web analytics
April 19, 2015 / 30 Nisan, 5775
At a Glance
Judaism
Sponsored Post


Home » Judaism » Parsha »

Using Non-Kosher Items For The Mishkan

Taste-of-Lomdus-logo

In Parshas Vayakhel the Torah continues detailing the building of the Mishkan and its vessels, and the kohanim’s garments. Rabbeinu Bachya points out that of all the materials that were donated to the building of the Mishkan, we do not find the inclusion of meshi (silk). His reason: because it is made from a worm, and only material that came from items that were tahor and were permitted to be consumed were used in the Mishkan.

Regarding this, the Acharonim say that even though techeiles comes from a non-kosher worm – the cheilazon – it was used in the Mishkan. There is a dispute, however, as to the kashrus of the cheilazon. Rashi, in Sanhedrin 91, says that the cheilazon was a worm from the sea, implying that it was not kosher. But the Radziner Rebbe, in Pesil Techeiles, writes that the Cheida says that the cheilazon was a kosher fish. Similarly, the Rambam (Hilchos Tzitzis 2:2) says that the cheilazon was a fish. This seems to contradict Rashi’s explanation of the cheilazon. The Noda B’Yehudah also says that according to the Rambam the cheilazon was in fact a kosher fish.

According to the latter opinion, it is obvious that the question of how techeiles was permitted in the Mishkan is a non-starter. Nonetheless, according to the opinion that holds that the cheilazon was a worm, we need to understand how it was permitted to be used in the Mishkan.

The Cheida (Nachal Kedumim, Parshas Terumah) says that according to those who opine that the cheilazon was a non-kosher fish, the reason it could be used in the Mishkan was because it was mixed with other ingredients. With this being so, we apply the halacha of zeh v’zeh goreim – when two things make a joint contribution, we allow the forbidden item (see Sanhedrin 80a).

The Radziner Rebbe cites several Rishonim who hold that one may eat the blood of a non-kosher fish. Only the flesh of the fish is prohibited to consume; the blood is permitted mi’de’oraisa. Since the techeiles dye is produced from the blood of the cheilazon fish, it would be a permitted material in the Mishkan.

The opposite was also true. The Gemara (Shabbos 108) says that tefillin may only be made from items that are permitted to be consumed; the hide must be from a kosher animal. The Gemara there says that if a kosher animal dies without shechitah and is now forbidden to be eaten (as it is a neveilah), its hide may still be used to make tefillin because the animal’s species are kosher.

Additionally, the Chasam Sofer (Teshuvos Orach Chaim 39) writes that many people use the gid hanasheh to bind Sifrei Torah, tefillin, and mezuzos even though gid hanasheh may not be eaten. Why? Because it comes from a kosher species. Therefore, even if the item that is being used cannot be eaten in its current state, it may be used if it is of a kosher species.

The Chasam Sofer’s proof regarding those who hold that the gid hanasheh may be used for tefillin is that the hides of eilim m’adamim were used in the Mishkan. These hides, dyed in blood, were forbidden to be eaten. Yet since the blood came from a species of animal that was kosher, its blood was permitted to be used with the materials of the Mishkan. The Chasam Sofer nevertheless adds that his rebbe, Rav Nosson Adler, opposed the allowance of the gid hanasheh to be used in binding Sifrei Torah, tefillin, and mezuzos.

The Mishnah Berurah (32:24) cites Acharonim who, disagreeing with the Chasam Sofer’s decision, prohibit the use of the gid hanasheh in binding Sifrei Torah, tefillin and mezuzos. Rav Chaim Kanievsky, shlita, writes in Maseches Sefer Torah that the basis of this opinion is that although the item may be unfit for consumption in its present state, as is evident from the aforementioned Gemara in Shabbos concerning neveilos of kosher animals, the item was at one time permitted to be eaten – namely, before they became neveilos. The gid hanasheh, on the other hand, was never permitted to be eaten.

According to the opinions disallowing the gid hanasheh to be used, we need to explain how the blood of the eilim was used in the Mishkan, since there was never a time when it was permitted to be consumed. The Noda B’Yehudah (Tenina Orach Chaim 3) explains that only something used for coloration purposes was allowed to be from a forbidden material. Therefore the blood of the eilim was permitted to be used as a dye.

Similarly, we can suggest that those who hold that the cheilazon was a non-kosher worm allowed it to be used in the Mishkan because it was only used for coloration purposes.

About the Author: For questions or comments, e-mail RabbiRFuchs@gmail.com.


If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.

Our comments section is intended for meaningful responses and debates in a civilized manner. We ask that you respect the fact that we are a religious Jewish website and avoid inappropriate language at all cost.

If you promote any foreign religions, gods or messiahs, lies about Israel, anti-Semitism, or advocate violence (except against terrorists), your permission to comment may be revoked.

No Responses to “Using Non-Kosher Items For The Mishkan

Comments are closed.

Current Top Story
US has no problem with Egypt's bombing hundreds of homes of Gaza civilians but can't stand to see Israel destroy a terrorist's home.
Gaza: Egypt Responsible For Weapons Shortage
Latest Judaism Stories
Hertzberg-041715

Lincoln was not a perfect man. But he rose above his imperfections to do what he thought was right not matter the obstacles.

Arch of Titus

Adon Olam: An Erev Shabbat Musical Interlude Courtesy of David Herman

Daf-Yomi-logo

Oh My, It’s Copper!
‘…And One Who Is A Coppersmith’
(Kethubboth 77a)

Grunfeld-Raphael-logo

The omer sacrifice of loose barley flour was more fitting for animal consumption than human consumption and symbolizes the depths to which the Jewish slaves had sunk.

Question: If Abraham was commanded to circumcise his descendants on the eighth day, why do Arabs – who claim to descend from Abraham through Yishmael – wait until their children are 13 to circumcise them? I am aware that this is a matter of little consequence to our people. Nevertheless, this inconsistency is one that piques my curiosity.

M. Goldman
(Via E-mail)

When Chazal call not eating treif food a chok, that refers to how it functions.

His mother called “Yoni, Yoni!” Her eyes, a moment earlier dark with pain, shone with joy and hope

Kashrut reminds us that in the end, God is the arbiter of right and wrong.

In a cab with Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach & Rav Elayshiv discussing if/when to say tefillas haderech

The successful student listens more than speaks out; wants his ideas critiqued, not just appreciated

Why would it not be sufficient to simply state lehoros from which we derive that in such a state one may not issue any psak?

What do we learn about overcoming loss from the argument between Moses and Aaron’s remaining 2 sons?

Each of the unique roles attributed to Moshe share the common theme that they require of and grant higher sanctity to the individual filling the role.

Because of the way the piece of my finger had been severed, the doctors at the hospital were not able to reattach it. They told me I’d have to see a specialist.

“The problem is that the sum total is listed is $17,000. However, when you add the sums mentioned, it is clear that the total of $17,000 is an error. Thus, Mr. Broyer owes me $18,000, not $17,000.”

More Articles from Rabbi Raphael Fuchs
Taste-of-Lomdus-logo

Why would it not be sufficient to simply state lehoros from which we derive that in such a state one may not issue any psak?

Taste-of-Lomdus-logo

The Netziv answered that there is a difference between a piece of bread that was cut already in front of you, and one that was cut from beforehand.

Why is it necessary to invite people to eat from the korban Pesach?

The Ran asks why the Gemara concludes that since we are unsure which two of the four we must recline for, that we must recline for all four.

The Chasam Sofer answers that one of only prohibited from wearing a garment that contains shatnez if he does so while wearing the garment for pleasure purposes.

The Aruch Laner asks: How can Rashi say that the third Beis Hamikdash will descend as fire from heaven when every Jew prays several times a day for the rebuilding of the Beis Hamikdash?

The Ohr Hachayim rules that one may not manipulate the system; rather he must state his opinion as he see the ruling in the case; not as he would like the outcome of the verdict to become.

He suggests that the general admonition only dictates that a father may not actively enable his son to perform an aveirah.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/judaism/parsha/using-non-kosher-items-for-the-mishkan/2014/02/20/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: