Tefachim! We must say that the broken Luchos were under the whole Luchos.

Tosfos, based on the Yerushalmi: The Luchos were six long and three wide and three thick. They were next to each other; in all they were six by 12, and arranged along the length of the Aron. Perhaps also the Bavli means so; two Luchos together were six long and six wide. It says that they occupied 12 Tefachim in the Aron, i.e. including the broken Luchos next to the intact Luchos.

How can Bitul Torah be the foundation of Torah?

Rashi: He neglects learning in order to accompany a Mes or bring a Kalah to Chupah. He is rewarded as if he founds the Torah and engages in it.

Maharal: This is not the foundation of Torah!

Daf Al ha'Daf: The Taz (YD 251:6) says that one who learned has a greater merit than one who saved lives. He learned from Mordechai. Because he needed to neglect Torah in order to save lives, Chachamim demoted him from his grandeur (Megilah 16b). This seems unlike Rashi, who says [for other Mitzvos] that He is rewarded as if he founds the Torah and engages in it! Merafsin Igra (24) answers, he receives as much reward as one who learned, but he lacks the attributes of Talmud Torah. I explain that this attribute is due to a second Mitzvah in Talmud Torah - to know Torah, that it should be sharp in your mouth ("v'Shinantam l'Vanecha").

Maharal: This is like it says in Berachos (63b) 'when people spread, gather in.' i.e. if Torah is not dear to them, do not teach to them. This causes Torah to persist! We learn from "Asher Shibarta" - Yishur Kochacha (you should be strengthened) for breaking the Luchos, for this made a foundation for Torah.

Iyun Yakov: Breaking the Luchos caused Yisrael to forget [Torah - Eruvin 54]. This is the Kiyum of Torah - it obligates people to constantly review their learning.

Daf Al ha'Daf: citing the Imrei Emes: From when Moshe broke the Luchos, until Hash-m gave the second Luchos, Yisrael did not engage in Torah. (NOTE: The Luchose were six Tefachim by six Tefachim. How many people could see them at once? The letters were carved out all the way from front to back; miraculously, also from the back one could read them normally (the writing was not backwards). Perhaps also miraculously, one could read them even from far away. Alternatively, the very existence of the Luchos enabled a much higher level of Talmud Torah. - PF) However, they yearned for new Luchos; this was the preparation for the second Luchos! Bitul Torah was the foundation of Torah! One may not destroy a Beis ha'Keneses before building its replacement. Therefore, Hash-m did not say "Asher Shibarta", from which we expound 'Yishur Kochachah for breaking them', until He commanded about the second Luchos.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Tzafnas Pane'ach: The Ba'al Shem Tov said, the Neshamah is always fervent to rise higher and higher, without end. There is concern lest it be Batel to Hash-m's light, and then also the body will have no importance! Therefore, Bitul Torah, that man engages in bodily needs - eating and drinking, business... so the Neshamah will cease its fervor, and enable its Kiyum.

How do we learn from "Asher Shibarta"?

Rashi: Hash-m did not use an expression of anger. This shows that He approved that Moshe nullified Torah and broke the Luchos, for he intended for good.

Maharsha: Moshe reasoned, a Mumar may not eat Korban Pesach. All the more so, Yisrael [after Chet ha'ha'Egel] are not proper for the entire Torah!

Etz Yosef: It was better that Yisrael be judged like a single girl [who was Mezanah] than like a married woman, like a Midrash says. Moshe did so on his own, and Hash-m consented.

Etz Yosef citing Rashi (Shabbos 87): Asher is Ishur - people will affirm and praise him for breaking the Luchos.

Etz Yosef citing Rashba: The Aleph in "Asher" is in place of a Yud. Had it been improper to break them, Hash-m would not have commanded to put the broken Luchos in the Aron, for the prosecutor cannot become the advocate! (NOTE: It was improper for Adas Korach to offer incense, yet their pans became a covering for the Mizbe'ach! Perhaps the concern is only in Kodesh ha'Kodoshim. The Kohen Gadol may not wear gold there, but he wears gold for all other Avodas. - PF) The Midrash says that Yehoshua and 70 Zekenim grabbed his hands to stop him from breaking them, but they could not stop him. (NOTE: How could 70 men get so close to him? However, in the future 2800 Goyim will hold the corners of a Jew's garment (Zecharyah 8:23)! - PF) This is why it says "Kol haYad ha'Chazakah."

Why did Hash-m bless Moshe with Yishur Ko'ach for breaking the Luchos?

This made a foundation for Torah, like the explanations above from Maharal, Iyun Yakov and Imrei Emes.

If a Chacham sinned greatly, why do we cover up for him, like night?

R. Gershom: "[V'Chashal Gam] Navi [Imcha Laylah]" refers to a Chacham. His honor should be dear to you, like your own.

Iyun Yakov: It is due to Chilul Hash-m. Also, surely he repented. We say, do not think [that he is still a sinner] - surely he repented! (Berachos 19a)

Etz Yosef: Do not disgrace him in public.

Why does it say Kol (anyone) who forgets one matter from his learning? What does this include? Also, why is he liable for one matter? It says "ha'Devarim" (at least two), and not 'meha'Devarim'!

Anaf Yosef citing Midrash Shmuel: Perhaps Kol includes whether he forgot due to laziness or Ones (he was busy financing his household). Even so, he is Chayav Misah (bi'Ydei Shamayim), for it says "Hashlech Al Hash-m Yehavcha" (NOTE: i.e. he should have learned, and trusted in Him to finance his household . Here it says only that he transgresses Lavim. Avos 3:8 says that he is Chayav Misah. - PF) Also, he should have eaten bread with salt, and diligently learned (and not worked extra in order to afford nicer food). He is exempt only if his learning was too much for him. Forgetting one matter is like forgetting many matters, for there is no limit to the number of things that depend on each matter. It is as if he forgot Devarim. It says "Asher Ra'u Einecha", for a wonder was done with Divrei Torah - they saw what is heard. So Chazal expounded "v'Chol ha'Am Ro'im Es ha'Kolos." Surely, this was due to their great Kedushah and spirituality,

Iyun Yakov: Ha'Devarim" implies all, or at least most, of the matters. However, we expound "Im Shacho'ach Tishkach" - if you began to forget, in the end you will forget everything. The Torah warned you to be very careful lest you forget.

What is the Havah Amina that he transgresses if he forgot due to Ones?

Maharsha: Tosfos said that this is a Mishnah in Avos (3:8). Really, there it says 'perhaps this is even if his learning too great for him to remember.' Perhaps Tosfos understands that this is Ones! Noda bi'Yhudah excludes this due to "u'Fen Yasuru..." (he is liable only if he removes them from his heart). Why didn't Tosfos say that the Reisha (anyone who forgets one matter from his learning...) is a Mishnah? The Mishnah discusses being Chayav Misah bi'Ydei Shamayim; here we discuss transgressing Lavin. However, Noda bi'Yhudah says that he transgresses three - it says twice Hishamer, and "u'Fen". He should have counted another Pen - it says "Pen Tishkach" and "u'Fen Yasuru"!

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): Since we discuss one who veered the matters from his heart, he transgresses also a fourth Lav - "u'Fen Yasuru mi'Levavecha"! Perhaps the Reisha discusses written Torah - "Asher Ra'u Einecha." The three Lavin are for written Torah; "u'Fen Yasuru" is for oral Torah.

Iyun Yakov: Man is always Mu'ad, and forgetting learning is considered like Mezid (Avos 4:12). Had he been zealous, he could have remembered everything. Etz Yosef - Ones is like Rav Yosef, who fell ill and forgot his learning.

How does he remove Divrei Torah from his heart?

Tosfos Yom Tov (Avos 3:8) - he does not review his learning

How was his learning too great for him to remember?

R. Gershom: He could not understand it. Etz Yosef - therefore, he forgot it.

Anaf Yosef citing Midrash Shmuel: His intellect could not bear it. When this matter entered, this one left.

Why does it say that Torah was given in 40 days?

Iyun Yakov: All 40 days, Moshe learned and forgot, until Torah was given to him for a gift. This teaches future generations, if someone says 'I did not toil, and I found (understand Torah), do not believe him (Megilah 6a). Rather, one must toil greatly and review his learning, until ii given to him for a gift and it is called on his name. Then he will not forget.

Etz Yosef: It is difficult to understand the supreme spiritual Torah; Moshe needed 40 days. The supreme Neshamah needs 40 days to separate from its source and blend into a physical body. Both of them are one kind.

What is the meaning of 'a Neshamah is formed in 40 days'?

Rashi: The fetus is formed on day 40 [from conception].

Maharal: The Gemara makes this comparison, lest one say that forgetting Divrei Torah is not a severe matter. Since both are in 40 days, they resemble each other. Torah is not natural; it is separated intellect. Also the Neshamah is not physical. Man is to Torah like a fish to water. Each pertains to the other. A fish cannot be without water. So the Neshamah, which is separated, needs Torah, which is Hash-m's separate intellect. Therefore, if man does not guard one, Hash-m takes the other from him.

Maharsha: We expound "Hishamer Lecha" (be careful) about Torah, and via this "u'Shmor Nafshecha."(o) What is the significance of the parable of one entrusted his slave with a wild bird?

Maharal: Torah is compared to a wild bird, which does not accept to be under man's authority. It flies in the air, and does not dwell with man, rather, everywhere. It is called Tzipor Dror, an expression of freedom - "v'Karasam Dror." So Torah is separated from man; it is not under man. Just like a wild bird must be guarded more, lest it fly away, also Torah. The master said, I will not take money, for there is no amount equal to a wild bird. Rather, I will take the Neshamah, which is priceless. It says, from the day that I separated from the body, I fly like a bird (Sanhedrin 91a).

Maharsha: The master will not demand only money, for it is already his - what a slave acquires, it belongs to his master. Rather, I will take your Nefesh (Neshamah)!

Iyun Yakov: Do not say that if one does not guard from forgetting Torah, Hash-m will take his Neshamah immediately. Hash-m delays anger - perhaps he will repent and review his learning. One would not be so cruel to kill someone for losing a bird. Rather, it is an extra warning to oversee it well. All the more so, Hash-m who is full of mercy, does not kill immediately; He warns excessively, so people will be zealous and gain.

Etz Yosef: A man who forgets to guard his dear Nefesh in Taharah, he thinks that it is like a wild bird with a nice voice. Physical eyes do not esteem a small animal. So the Nefesh does not recognize its dearness, for it is hidden inside, and not revealed to the senses.