GOOD MORNING! This week’s Torah reading concludes the book Exodus. The majority of the last four Torah portions of Exodus are preoccupied with the building of the Mishkan – the Tabernacle; its utensils and priestly vestments, and the collection of the necessary materials to produce everything.

Reading through this week’s Torah portion I was reminded of a sign I once saw as a child hanging on the wall of a store on Lincoln Road in Miami Beach: “In God we trust, everyone else pays cash.”

In this week’s reading, we find an accounting of all the gold, silver, and copper that were donated by the Jewish people for the construction of the Mishkan. The sages of the midrash (ShemotRabbah 51:6) explain why Moses felt this accounting was necessary. The sages begin by asking, “Why was this accounting necessary? After all, God Himself vouched for Moses’ trustworthiness saying, ‘My servant Moses is a trusted servant throughout My entire house’ (Numbers 12:7).”

The Torah tells us that “Whenever Moses went out of the Meeting Tent [after concluding his conversations with the Almighty] all the people would rise and stand by their tent, gazing at him until he reached his own tent” (Exodus 33:8).

According to the midrash there were three schools of thought on Moses: 1) Those who didn’t suspect him of any wrongdoing and gazed after him thinking, “Wow, how fortunate it is to be a human and yet have such a close relationship with the Almighty” 2) Those who looked at him thinking that he was paying himself (rightfully) for managing the massive undertaking of building the Mishkan 3) Those who looked at him and suspected him of stealing monies from the donations.

When Moses heard of these different sentiments, he insisted that at the end of the construction a full accounting of everything be made. The audit wasn’t for future generations; it was for the people of his own generation who didn’t trust him.

There is a well-known saying; “The pot calling the kettle black.” This expression is said to date back to the 17th century and is commonly understood to refer to the irony of pointing out a deficiency that you yourself share. The fact is that both cast-iron pots’ and kettles’ bottoms turn equally black when hung over a fire, and thus the pot is accusing the kettle of a fault it shares.

But there is another way to look at it, which is much more insightful and perhaps even more historically accurate. It has been suggested that this expression finds its origins in the cooking methods of the time. Kettles were generally made out of shiny metals, either copper or silver. When warming water on the fire there wasn’t any concern of burning the water, so the kettle was placed directly on red hot coals.

By contrast, when cooking over an open flame the temperature has to be very carefully monitored and adjusted so that the food doesn’t burn. For this reason, pots would be suspended high above the flames for quite some time and the smoky fires would inevitably turn the bottoms black with soot.

Now the expression takes on a whole new meaning – the pot “looking” at the relatively clean and shiny kettle (who was directly on the coals and therefore not sooty) really only sees its own black reflection. In other words, the pot is accusing the kettle of something that is only true in the pot itself. This reminds me of a story that my father once mentioned in a lecture on this week’s Torah reading.

Many years ago, one of my father’s former students – let’s call him Bob – told him he needed to see him urgently. A few years’ prior, Bob had taken a fundraising position with one of the local charitable institutions and headed their development department. During his community work he had befriended an older, childless holocaust survivor.

The gentleman came to trust him and sought his advice on how to distribute his fairly large estate. Bob secured a very sizable donation for his organization and also helped the donor choose charitable organizations in Israel, where the donor had intended to leave the majority of his estate.

Bob was then called in by the president of his organization’s board and accused of not securing a large enough gift for the institution. He was then accused of directing the majority of the donor’s estate to organizations in Israel that would pay him a “kickback” in some way or another. The president of the board threatened to dismiss him from his position if he didn’t redirect the funds back locally.

Bob was devastated. He was an honest and loyal employee who had just tried to do the right thing by an elderly holocaust survivor. He wondered how the president of the board could accuse him of such a betrayal and threaten to fire him. For this reason, he came to my father to seek counsel.

My father told Bob that he shouldn’t feel bad and that he should hold his head up high. As long as he acted properly the truth would eventually come out. My father went on to explain that the president of the board was only judging him by what he would have done himself if he were in that position. My father based this insight on a well-known teaching in the Talmud (Kiddushin 70a) that one who suspects another of a deficiency is simply articulating his own deficiency.

The Talmud teaching and my father were proved correct; three years later the president of the board was ousted by the organization over accusations that the president himself had diverted donor funds to his personal accounts. The president was forced to resign with no small measure of embarrassment.

When it comes to judging others, we have to be particularly aware of our own shortcomings and consider how our deficiencies may color our perspective when viewing the actions of others. I find this lesson particularly relevant to the turbulent political climate in which we currently find ourselves.

The sages point out a fascinating omission in the actual accounting of all the donated gold, silver, and copper. While the exact donation amounts are given for all three precious metals, the Torah only explains exactly where the silver and copper were used throughout the Miskan. There is no statement in the audit of exactly how or where the gold was used. Why did the Torah not give a complete accounting for the different uses of all the gold?

There is an interesting commentary from the Da’at Zekainim (sages from the schools of thought founded by the grandchildren of Rashi). The Da’at Zekainim explains that gold, silver, and copper represent the three different types of givers. Gold represents people who give when they are healthy. In other words, they give altruistically and are not expecting anything in return; they give because they believe in the cause and want to do the right thing.

Silver represents those who give while sick or ailing in some way, hoping that in return they will be healed. However, even if they aren’t healed, they don’t regret giving the charity (see Tosfos Pesachim 8b) and are happy that the money is being used properly. Copper represents those who only give after death – they give only when they won’t be negatively affected by the giving or feel the loss.

Based on this, perhaps we can now understand the three groups of givers. The group who gave the “golden way” had a deep admiration for Moses and didn’t suspect him of any wrongdoing. The group who gave in the least meaningful way (the copper) – i.e. after death, when their monies are of no use to them anyway – suspected Moses of stealing because they themselves were incapable of giving freely. They could not understand why anyone would do what Moses had undertaken; therefore, he must be stealing from the donations.

The group who gave the silver understood that while there is some altruistic element to giving, it isn’t purely selfless. In other words, we can do the right thing, but we also like to be compensated for it. Thus, they believed Moses could work hard for the Mishkan, but he would be entitled to take money for his time.

Now we can understand why the Torah didn’t account for how the gold was used while still accounting for the uses of the silver and the copper. The silver and copper came from those without complete altruism, and they suspected Moses of varying degrees of motivation. But the gold came from those who believed in the cause and trusted Moses, and therefore they never suspected him of taking any of it and did not need a complete accounting of the gold’s usage.

Pekudei, Exodus 38:21 - 40:38

Pekudei includes an accounting of all the materials that went into the making of the Mishkan (the portable Tabernacle) and details of the construction of the clothing of the Cohanim. The Tabernacle is completed, Moses examines all of the components and gives his approval to the quality and exactness of construction, the Almighty commands to erect the Tabernacle, it’s erected, and the various vessels are placed in their proper place.