Parshiyot Vayakhel-Pekudei 5786

A D’var Torah for Parshiyot Vayakhel-Pekudei

By Rabbi Dr. Matthew Goldstone

Parashat Vayakhel begins with a discussion of Shabbat that barely adds new information. Of the two verses that appear here about Shabbat, one of them (Exod. 35:2) reiterates information that we learned just a few chapters ago (i.e., Exod. 31:15) and the other seems to only provide a single example of what constitutes work – i.e., lighting fire. So why this emphasis on something that largely appears to repeat what we already know?

Starting with the verse that provides new information (Exod. 35:3), we can ask what is so special about kindling fire that the Torah singles this out as a key prohibition for Shabbat? In some ways fire is the quintessential catalyst for transformative work. Fire cooks food, tempers metal, and allows for a plethora of technologies. The modern equivalent is perhaps electricity (understood by some traditional posekim to be a form of fire), which is the basis for so much of the work that we do day to day. The Hebrew root used to speak of lighting fire in our verse (ב.ע.ר) is commonly used with this meaning, but it also has other senses as well, including destroying (think ביעור חמץ). The fire here can thus either point to a highly constructive or destructive force. We can also note that the word מֹשְׁבֹֽתֵיכֶ֑ם (“your settlements/dwellings”), although it derives from the root י.ש.ב, contains the letters ש.ב.ת (i.e., שַּׁבָּת) – מֹשְׁבֹֽתֵיכֶ֑ם. So perhaps there is something about the essential nature of rest in the home.

A few key themes have emerged from this verse – the constructive and destructive possibilities for work, and especially for transformational technologies (as represented by fire), as well as the restful dimension of the home. Observing these themes in dialogue, what immediately comes to mind for me are the ways in which technologies can destroy our rest by encroaching on our restful spaces – both temporal and physical. With the rise of email, smartphones, and other similar technologies, our ability to step away from work has greatly diminished and the destructive force of overworking looms as a real possibility. But, like fire, we have a choice in whether we use this in constructive or destructive ways.

In speaking of the work that should be completed during the six days leading up to Shabbat, the first of our two verses about Shabbat, Exodus 35:2, employs the passive form תֵּעָשֶׂ֣ה, that work should be done, rather than the active form תַּעֲשֶׂה, that we should act. Why employ this passive form for the work that is to be accomplished during the week? I recently participated in a two-day workshop as part of a working group on “Jewish Thought and Jewish Education for the Jewish Future.” While a variety of different technologies arose in the course of conversation, Artificial Intelligence emerged as a dominant topic. AI has the possibility to radically revolutionize how we work. Indeed, it could lead to an age in which work is done for us while humanity is able to rest. This could, theoretically, be the epitome of תֵּעָשֶׂ֣ה, of having our weekly work completed for us. It is also worth noting that the word שַׁבַּת can refer to a full week rather than just the Sabbath (think about the line introducing the daily Psalm, “today is the X day of the week [בַּשַּׁבָּת]).” Thinking about שַּׁבָּת in this sense of a full week, coupled with the passive form תֵּעָשֶׂ֣ה, I envision a possible future in which AI allows the entire work week to become a period of rest. And yet, we are witnessing the opposite force in which the rate of productivity continues to increase. In an age in which so much work could be done for us, we are doing even more work and the verse warns us that whoever does work in this period will die (כׇּל־הָעֹשֶׂה בוֹ מְלָאכָה יוּמָת) – perhaps of overexertion without needed rest?

When we contrast the discussion of Shabbat in our Parashat with that of last week (which has a remarkably similar verse), there are a number of differences. One of them offers an important insight into how to speak to our challenge. Exodus 31:15 states that the seventh day is holy for God (קֹדֶשׁ לַה’). By contrast, Exodus 35:2 slightly switches the order of the words, declaring that the seventh day should be holy for us (יִהְיֶה לָכֶם קֹדֶשׁ). The difference is both with respect to the issue of for whom the day is holy – God or us – as well as the immediacy of this reality – the presence of the verb יִהְיֶה in our Parashah suggests that the day is not holy for us yet, but it will, or should, be in the future. What does it take to make not only the 7^th day holy, but for שַּׁבָּת in the sense of the full week to be holy and how does this connect with our earlier observations?

There are three mentions of action in these opening several verses. The first verse of our Parashah instructs us that there are things that God commands us to do (אֵ֚לֶּה הַדְּבָרִ֔ים אֲשֶׁר־צִוָּ֥ה ה’ לַעֲשֹׂ֥ת אֹתָֽם). The subsequent verse contains the other two instances – the first telling us that work should be done during the six days of the week and the other telling us that one who does work on Shabbat will perish. We already suggested that the passive verb תֵּעָשֶׂ֣ה could hint at having work done for us by technology like AI and that the final instance could point to the destructive over-focus on work leading us to drive ourselves to death. But the first appearance of ע.ש.ה reminds us of our obligation. There are things that we can, and should do, in order to make Shabbat – and perhaps the entire week – holy for us. And one way to begin is with our essential technologies, the fires that can spark great innovation or consume us. The collective sermonic observations about the beginning of our Parashah suggest that we should pay attention to those technologies that have constructive and destructive possibilities for impacting us and our work. And, we are commanded to strive to sanctify Shabbat, or the entire week, for ourselves. What this means for each of us may perhaps be different, but when we gather together as a community, as the people of Israel did with Moses, perhaps we can fulfill these obligations.