“וצפית אתו זהב טהור מבית ומחוץ תצפנו ועשית עליו זר זהב סביב”
רש”י: “מבית ומחוץ תצפנו – שלשה ארונות עשה בצלאל, שתים של זהב ואחד של עץ, וארבע כתלים ושולים לכל אחד ופתוחים מלמעלה, נתן של עץ בתוך של זהב ושל זהב בתוך של עץ, וחפה שפתו העליונה בזהב, נמצא מצופה מבית ומחוץ”
Rashi: “And coat it from within and from without – Betzalel made three arons: two made of gold and one made of wood. Each one had four walls and a bottom and was open at the top. He placed the aron of wood into the aron of gold, and placed the (other) aron of gold into the aron of wood, and it covered the upper lip (of the aron of wood) with gold. The aron was therefore found to be coated with gold from within and from without.”
This description of Rashi (ע”פ יומא דף עב:) seems to contradict the simple meaning of the words. The word “צפוי” is used always in the sense that one object of specific shape and form is coated by a second material such that the original shape and form remains. In this instance, there were three solid, individual aronos. There was an “inside” aron, an “outside” aron and a third aron in between them, but in what respect was there a coating?
The usage of the word “צפוי” here implies that the outer, golden aronos fit the inner wooden aron precisely and perfectly. If there existed even the slightest deviation in form between the aronos, or if there was even a tiny airspace between them, then the golden aron could no longer be considered the “צפוי” of the wooden aron, but rather its own, separate aron.
“מבית ומחוץ תצפנו: אמר רבא כל תלמיד חכם שאין תוכו כברו אינו תלמיד חכם” – And coat it from within and from without: Rava said, “Any talmid chacham whose inside is unlike his exterior is not a talmid chacham.” (יומא שם) Chazal derive from the aron, coated with pure gold on the inside as well as the outside, that the “inside” of a true talmid chacham should be as impressive as his “outside”. Yet, one might note that the aron was not made exclusively of gold. What about the inner wooden aron? Shouldn’t that also be “תוכו כבורו” – with the inside and outside alike?
In light of the above, we can explain as follows. “תוכו כבורו” does not mean that the inside of the aron should be gold, but rather that the wooden inside matches and fits the golden outside, and vice-versa. As we explained, the golden aronos conformed to the shape and form of the wooden aron perfectly.
This, Chazal teach us, is the make-up of a true talmid chacham. The inner wooden aron signifies the person himself: “כי האדם עץ השדה”. The golden aronos signify the Torah; the outer aron corresponds to the revealed Torah, while the inner aron corresponds to the hidden Torah. Like the aron hakodesh, wherever you look you see gold – Torah; in every aspect and every layer of his being. But you still see the form of the man himself. The Torah serves not as an outer shell which hides the man’s inner self, but rather as the truest expression of who he really is. The Torah fits him and he fits the Torah; he experiences it with his entire being. If you were to observe such a talmid chacham saying kiddush on Shabbos night, you would not see only the Shulchan Aruch; you would see the man himself.
We understand this intuitively with regard to certain mitzvos, such as a Shabbos Seudah; of course, my meal will be different than my friend’s, even if we both follow every seif of Shulchan Aruch and Mishna Berura. Yet when it comes to other areas, we consciously or unconsciously force ourselves into rigid, preconceived “molds”. Take, for example, learning Torah b’hasmada. For some people, it involves learning alone with a sweet niggun for hours on end. But for many others, that would be a mistake as it does not suit them. They should find their own way, and there are many possible ways they could choose. This is the beauty and wonder of Torah: as encompassing and demanding as it is, it fits each person, completely.