Parsha discussion

Question:  1:2 This verse seems to imply that one can only bring a קרבן from cows, sheep or goats. Yet we see later on that other things can be brought. How do we understand this? Approach : It would seem that there is a hierarchy of voluntarily brought קרבנות, with the types of possibilities within each subgroup also given is order of preference. So the best option would seem to be an olah, followed by Mincha and then Shelamim. And within the עולות, the preference is for animal over bird - which is what is referred to in the verse.

Question:  When describing what will be made from the donated materials, why is there no details given of the בגדי כהונה, in clear distinction to the many parts of the משכן? Approach : It seems that, whilst there was a lot of work to be done with various fabrics, the main work necessary was the metal and woodwork, and as such the emphasis is placed on the vessels to be made. An alternative approach would be to surmise that the בגדי כהונה represented only a very small part of the work to be created. After all, there were only 5 כהנים initially. As such, it was not necessary to spell out the finer details at the collection stage. A slight twist on this approach is that the creation of the בגדי כהונה is an ongoing process as new כהנים are inaugarated and clothes get worn out. As opposed to most of the physical vessels, which should last for a long time.

Question:  30:36 What is the meaning that the קטורת should be placed near the עדות? What does that tell us about it’s purpose? Approach: at its most basic level, the פסוק relates, as explained by Rashi, to the fact that the קטורת was to be placed every day on the מזבח הקטורת, which is near the ארון = עדות. To this we can add the yearly burning of the קטורת in front of the ארון every יום הכיפורים. It would seem from other cases in the תורה (e.g. נדב ואביהוא, עדת קרח) that the קטורת has the property to allow getting close to הקב"ה, under the right circumstances and conditions. So it makes sense that the קטורת needs to be nearest the place where the שכינה is most manifest.

Question:  How do the first two פסוקים fit into the structure of the commands about the משכן & כהנים? This is especially true given that they are virtually repeated towards the end of פרשת אמור Approach: It would seem that the plain understanding is to provide a bridge from the physical vessels and physical structure to the service of the כהנים. Of the activities using the physical structures mentioned so far, only lighting the מנורה was a daily service requiring specifically a כהן to carry out. The לחם הפנים were baked once a week and the קרבנות on the copper מזבח could be slaughtered by a non-כהן. In פרשת אמור, the context would seem to be the coming together of the sanctification of time and that of the בית מקדש and קרבנות, as per the two prior topics in that section.