18

The Talmud (Arachin 3b) informs us that the Kohanim were exempt from wearing the Tefillah shel Yad while servicing in the Temple because it would constitute a separation between the priestly garments and the skin. The Tefillah shel Rosh could still be worn, and the priestly garments on the head were worn in such a way as to leave room in the front for the ...


9

Even if the threads are fairly fine (and we don't know if they were), two colors plied together still looks like two colors, not the combined color. Thread is not like paint. Now even if at the usual viewing distance most people would see it as the combined color, it would not look that way close up, like to the kohein wearing the garment or tending to the ...


8

R' Hirsch (e.g. in the long comment at the end of Ex. 25:1-8) takes the four types of thread used in Mishkan construction to represent four basic aspects of life that we humans need to strive to perfect within ourselves and unify in the service of God: Linen, from the flax plant = Vegetative - consumption and reproduction Wool died red with worm blood = ...


5

Ibn Ezra (Shemot 28:6 Peirush Aroch) suggests that someone who was familiar with asking through the Urim VeTumim would be capable of getting answers on occasion from the Ephod. (I think he is referring to the two stones on the shoulders that clipped to the Choshen, but I'm not sure.) Thus David used the Ephod (which we know he had, per 23:6) and Shaul used ...


4

The Midrash Tanchuma when explaining Korach's argument calls it a טלית שכולה תכלת, a garment made entirely of techeiles. Later it says לקח טליתו which may indicate that he confronted Moshe with his own garment. That said, there are some who have explained his argument as referring to the me'il. R. Yisrael Ariel suggests this in Ma'alin Bakodesh Vol. V p. 24:...


3

Yittur Begaddim According to the Gemara (Eruvin 103) and Rambam (Kli HaMikdash 10:8), something smaller than 3x3 (tefachim) is not a beged if shelo bmokom begadim (not in place regularly clothed): מר רב יהודה בריה דרבי חייא, לא שנואלא גמי, אבל צלצול קטן -הוי יתור בגדים. ורבי יוחנן אמר: לא אמרו יתור בגדים אלא במקום בגדים, אבל שלא במקום בגדים -לא הוי ...


3

We have not had the Urim Vetumim (the insert with the name of Hashem put into the Choshen) since the end of the first temple. The Choshen (with the stones) was commanded as part of the Bigdei Kehunah (priestly garments), so the high priest wore one without the insert during the second temple. Since we do not have a temple (yet) we cannot have anyone wear the ...


3

From Wikipedia here: The priestly sash or girdle (Hebrew avnet אַבְנֵט) was part of the ritual garments worn by the Jewish and priests of ancient Israel whenever they served in the Tabernacle or the Temple in Jerusalem. The "sash" or "girdle" worn by the High Priest was of fine linen with "embroidered work" in blue, purple and scarlet (Exodus 28:39, 39:29); ...


3

The historical elision of a vowel preceding ד could explain the absence of a dagesh qal within it. Similar phenomena are seen in words like בִּנְפֹל and מַלְכֵי. The latter probably was pronounced like malak̲e at some point, since the absolute plural form מְלָכִים has an a vowel before k̲. See, for instance, p. 40 from Greenstein's "An Introduction to the ...


3

Radak (Y'sha'ya 28:4) comments that ציץ is the masculine form and ציצית is the feminine form: נזכר בלשון זכר ציץ ובלשון נקבה ציצית The Zohar (Sh'lach 174b) likewise notes this. The Zohar understands this connection as representing a kabbalistic dichotomy where ציצית represents the feminine aspects of Creation and the physical world while the ציץ ...


3

The strings where mixed not just to get the desired color. Each detail in mishkan has its deep meaning about how G-d rules our world and so on. It's like asking: "Why we take 3 hadasim on Sukkos, one is already green enough?".


2

See translation Verse 4: Greenish-blue [wool], dark red [wool], crimson [wool], fine linen, and goats [hair].


2

In answer to the question of "how", here is some explanation The אוּרִים ותוּמִים [sic], Urim V’tumim, served as a means of communicating with G-d. Rashi states, in Yomah 73b, that the High Priest could ask questions of G-d through the אוּרִים ותוּמִים [sic], and the letters that were etched in the stones would light up, providing answers to the questions ...


2

Rav Hirsch, in his commentary on Pekudei 39:1 states that the individual garments were commanded separately and were considered complete as soon as they were finished and ready to be worn. The mishkan and its utensils, such as the curtains, etc, could only be considered done after the entire mishkan was assembled. כאשר צוה ה וגו, it says this when ...


2

There are minor pieces subject to tearing (like the techeles strands of the tzitz and the ephod), but those are easily replaced and aren't intrinsic to the remainder of the beged. Most of the other begadim of the Kohen Gadol contain metal strands or are actually made of metal, making them difficult to "tear" - you would have to cut them. The other begadim ...


2

There is an institute in Jerusalem that seeks to recreate them to have them ready at some point in the future. Otherwise, using them today is misguided. At the bare minimum, they contained a mix of wool and linen, which is prohibited to wear unless specifically commanded to do so, i.e. by priests in the Temple. Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan notes this in his ...


2

Rashi Vayikra 6,3 says The torah calls the tunic מִדּ֣וֹ when it is normally referred to as כתנת. The word מִדּ֣וֹ comes from the word מדתו which means the Cohen's exact measurement as the Ibn Ezra (ibid) explains: מדו. חלוק וחכמים אמרו שהוא חנוק כנגד מדתו The Tunic Chazal explain that it has to be enstrangled to his body so that it should be the Exact ...


1

The Temple Institue has apparently chosen one of the opinions for the Choshen Mishpat. The web site statement does not say who determined this particular psak. However, the research page states that this was examined by a team of experts in halacha as well as gemologists. The stones of the breastplate - recently created - were investigated with the help ...


1

Keli Yakar to 28:6 says that only the Ephod and the Aron as well were constructed by the entire nation, since they come to atone for Avodah Zarah (Arachin 16), which the whole nation sinned in at the Ma'aseh Ha'egel. However, for the other garments, as well as the other vessels of the Mishkan, it remains in the singular form (presumably aimed at Moshe).


1

Welcome, and great question! This is one of the many questions that Ramban (Shemot 28:31) asks on Rashi (and others), and he therefore rejects their opinion. However, in responding to Ramban, Mizrachi (28:33) asks right back - what's wrong with pomegranates? If it had said another fruit, you would have asked the same question: ואיני רואה מקום לאלה ...


1

It doesn't apply only to the me'il. Rambam (Hilchos Klei Hamikdash 9:3) says: והקורע פי המעיל לוקה שנאמר לא יקרע והוא הדין לכל בגדי כהונה שהקורען דרך השחתה לוקה One who tears the border of the opening of the cloak is liable for lashes, as [Exodus 28:32] states: "It shall not be torn." This applies to all the priestly garments. One who tears them ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible