The Textual Source for the 39 Melachot of Shabbat

The piece has been translated and adapted by Zev Farber with the author’s permission and input.

See Mishna Shabbat ch. 7, Mechilta de-Rabbi Yishmael, “Ki Tissa” and “Vayakhel,” b. Shabbat 73-75, and j. Shabbat 7:2.

See for example b. Shabbat 96b where carrying includes putting one’s hand outside while holding something (הושטה), as well as throwing (זריקה).

As is done with building (בונה), chipping (מסתת) and drilling (קודח).

As is done with separating (בורר), winnowing (זורה), and sifting (מרקד).

See: m. Keritot 3:10 and b. Bava Kama 2a.

See: R. Yitzchak Gilat, R. Eliezer ben Hyrcanus: A Scholar Outcast (Bar-Ilan studies in Near Eastern languages and culture; Bar Ilan University Press, 1984).

 רבינו חננאל: "וא"ר יונתן בן אלעזר כנגד מלאכת ומלאכה שבתורה והן ס"א. כשתוציא ג' מלאכות הכתובין בויכולו השמים וד' שכתוב בהן ועשית ויעשה ותעשה ולרגל המלאכה וי"ג שכתב כל מלאכת עבודה הרי כ"א נשארו מ' ובכללם ששת ימים וכו' לא תעשה מלאכה."

See the comment of R. Menachem Kasher (Torah Sheleima, Parashat Vayeshev and the supplements to Parashat Pekudei).

The version now found in the printed edition also seems to be the one used by R. Hananel, which explains his question.

In Rashi’s understanding, this view appears in the Babylonian Talmud as well, once in the name of R. Nathan (Shabbat 70a) and once in the name of Rabbi [Yehudah HaNasi] (Shabbat 97b). See Rashi in both places, where he explains the Bavli’s more cryptic description along the lines of R. Chanina’s more explicit one in the Yerushalmi. These versions of the midrash will be discussed in Part 2 from a different angle.  

This argument (i.e. that of R. Chanina bar Chama and Rabbi [Yehudah haNasi]) hinges upon the parallel between “this is the thing” and “these are the things.” To what “things” does the latter phrase refer? The verse seems to introduce Shabbat, with a reference to forbidden forms of labor, but what “these things” are remains unclear. The hint comes from verse 3, which states, “Do not burn fires in any of your dwellings on the day of Shabbat.” Since we are looking for a list of “these things”, this verse should not be understood as an example of labor, or some sort of special rule. (Despite the fact that the Mechilta offers five different derashot with this theme.) Rather, the verse is either the beginning or the end of the list of “these things,” the rest of which was delivered orally.

This is the simple way to understand the verses, and the way Onkeles seems to translate it. Nevertheless, there is some controversy as to the meaning of the term “service vestments.” Rashi, R. Avraham ibn Ezra, and Rashbam all explained this term as the cloths with which they would cover the Tabernacle and its furnishings when preparing to move. This is a difficult interpretation to accept on the peshat level, since the covering cloths are not used “for officiating in the sanctuary.” Moreover, there is no mention anywhere in all of Exodus of these cloths. They are first mentioned in Numbers chapter 4, as part of the description of the move. According to this alternative interpretation, the sacral vestments referenced afterwards, those of Aaron and those of his sons, would constitute two more items, bringing the count to 41. (Perhaps it could be lowered to 40 if we were to argue that the first one, “the Tabernacle,” is really just a general category, not anything specific. I note, however, that reading the passage according to Ramban (and others)—that the word “Tabernacle” refers to the linen cloths (Exod. 26:1) and “the tent” to the goat-hair cloths (Exod. 26:7)—makes reading “Tabernacle” as a general category unworkable.)

It may even be possible to connect this reading of the verse with the position of Rabbi Yehudah in counting the forms of melacha. R. Yehudah adds into the list of cloth-making melachot “closing up the web (שובט)” and “beating of the woof (מדקדק).” He may have been inspired by counting the vestments reference as three instead of one (i.e. 41 melachot)! I would even go so far as to suggest the possibility that the alternative reading of the sacral vestments as the cloths for covering the furnishings, may have been one of the reasons that some of the Talmudic sages rejected the position of Rabbi, his two students Rabbi Chanina bar Chama and R. Yossi bar Chanina, and Rabbi Nathan, and preferred to derive the number 39 from a different source. Finally, R. Shaul Baruchi reminded me that Ramban (Exod. 31:10) understands the sacred vestments as clothing for the high priests, which leaves the last phrase about clothing for Aaron’s sons, as number 40. For more on this, see Yosef Ofer and Jonathan Jacobs, Nahmanides’ Torah Commentary Addenda, Written in the Land of Israel (Magnes, 2013) p. 349, n. 34 [Hebrew].

It appears that the Pekudei version has a tendency to list materials. The altar of incense (Vayakhel 21) is described as the golden altar (Pekudei 22); the altar of burnt offering (Vayakhel 26) is described as the copper altar (Pekudei 26).

The Sages’ understanding of the verses in Pekudei that follow upon the list of Tabernacle items (Exod. 40:42-43) provides further evidence for this reconstruction.

ככל אשר צוה ה' את משה, כן עשו בני ישראל, את כל העבודה. וירא משה את כל המלאכה, והנה עשו אתה, כאשר צוה ה' כן עשו, ויברך אותם משה.

⁴² Just as the Lord had commanded Moses, so the Israelites had done all the work. ⁴³ And when Moses saw that they had done all the tasks—as the Lord had commanded, so they had done—Moses blessed them.

In the context of the midrash reconstructed above, these verses can be understood as saying the following:

“Just as the Lord had commanded Moses [regarding Shabbat and the Tabernacle] so the Israelites had done [in the Tabernacle] all the work. And when Moses saw that they had done all the tasks [that they were commanded regarding Shabbat and the Tabernacle] so they had done [with the Tabernacle] as the Lord had commanded—Moses blessed them.”  

The phrase that appears repeatedly in these parashiyot, from the beginning of Vayakhel until the end of Pekudei, is “that the Lord commanded.” It further appears in the command about Shabbat in 35:1, “these are the things that the Lord commanded to do,” as well as in the command to donate materials for the building of the Tabernacle (35:4), “This is the thing that the Lord commanded.” It appears in this context again, as part of the detailed command to build the Tabernacle (35:10), “And let all among you who are skilled come and make all that the Lord has commanded.” Immediately after this verse comes the list of 39 items that need to be built.

At the end of Pekudei, the phrase appears again twice, immediately before and immediately after the list of 39 Tabernacle items. The first appearance of the phrase refers to how perfectly the Israelites carried out the command; the second is the introduction to Moses’ blessing the people because of their great work.

There are some other parallels as well. In virtually every instance that this phrase appears, the term “to make/do” (ע-ש-ה) appears as well, in the Shabbat verses as well as the Tabernacle verses.[1] In Moses’ review of the Israelite’s hard work in building the Tabernacle, he uses the term “all the melacha” (40:43), which is reminiscent of the command about Shabbat in the Decalogue (Exod. 20:10). 

When they explained why the Oral Torah was written down, the Sages referenced the verse (Psa. 119:126), “There is a time to act for God, they violated Your Torah.” (See, for example b. Gittin 60a (=b. Temurah 14b), where it describes Resh Lakish and R. Yohanan studying aggadah from a book on Shabbat.) The Talmud describes a fear, going back to the sages of Yavneh, that the Torah would be forgotten (b. Shabbat 138b). Rav expresses this fear as well. This fear explains how a prohibition of writing down oral Torah could have been overturned. Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai pushes back against this fear, declaring, “God forbid the Torah should be forgotten!” He goes on to explain that the Torah will continue, but it will be impossible to find “clear halacha and clear mishna in one place.” This idea explains, in my opinion, the reasoning behind Rabbi’s decision to compose the Mishna (in the generation between that of R. Shimon bar Yochai and Rav.) He created a work that could stand strong against the tide of forgetfulness. It is a collection of multiple interpretations of Torah and halacha, but in one work. Nevertheless, as we see from the example of the origin of the 39 melachot, the fear of forgetting Torah is not baseless.

See: Torah Sheleima vol. 23, Supplements to Parashat Pekudei, pp. 118-119. 

In this particular case, the proof-text is imperfect. As there is no reference to the cords in section of the Torah where the command to build the Tabernacle is found, the Midrash HaGadol made recourse to a general catchall verse as his proof-text here.