Ramban Parshas Terumah (+Mishpatim hosafa)

Absolutely. I thought we'll just start by following up with what we spoke about last week last week we saw the Ramban on Kedoshim Tihyu and he juxtaposed it to the Rambam's explanation of what what he included in Sefer HaMitzvos and Sefer Kedushah in the Yad HaChazakah. The that that emphasis of of the Rambam on the kedushah generating qualities of Maachalos Asuros that it needed to be corroborated with some avoidance some spiritual contaminant in in the Maachalos Asuros. Obviously that approach to kedushah is not conceptually at odds is not conceptually incompatible with what the Ramban was talking about. Fact that the Ramban says that there's also a level or dimension of kedushah which means avoiding things that are inherently spiritually contaminating doesn't mean that the Ramban can't or or doesn't also embrace the idea that that there's kedushah that's created through that through the disciplining and and curbing the physical drives and and impulses that that a person has. L'maaseh the Ramban explicitly has it has it actually in on two levels the second of which is a little surprising when you juxtapose the Ramban that that we were reading last week with the famous Ramban beginning of Parashas Kedoshim but the Ramban begins by quoting Rashi and then quoting the Toras Kohanim that Kedoshim Tihyu means Perushim Tihyu. So the Ramban writes

לפי דעתי אין הפרישות הזו לפרוש מן העריות כדברי הרב, אבל הפרישות היא המוזכרת בכל מקום בתלמוד שאוהביה נקראים פרושים. והענין כי התורה הזהירה בעריות ובמאכלות האסורים, והתירה הביאה איש ואשתו ואכילת הבשר והיין. אם כן ימצא בעל התאוה מקום להיות שטוף בזמת אשתו או נשיו הרבות, ולהיות בסובאי יין בזוללי בשר למו, וידבר כרצונו בכל הנבלות שלא הוזכר איסור זה בתורה, והנה יהיה נבל ברשות התורה. לפיכך בא הכתוב אחרי שפרט האיסורים שאסר אותם לגמרי, וצוה בדבר כללי שנהיה פרושים מן המותרות. ימעיט במשגל כענין שאמרו שלא יהיו תלמידי חכמים מצויים אצל נשותיהם כתרנגולים, ולא ישמש אלא לפי הצורך וקיום המצוה ממנו. ויקדש עצמו מן היין במיעוטו, כמו שקרא הכתוב הנזיר קדוש, ויזכור הרעות הנזכרות ממנו בתורה.

So then here clearly this is the emphasis that the Rambam talks about in terms of Sefer Kedusha. The need to practice abstinence, the need not to have any excessive involvement, pursuit, entanglement with devarim chomriim. And that's what the mandate according to the Ramban of kedoshim tihiyu represents is that it otherwise if the Torah didn't have such a mitzvah kedoshim tihiyu so then it's important to understand correctly what the Ramban means with the phrase of naval bireshut haTorah. There is no such thing. The Ramban is saying, right, it's a counterfactual conditional. והנה יהיה נבל ברשות התורה, were it not for the pasuk of kedoshim tihiyu, it would have been possible to be a naval bireshut haTorah. If you didn't have such a pasuk, if you didn't have a pasuk of kedoshim tihiyu or similar pesukim, so then it would have been possible to lead a hedonistic vulgar lifestyle and the person could have said and everything I'm doing is correct and עושה הכל על פי תורה. It would have been possible to again to be vulgar to be gross to be a hedonist bireshut haTorah. In light of kedoshim tihiyu there is no such thing. It's not that a person can. It's not that it just goes against the spirit of the law. No, in light of kedoshim tihiyu what the Ramban is telling us is it clearly clearly violates the letter of the law because over here the law the letter of this law codifies and legislates the spirit of the law. So clearly this is very similar to the Rambam's discussion of kedusha in again in that short paragraph explaining Sefer Kedusha. And that's not a question because obviously the two dimensions of kedusha there's nothing which is there's nothing incompatible about them. The fact that the Ramban says there is such a thing as things which are inherently inherently spiritually contaminating and kedusha means one dimension one aspect of kedusha is to steer clear from those. And then the Ramban says that there's another aspect there's another dimension of kedusha which entails again this abstinence this avoiding unnecessary involvement and entanglement with chomriyut. They're complementary aspects of kedusha not competing. Challenge is like this we'll see in a minute the Emes L'Yaakov. The question is really on the Ramban as well but for now let's pose it the question on the Ramban. So the Ramban doesn't have this idea of spiritual contaminant in Maachalos Asuros. Again it's to help us achieve this aspect this dimension of kedusha of the abstinence. For instance that ultimately it's not enough to eat tuna fish and not eat lobster. It's not enough to eat pizza and not cheeseburgers but even when you're eating the tuna fish even when you're eating the pizza it has to be done in moderation otherwise what's intended even with the not eating the lobster even with not eating the cheeseburgers is not going to be realized. So then what do you need all those Maachalos Asuros for? Just say that just say that you have to be moderate. Have one piece. Okay whether the one piece will be tuna whether the one piece will be lobster it should be the same thing. There are other answers to this for the Ramban as well but lechora even even the question as put it's important to understand the following answer. Let's see l'mashal m'daber b'avos. Let's say you have the parents and they have a teenage son. They want to make sure that teenage son doesn't get involved with drinking and doesn't, lo aleinu, develop a drinking problem. Okay. So first of all, they tell them בשום אופן ופנים, it's categorically, categorically assur to ever step foot in a bar, to ever go anywhere near a Kiddush club, categorically, categorically assur, prohibited. Okay. But then they also have to tell them, you know, that on... why not just say that it's categorically assur to never ever touch a drop of wine? Because they want him to make Kiddush on Shabbos. They want him to have a cup of wine on Yom Tov. They want him to have within the boundaries of what's safe and responsible in avodas Hashem. They want him to do a little bit on Purim. So they can't just tell him that a prohibition-style regulation. So השתא דאתינו להכי that you have to tell them don't drink too much wine, so what do you have to tell them don't go to the bar for? So what's the point? Either way, that's not going to ensure what what you want, right? Either way you're going to have to tell him about the moderation, right? Either way you're going to have to tell him, when you drink wine, don't drink too much wine, make Kiddush and that's it. Make Kiddush, you'll have a melo lugmav, maybe you want to have a little bit more between the between the fish and the and the chicken, but but not not not more than that. So השתא דאתינו להכי that that you need to impart that directive, fine, so with that same directive you can go to the bar, with that same directive, leaving aside the chillul Hashem and everything else, you can go to the you can go to the Kiddush club. So obviously that's not a question, right? Obviously that's not a question. In contexts where it's appropriate and you can tell him something absolute, so you're helping, you're helping the child by by giving him such a such a directive. The fact that it's not possible to give such an absolute directive in in every context and because of that in those other contexts you're going to have to tell him be moderate and and trust him to implement that, it's intuitive to us that that doesn't mean that that that it's a waste or or pointless to tell him, no, you can't step foot in a bar. So that's the that's what the two tiers are according to the Ramban. Certain things the Torah just assurs categorically. The Torah can afford to and the Torah assurs it categorically for our benefit. You can't assur all all food and and drink categorically obviously. So then what can't be assur categorically, the analog to drinking to making Kiddush on Shabbos ve-chulu, the analog to that, so then the Torah says there has to be there has to be moderation. It doesn't explain why some animals and not others. It doesn't. So that that's what we were alluding to before when there are other answers to the Rambam. The Ramban thinks that there's something unhealthy in a physical sense about the various ma'achalos assuros. We won't go into that we won't go into that too much. What's a little bit tzarich iyun in the Ramban is that the mashma'us here, just the mashma'us of two points in Parshas Kedoshim, so maybe just to re-read a little bit of what we read before and then to add a couple lines that that we didn't read yet.

והענין הפרישות היא הנזכרת בכל מקום בתלמוד שבעליה נקראים פרושים והענין כי התורה הזהירה בעריות ובמאכלים האסורים

but on the other hand

והתירה הביאה איש באשתו ואכילת הבשר והיין אם כן ימצא בעל התאוה מקום להיות שטוף בזימת אשתו או נשיו הרבות ולהיות בסובאי יין בזוללי בשר למו והנה יהיה נבל ברשות התורה לפיכך בא הכתוב אחרי שפירט האיסורים שאסר אותם לגמרי וצוה בדבר כללי.

The Ramban says at the end, he says, Vezeh derech hatorah, ולפרוט ולכלול וכיוצא בו זה, Prat uchlal,

כי אחרי אזהרת פרטי הדינין וכל משא ומתן שבין בני אדם לא תגנוב ולא תגזול ולא תעשוק ושאר האזהרות אמר בכלל ועשית הישר והטוב שיכניס בה עשה הישר וההשויה וכל לפנים משורת הדין לרצון חבירו כאשר אפרש והדיון עם כמה לרצון הקדוש ברוך הוא וכן בעניין השבת אסר מלאכות בלאו והטרחים בעשה כללי שנאמר תשבות.

And he says this no less than three times here. And not here, you wouldn't know from the Ramban here what he had said by ואנשי קדש תהיון לי. Because the mashmaut in the Ramban over here is he says when you have this type of very general sweeping directive, kedoshim tihyu, veasita hayashar vehatov. So let's say, let's say, again, משל רע לי זה, so parents are going out. Going out for a few hours at night, so they have their babysitter for the kids. So before leaving, so they say to the kids, be good. Now what does be good mean? It's so vague. Maybe be good means be happy, be in a good mood. So throw a ball out the window and so what does be good mean? So clearly, clearly, what the parents, just be good, you know, perhaps lends itself for a wide array of interpretations. So it's clear that what the parents mean is, look, we've been mechanech you, we've told you specifics, lots of specifics about what's good and what's not good, what's appropriate and what's inappropriate, so you have a sense for what's good. So on the heels of lots of specific directives, so then it's meaningful to say be good. But just stahm azoi say be good, that doesn't mean anything. So be holy. So what does be holy mean? So you can go to India and you can dress like a, dress like a shlump and be an anti-Semite and tell the whole world that you're holy. Some people think that's what, that's what kedusha is also. So what do you mean just, what do you mean, kedoshim kedoshim tihyu? So the Ramban says, the Ramban says veasita hayashar vehatov, tishbot, take it easy, take it easy. So maybe take it easy means sleep in and sleep till 10:00 in the morning Shabbos morning. The Ramban says in each of these cases when the Torah has such a tzivui klali, the tzivui klali only comes on the heels of many, many pratim. After the Torah gives us so many מצוות בין אדם לחבירו, then the Torah says and בכלל ועשית הישר והטוב. Extrapolate from all the specifics and you'll understand what veasita hayashar vehatov means. Everything the parents have been telling the kids for so many years, so extrapolate from that and you know what it means when we're telling you to be good. Similarly, says the Ramban, so now plug that back in to kedoshim tihyu, which is how the Ramban is saying it. So the Ramban clearly is saying that this idea of kedoshim tihyu of the abstinence, even in devarim hamutarim, even in food that's mutar to eat, even in wine that's mutar to drink, even in marital life. So it's clear that the Ramban is saying that the pratim which would give us a sense for what that means and how to translate it and how to implement it, that those pratim came from the issurei maachalot assurot and the issurei arayot, which is a very different, that's much more of what we saw last week being the Rambam's perspective on those mitzvot rather than what the Ramban himself seemed to be saying by ואנשי קדש תהיון לי. Okay, גם זה וגם זה. And let's see, it's again, he says it most explicitly, most fully at the end, but it was already clear at the beginning, right?

והעניין כי התורה הזהירה בעריות ובמאכלים האסורים והתירה הביאה איש באשתו ואכילת הבשר והיין אם כן ימצא בעל התאוה מקום להיות שטוף בזימת אשתו ונשיו הרבות.

So what did the Ramban need the הזהירה בעריות ובמאכלים האסורים? He should have just said

התורה מתירה הביאה איש באשתו ואכילת הבשר והיין אם כן אם.

No, it means that the fact that haTorah hitirah these things can erode what haTorah is accomplishing, what haTorah sets out to do through the other issurim. And that's where the Ramban again says even more explicitly at the end, זהו דרך התורה לפרוט ולכלול, and it tells you that the klal, the klalus-dikke mitzvah is meaningful because you have a sense for what be good means from ever since kids have a sense for what be good means and what the parents have been telling them, mechaneching them for the past five, eight, ten years. This is why these bigger details, big details, smaller details, these details are supposed to be informing what the klal is. Another difference is that the klalim can be circumstantial, whereas the specifics are not circumstantial short of pikuach nefesh or something like that. Because again, Kedoshim Tiyu means that the Torah, what we call the spirit of the law, the Torah made the letter of the law. But since it goes in that direction, so then it is... there is something... there is something circumstantial about it. A person is... a person is supposed to practice perishus. Chas ve-shalom you have a person, chas ve-shalom, who is suffering from an eating disorder and they have to... they have to eat a lot. So you don't have to declare whether it is or isn't pikuach nefesh because again, when you have the klalus-dikke, there's something circumstantial about... about it, about the translation of it. Whereas the pratim are also just absolute, and again, short of pikuach nefesh, so you can't... you can't rationalize it and say that it's not... that it's not relevant. Let's see the Ramban here in the beginning of his hakdamah to Parshas Mishpatim, actually,

דבר ה' עם ישראל פנים אל פנים עשרת הדברות וצוה אותם על ידי משה קצת מצות שהן אבות למצותיה של תורה כאשר הנהיגו אבותינו עם הגרים שבאים להתייהד וישראל קבלו עליהם לעשות כל אשר יצום על ידו של משה וכרת עמהם ברית על כל זה.

The Ramban, Chazal tell us that ma'amad Har Sinai, entering into this Torah, was accompanied by geirus. And that we learn dinim of geirus from there. That kochem ka-avoseichem, שאבותיכם נכנסו בברית במילה טבילה והרצאת דמים, if I'm not mistaken, that's the lashon. So too for the doros. That the way a person is mis-gay-er bizman Beis Hamikdash is that there's milah, obviously for the zachar, there's milah, tevillah, and hartza'as dam, that a ger brings a korban when he is mis-gay-er. And we know that din of doros from Matan Torah because what happened when we were mekabel Torah is that we were... The Ramban says another sort of din that we know ledoros that that was exemplified at b'shas matan Torah is Chazal tell us in a braisa in Yevamos that when the ger comes lehissgayer מודיעים אותו מקצת מצוות קלות ומקצת מצוות חמורות. You have to make sure that the ger, the prospective, potential ger knows is exposed to a representative sampling of mitzvos. Can't just tell him there's a mitzvah of kiddush and seuda and we eat cholent and all that sort of stuff, but you have to tell him miktzas mitzvos chamuros also. You have to tell him that there's an issur cheilev and rachmana litzlan a person eats cheilev then there's an issur kareis. It's a beautiful, beautiful mitzvah of Shabbos, a person does melacha on Shabbos he's rachmana litzlan, he's onash, he's onash skila. That's what Chazal say. When the Rambam quotes this in Hilchos Issurei Biah, he adds something which is very, very compelling in sevara, so compelling that it explains why it's not mentioned in the braisa in Yevamos, that maybe it was just muvan me-eilav in terms of Chazal, but the way the Rambam quotes it is as follows: כיצד מקבלין גירי צדק? So then there's one line here again. Take a look. It's in the braisa in Yevamos in the fourth perek. And the Rambam says before he says the מודיעים אותו מקצת מצוות קלות ומקצת מצוות חמורות, he says מודיעים אותו עיקרי הדת. You have to tell him what what faith is, what the Torah teaches us about correct belief and faith is. It's not just that you're only going to go to a restaurant that has a proper hashgacha and eat kosher. But the first thing is that before you come to any specific examples of mitzvos, the Rambam says

מודיעים אותו עיקרי הדת שהוא ייחוד השם ואיסור עבודה זרה ומאריכים בדבר זה.

And only only when the Beis Din is convinced of the that the ger is on board, the potential ger is on board in terms of belief, so then מודיעים אותו מקצת מצוות קלות ומקצת מצוות חמורות. So the Ramban here is telling us, it's interesting, according to the Ramban, matan Torah itself, ein hachi nami, the braisa in Yevamos doesn't mention it, but matan Torah itself is again, it doesn't need a murtza so compelling in sevara, but matan Torah itself followed this pattern. Because the Ramban says that basically Aseres ha-Dibros, what that represented al pi halacha was Hakadosh Baruch Hu telling the מקצת מצוות קלות ומקצת מצוות חמורות. So what did Hakadosh Baruch Hu begin with? He began with the yichud Hashem and issur avoda zara with

אנוכי ה' אלוקיך לא יהיה לך אלוהים אחרים על פני.

And then after that, kibbud av v'em and Shabbos and kibbud av v'em v'chu v'chu. In general, Aseres ha-Dibros on the one hand have no there's no more kedusha to the psukim of Anochi Hashem Elokecha than there is to u'vnei Pallu Eliyahu. It's all Torah min hashamayim, every every word is literally verbatim dvar Hashem communicated by Hakadosh Baruch Hu to Moshe Rabbeinu, which is why the Gemara in Berachos says why when the Rabbanan they were considering appending Aseres ha-Dibros to Krias Shema, so ביטלום מפני תרעומת המינים. The Chazal said no, we can't do that because it would lend credence to what the minim say, no, that the Aseres ha-Dibros are min hashamayim but rachmana litzlan other things not. So in terms of kedushas Torah, in terms of being verbatim dvar Hashem, so there's no difference between one part. also the Pasuk and another Pasuk in the Torah, it's all, it's all, all Dvar Hashem, all Kodesh Kadashim. And yet of course it is true that notwithstanding it is true and we see from the fact that Chazal otherwise would have wanted to include Aseres Hadibros in Krias Shema, it is true that there is something representative of the Aseres Hadibros, that there is something special about the Aseres Hadibros in the sense that the Aseres Hadibros as this Ramban is telling us, which is not necessarily true of every other Mitzvah, serve as representative Mitzvos for the Kol HaTorah Kulah, which is why had it not been for the Ta'anos HaMinim, why Chazal did want and and would have appended the Aseres Hadibros to Krias Shema. That's why Rav Saadya and others wrote Azharos where they grouped all the Taryag Mitzvos into the ten headings of the Aseres Hadibros. Al Kol Panim, says the Ramban, after we were Mekabel the Torah and Hakadosh Baruch Hu established a covenant with us,

מעתה הנה הם לו לעם והוא להם לאלהים כאשר התנה עמי תחילה

Hakadosh Baruch Hu had stipulated

ועתה אם שמוע תשמעו בקולי ושמרתם את בריתי והייתם לי סגולה מכל העמים ואתם תהיו לי ממלכת כהנים וגוי קדוש

Vehinei heim kedoshim, and as such

ראוי שיהיה בהם מקדש להשרות שכינתו ביניהם ולפיכך צוה תחילה על דבר המשכן שיהיה לו בית בתוכם מקודש לשמו.

The Tzivuy HaMishkan is not a response to the Egel; it it antedates the Egel.

ושם אועד ואצוה אל בני ישראל והנה עיקר החפץ במשכן הוא מקום מנוחת השכינה שהוא הארון.

The Hashra'as HaShchina is concentrated on top of the Aron Bein HaKeruvim כמו שאמר ונועדתי לך שם ודברתי אתך מעל הכפורת. Al Kein, Ramban says, that explains why in the Tzivuy HaMishkan הקדים הארון והכפורת בתחילה. That's why the very first thing Hakadosh Baruch Hu specifies about what it means to build a Mikdash is Va'asu Aron כי הוא מוקדם במעלה because if you're not arranging things practically, thematically, if your order represents importance, well then the Aron is number one.

וסמך לארון השולחן והמנורה שהם כלים כמוהו ויורו על ענין המשכן שבעבורן נעשה.

But Moshe Hikdim in Parshas Vayakhel את המשכן את אהלו ואת מכסהו Vechein asa betzalel לפי שהוא ראוי שהו הראוי בבנין הבית. So Hakadosh Baruch Hu when he gives the Tzivuy, so the organizer is in terms of importance, in terms of capturing what what the Mishkan is is is all about. Moshe Rabbeinu and and subsequently Betzalel in his implementation are going about it what needs to be done practically to achieve that result. So practically first you build the Mishkan, first you build the house, then you bring the furniture. Says the Ramban,

וסוד המשכן הוא שיהיה הכבוד ששכן על הר סיני שוכן עליו בנסתר.

That Kavod, that glory which was so prominent and pronounced by Har Sinai should be present albeit in in a more concealed sense in the Mishkan. And the Ramban now points to a series of parallels, descriptions of Har Sinai Beshas Matan Torah with the Mishkan. כמו שנאמר שם וישכן כבוד ה' על הר סיני Uksiv הן הראנו ה' אלהינו את כבודו ואת גדלו Kein kasuv bamishkan

וכבוד ה' מלא את המשכן והזכיר במשכן שתי פעמים וכבוד ה' מלא את המשכן

Keneged what it says Matan Torah es kevodo. Even though it was the Kol of the Dibbur which was present at Har Sinai as it says in the Torah

מן השמים השמיעך את קולו ליסרך ועל הארץ הראך את אשו הגדולה.

keaf bamishkan kesiv וישמע את הקול מדבר אליו. Again that same description of Kol מעל הכפורת מבין שני הכרובים vaydaber elav. vaydaber elav להגיד מה שאמרו בקבלה tradition that the Kol was coming from the heavens onto Moshe from on top of the Kaporess and from there he spoke with him

כי כל דיבור ודיבור עם משה היה מן השמים ביום

skipping a couple lines and maybe we'll just read and try very superficially very approximately to understand a little bit of the Hemshech here. והמשתכל יפה בכתובים הנאמרים במתן תורה if a person looks well discerningly at the Pesukim which describe Mattan Torah יבין סוד המשכן ובית המקדש and he can look into it from

מה שאמר שלמה בחכמתו בתפילתו בבית המקדש לה' אלוקי ישראל.

Shlomo HaMelech addresses himself to HaShem Elokei Yisrael כמו שאמר בהר סיני ויראו את אלוקי ישראל. And Shlomo added to explain HaShem לעניין שרמזתי שם למעלה כי אלוקי ישראל יושב הכרובים as it says

כבוד אלוקי ישראל עליהם מלמעלה היא החיה אשר ראיתי תחת אלוקי ישראל בנהר כבר ואדע כי כרובים המה.

And David said

לסבנית המרכבה והכרובים זהב והפורשים וסוככים על ארון ברית ה'. וכן יזכיר תמיד בבית המקדש בשם ה' לשמך

and they say every time ve'atah tishma hashamayim bemiddas rachamim and it's written

והתפללו אל ה' דרך העיר אשר בחרת בה והבית אשר בניתי לשמך.

veshamata hashamayim. ubebiyur amar

כי האמנם ישב אלקים את האדם על הארץ הנה השמים ושמי השמים לא יכלכלוך וכתוב על הארון להעלות משם את ארון האלקים אשר נקרא שם שם ה' צבאות יושב הכרובים עליו. ובדברי הימים להעלות משם את ארון האלקים ה' יושב הכרובים אשר נקרא שם. כי השם יושב הכרובים.

So very roughly very approximately a little bit of what the Ramban seems to be telling us is the following. In many many Sifrei Chassidus you find so obviously they're all drawing from the same sources as Seforim it's present in those sources the Mashal as follows. Let's say the light of the sun is so bright and strong and brilliant that we can't stare at the sun. So even though the light of the sun is the source of light and the light and warmth and heat of the sun is the source of life but direct exposure to it is too overpowering is too overwhelming. So what do you do? So we need we need to wear glasses sunglasses that will diminish the light the strength of the light the potency of the light to a degree that we have the capacity to receive it and not just be totally overwhelmed by its sheer strength and brilliance. כביכול הקדוש ברוך הוא has to impose veil upon veil between himself and the world because otherwise we can't, we don't have the kelim to be able to deal with the intensity of kedusha, the same way, in the physical analogy, that we don't have the kelim to deal with the brightness of the sun. Which is why, in this world, Hakadosh Baruch Hu is very hidden, which is why in this world there is teva and things, teva is the, again, the last and maybe one of the biggest and opaque screens that allow us to exist in the presence of Hakadosh Baruch Hu without being just totally overwhelmed to the point of, of not being able to continue to exist. So the shem Hashem, which is associated with teva, which is associated with regularity, is Elokim. In the same way we associate Elokim with din, for din also means like din, this mandatory set of things. Right? Sometimes the din is mandatory set of things, things just run according to, according to rules. So Elokim, in the same way we know that it's associated with din, so Elokim also, the Kuzari and others explain, is associated with teva as well. What the Ramban seems to be hinting at here is that the sode, the sode, the mystery, the miracle of the Mishkan and the Beis Hamikdash is it allowed for not only Hakadosh Baruch Hu, hidden behind all those opaque screens, to be present in this world—again, a presence that we perceive and describe as Elokim—but it's with, that's the emphasis on, that's what the Ramban is saying, that the Shem Yud-Kei-Vav-Kei is always repeatedly being associated with Mishkan, with Mikdash. That the sode, again, the mystery and miracle of the Mishkan and Beis Hamikdash is that somehow or other, it allowed for some of those screens being lifted, and within the confines of Mikdash, within the confines of Mikdash, the light of Hakadosh Baruch Hu, the kedusha of Hakadosh Baruch Hu didn't need to be filtered and screened the way it has to be screened throughout, throughout the rest of the world.