Our Parasha relates the offering by (35:20-29): ’Every man whose heart inspired him..brought the portion of Hashem for the work of the Tent of Meeting, for all its labor and for the sacred vestments.

Our Sages expound the words: ’The men came with the women’: What do they come to teach us? As it was said :(Ki Tissa 32:2) ’Remove the golden earrings that are in the ears of your wives, your sons and your daughters and bring them to me’, in the sin of the golden calf, ‘Bnei Israel said: In what will there be atonement for the sin of removing the gold ornaments, from our wives, our sons and our daughters’, when we removed their jewelry from them, to make the golden idol?

‘Since Moshe assembled them to bring silver and gold for the work of the Sanctuary, each one brought from his house and from his possessions, as it says: ’Every man whose heart inspired him..brought the portion of Hashem for the work of the Tent of Meeting..’

‘After doing so, they also retrieved the ornaments of their wives, sons and daughters, to take them by force, as it says: ’The men came על: with the women, and brought the bracelets, nose-rings, rings and body ornaments - all sorts of golden ornaments - every man who raised up an offering of gold to Hashem, so that this removal, atoned for the removal of the ornaments, for the calf.

‘It therefore says:’The men came על: with the women..’.

Ramban comments:’The reason it says:’The men came על: on the women’, is because the ornaments offered were more readily found by the women, all of whom had them, and they removed their ornaments immediately, and came first with their ornaments.

‘The men who were with them - and had such ornaments - brought theirs, with the women - the words ‘על: with the women’, alludes to the women being there first, and the men being subsidiary to them.’

Rav Eliyahu Shlezinger, brings the commentary of Ramban, and notes that Rabbeinu Bachya expands on his words, noting the difference between the offerings to the Sanctuary, to the removal of the gold ornaments, in the sin of the golden calf.

In the latter, it said :’And he’ Aaron, ‘said to them: ’Remove the golden earrings that are in the ears of your wives, your sons and your daughters, and bring them to me. And all the people stripped THEMSELVES of the golden earrings that were in THEIR ears, and brought them to Aaron’- and does not say: ’They removed the golden earrings earrings which were in the ears of their women’.

Rabbeinu Bachya elucidates there, that the women did not consent to participate in the making of the calf, which Shlomo Hamelech alludes to, in his words(Kohelet 7:28): 'One man out of a thousand I found, but a woman among all these I did not find’- meaning, that in the transgression of the golden calf, not one woman could be found.

Should you be moved to say, that this was because of the nature of women is to treasure their jewelry, and that it was for this reason that they refused to part with them, in that occurrence, go out and learn from the donations to the Sanctuary, which, despite their great attraction to their jewelry and ornaments, they brought all their gold ornaments - and preceded the donations of their menfolk.

Kli Yakar notes, that the commentators say that these words:על הנשים are to be read as עם: ‘with the women’, and proclaim thr righteousness of the women, who agreed to give their ornaments, which - it needs to be said - is truly a praise to them, as, by right, they were not obligated to give their ornaments - unlike the men, who, for the calf, removed the ornaments of their wives, and made from them, the golden calf.

‘The men, therefore, needed to donate their ornaments, to atone for their souls; but the women who did not want to give their ornaments for the calf.. did not, therefore, require atonement.

‘Why, then, should the women give their ornaments?

‘Nevertheless, because of their love of the sacred, they did not withhold from giving them - but they did not want to bring them with their own hands to Moshe, lest he think that they had a share in that transgression.

‘It therefore says: ’Every man whose heart inspired him..brought their portion of Hashem’; and, from the words’ על literally ‘on’ the women, and does not say עם: ‘with

the women’ it leads to an exposition that the men came upon the women by force, as the women did not wish to give their golden ornaments, lest it be said that they had a part in the golden calf; but the men came and took their golden ornaments from them the women by force.

‘Therefore, as to the bringing of the gold, only the men are mentioned.

‘In regard to the weaving, which the women wove - where no such concern arose - the Torah states:’Every wise-hearted woman spun with her hands, and they brought it.’

Rashi comments:’’With the women’: ’literally, ‘the jewelry was still on the women. The men came with the women, and (stood) near them.’

The Panim Yafot proffers a different explanation, as to why ‘the men came with the women’:’Rashi expounds, ‘with the women, and near them’.

‘It needs to be said, that because the Torah here enumerated all the golden ornaments of women, and it is established that a woman cannot contribute them without the permission of her husband - nor can a man sell his wife’s ornaments without her consent - it was necessary for both of them to come together, as they would not have been accepted otherwise.

‘However, the principal contribution was from the women, as the ornaments were ‘theirs’ for the lifetime of their husbands, though the permission of the husband to their disposal, was also required.

‘TheTorah writes על הנשים, to signify - as Ramban notes - that the women were the main factor, as is alluded to by noting, that the Torah also states:(35:32): Every man who raised up an offering of gold to Hashem’, meaning: all other types of gold for which the man did not require the permission of his wife, to contribute.’

Rav Yitzchak Karo brings the exposition of Ramban, but notes that, since it was not permissible to accept ornaments brought by a woman alone, and, further, that the Torah states that ‘the men came.. everyone whose heart motivated him brought bracelets, nose-rings, rings, body ornaments’ - indicating that the men brought them, not the women.

He therefore expounds:’Therefore, the explanation of the words is, that the woman is not permitted to give away the jewelry that she had brought from her father’s house - more so, if they had been given to her by her husband.

‘The men agreed with the women, that the women should give their jewelry, but - out of regard to the honor of the men - that the men should bring them jewelry by their hands, and that from them, it be received.

‘This is the meaning of: ‘the men came with the women’, that husband and wife agreed, but the men brought the jewelry.

‘And of the words:’Everyone whose heart motivated him brought bracelets, nose-rings, rings, body ornaments - all sorts of gold ornaments’.

‘In aid of this, the Torah states:’Every man and woman whose heart motivated them to bring any of the work that Hashem had commanded to make through Moshe - the Children of Israel brought a free-willed offering to Hashem’ - when it would have sufficed to say :’’Every man and woman whose heart motivated them to bring, for any of the work thst Haahem had commanded to make, they brought’: after it said:’offering to Hashem’, what was the need to add:’the Children of Israel’, ‘brought a free-willed offering ti Hashem’?

‘The additional words must surely mean, that every man and woman agreed to give their ornaments, but ‘the Children of Israel’: the males, brought them, by their hands.’

The Malbim expounds the words:’The men came..’, that it relates how they gave freely, with joy and whole-heartedly - unlike in the case of the golden calf, where Aaron asked that they bring them jewelry by gold ornaments which were in the ears of their wives, and the women did not wish to give their ornaments, which, in their eyes, were more precious, than all.

‘For the Sanctuary, the women with alacrity wanted to give all their ornaments, before all - and the men came after them, as it was not permitted to accept a gift from a women, unless her husband consented.

‘The whole-heartedness of the women can be seen, by they giving all their jewelry.

‘In addition to that which the women gave - all their jewelry - each man gave all the gold that was in his possession, as we read: ’Every man who raised up an offering of golf to Hashem’.

The Alshich Hakadosh prefaces his commentary, by noting that: ’It first says:’Every man heart inspired him’, and then:’Everyone whose spirit motivated him’, to allude to there being, amongst the donors, two kinds: those whose heart is so complete to give, immediately that he hears the call to give, he is moved to come, his offering in his hand.

‘There are also the second kind - whose heart initially is averse to give, but the spirit with which he has been endowed, wishes to give, despite the resistance of his yetser, and there ensues a battle between these two forces, in him.

‘This is the underlying meaning of our two psukim: the first, who is moved to give, without any internal opponent, he being the one ‘whose heart inspired him came’; whereas, the one ‘whose spirit motivated him, brought..’, came subsequently.

‘In this, the women preceded the men, as it says:’The men came with the women’, and the men came after then, this being the meaning of על הנשים:’with the women’.

‘This is also be alluded in the earlier words: ‘The entire assembly of the Children of Israel left Moshe’s presence’, to praise the women, that not only that they did not wish to give for the calf, but that in regard to the Sanctuary, though the women did not hear the command to give - as the Torah relates, that ‘The Children of israel left Moshe’s presence’, at the outset - only the men, yet, despite this, in the bringing of the offering, the women preceded the men, on hearing from their menfolk, what Hashem had commanded, in the Assembly.’

A parting gem from the Ktav Sofer:’An intriguing Midrash:’They sinned by earrings, by earrings they found favor in Hashem’s eyes - by earrings they transgressed, as it says:’They removed their golden earrings’, and the very SAME earrings they brought to the Sanctuary..’

‘We need to understand: how could the earrings they donated to the Sanctuary - which were not the earrings that were donated to the calf but other earrings - be called ‘the same earrings’?

‘It appears to me - to answer this - the Midrash says:’Let the gold brought for the Sanctuary, come, and atone for the gold they gave for the golden calf’.

‘The gold they gave for the Sanctuary was far more in worth than the gold they brought for the calf, because a small gift that a poor man gives, has more value than a larger gift of a rich man.

‘At the time that they gave gold for the golden calf, they had a lot of gold, and - even after their gift - they had a lot of gold left; it was therefore relatively easy for them to give.

‘At the time they gave for the Sanctuary, they had far less gold - with the passage of time, and wear - than they had when they gave for the calf, and it was therefore more precious in the eyes of Hashem.

‘Now, as to the earrings they brought for the Sanctuary being ‘the same earrings that they had brought for the calf’, our Sages teach (Yoma 86:): ‘intentional transgressions become as merits’ for baal’ei teshuva’, the reason being that it is difficult to part from a transgression that has already been performed.

‘Because of this ‘difficulty to part’, there is great merit when the person does part from it; and the more severe the transgression, the greater the merit when the transgressor parts with it.

‘So now, after they had so greatly transgressed in their desire for the calf, that they were prepared to remove the earrings from the ears of their wives - against this, when they repented, in their willingness to donate for the Sanctuary, the earrings which had been given for the golden calf, they themselves ‘became’ mitzvot.’

לרפואת חייל צה"ל ולרפואת נועם עליזה בת זהבה רבקה ונחום אלימלך רפאל בן זהבה רבקה, בתוך שאר חולי עמנו.