Who would have imagined that the construction of a sacred meeting place, let alone the fashioning of a single piece of sacred furniture, would generate a charged debate over the very nature of God?

And they shall make for Me a Mishkan (Tabernacle), that I might abide in their midst. (Exodus 25:8)

And they shall make an ark of acacia wood, two and a half cubits its length, a cubit and a half its width, and a cubit and a half its height. (ibid., v. 10)

The very modesty of the Mishkan and its central accoutrement, the Ark of the Covenant, raised throughout the generations, profound questions regarding God’s omnipresence on the one hand and divine intimacy on the other. This discussion appears already among the prophets, yet it did not end there. It remained a persistent and pressing issue throughout rabbinic literature and continues into our own day.

The following midrash employs a verse from the book of Job as the starting point for an imagined debate within Moshe’s own mind:

“The Almighty, we cannot find Him; He is exalted in power” (Job 37:23).

At first glance, this verse suggests that God’s very nature transcends earthly categories and could never be contained within a structure fashioned by human hands. The midrash therefore imagines an intentionally ahistorical discussion addressing precisely this tension:

Another interpretation: “The Almighty — we cannot find Him; He is exalted in power.” When the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moshe, “Make a Mishkan for Me,” Moshe began to wonder: “The glory of the Holy One fills the upper and lower worlds — and yet He says, ‘Make a Mishkan for Me’?” Moreover, Moshe foresaw Shlomo (Solomon) arising and building the Temple, greater than the Mishkan, and declaring: “Will God indeed dwell upon the earth? Behold, the heavens and the heaven of heavens cannot contain You — how much less this House that I have built” (I Kings 8:27). Moshe said: “If Solomon spoke thus regarding the Beit HaMikdash, which is far greater than the Mishkan, how much more so regarding the Mishkan itself?” Therefore, Moshe said: “One who dwells in the shelter of the Most High, who abides in the shadow (b’tzel) of the Almighty (Shaddai)” (Psalms 91:1).

Moshe thus brings the question into sharp relief: how can his seemingly “puny” Mishkan contain God, if even Shlomo’s magnificent Temple was deemed inadequate for such a task?

The midrash continues by interpreting the verse from Psalms as a response to this theological challenge, focusing especially on the phrase “b’tzel Shaddai” — “in the shadow of the Almighty”:

Rabbi Yehuda bar Rabbi Simon said: The One who dwells in shelter is exalted above all His creations. What does “in the shadow of the Almighty” mean? Scripture does not say “in the shadow of God,” nor “in the shadow of the Merciful” or “the Gracious,” but rather “in the shadow of the Almighty” — in the shadow fashioned by Betzalel. Therefore it says, “who abides in the shadow of the Almighty.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said: “You, Moshe, do not think as I think. Twenty boards to the north, twenty to the south, and eight to the west. [Though I am omnipresent, I may choose to contract My presence.] I will descend and concentrate My Divine Presence within a space of one cubit by one cubit, between the poles of the Ark.” (adapted from Shemot Rabbah 34:1)

The basis for this conclusion rests upon two playful midrashim, the first on the name of the Mishkan’s artisan, Betzalel, which means “in the shadow of God” and the second a notarikon (a kind of play on words), in which God’s name Shaddai is read as she’amar dai — “the One who said: enough.” That is to say, the Ark, though small in physical measure, was deemed sufficient for the purposes of divine presence.

What emerges from this midrash is not a resolution of the paradox but its transformation. The Mishkan does not contain God; rather, it reveals a God who freely chooses relationship over transcendent distance. Divine infinity is not compromised by sacred space; instead, it is expressed through divine self-limitation.

The same God whom the heavens cannot contain elects to become present within measured human reality not because God requires a dwelling, but because God desires encounter with human beings. The Mishkan therefore stands as a theological statement: holiness is born where transcendence and intimacy meet. God remains beyond all worlds, yet becomes accessible within them, teaching that sacred space is not about limiting the Divine, but about creating the possibility of human encounter with God. In this way, the “shadow of the Almighty” is not a reduction of God, but an act of divine grace; the Infinite One making Himself available without ever ceasing to be infinite.

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)