Tag Info

“Mikdash” is a more generic term for a “holy place” or (following Rav S. R. Hirsch) a “sorce of holiness”. The Mishkan was the specific Mikdash built in the desert. (Note the same root SH-K-N in mishkan and v’shakhanti.) For your second question, God is not promising merely to dwell in the tent built for Him but to be an active Presence within the nation: ...

The Gemara (Eruvin 2A-3B) actually uses this verse to prove that a Mikdash is sometimes called a Mishkan. (Actually, that Gemara actually says that "Mikdash" and "Mishkan" are interchangeable terms). The Lubavitcher Rebbe explains that according to Rashi (the simple explanation of the text), one cannot say that "Veshanchanti Besocham" is a result of ...

Whether the third Beis Hamikdash will be pre-built is in fact the subject of a dispute among the Rishonim. Rashi (Sukkah 41a, ד"ה אי נמי) says that it will come down from Heaven ready-made; on the other hand, Rambam (Hil. Melachim 11:4) lists the building of the Beis Hamikdash as one of the things that Moshiach will accomplish (in fact, that he needs to do ...

I enjoy my copy of Carta’s Illustrated Encyclopedia of the Holy Temple in Jerusalem. It does a great job of helping the reader picture the architecture of the Mishkan and Beit Hamikdash and the service in them. I frequently refer to it for illustration when discussing these topics. I also have enjoyed the novels I've read from the "Naftali in the Mikdash" ...

The Netziv in his introduction to Sh'mos says that the ultimate purpose is NOT the redemption from Egypt, but the building of the mishkan and subsequent dwelling of the Shekhina. Remember, the exodus itself happens relatively soon in the sefer, while matan torah and the mishkan take up a much larger portion.

Well, presumably Rashi had a different version. The question is — and is asked by the Mizrachi and the Minchas Shay — that no extant m'sora agrees with him. They offer no answer.

If I understand correctly, you are referring to the brichim, the horizontal poles that were slipped through rings on the boards -- and through holes within the boards -- to hold them in place. The math is straightforward: There were 20 boards of 1.5 amos on the north and south, thus requiring the poles to span 30 amos (the top and bottom poles were 2 x 15 ...