parshas terumah - hashem keeps the torah?

 a friend of mine showed me a fascinating daas zekenim at the beginning of parshas beshalach concerning whether hashem keeps the torah or not.  one of the points of discussion is that rashi in rosh hashnah 30a writes that although there is a din that mikdash cannot be built on shabbos/yom tov, hashem, who will build the third beis hamikdash, does not have to abide by this rule.  the daas zekeinim takes this as a proof that hashem does not have to keep the torah.

i wonder if there is a way out of this proof, based on a closer read of the  rashi.  perhaps there is a special reason why hashem, even if he does keep the torah, does not have to follow the rule to not build the beis hamikdash on shabbos.

 rashi in chumash quotes 3 (that i know of, there might be more) different limmudim that building the mikdash is not docheh shabbos.  i dont know why we need more than one, but here they are (i think sifsei chachamim might ask the question somewhere)

1. pasuk in ki tisa - ach es shabsosai tishmoru - the word ach is to exclude shabbos from being used to build the mishkan.

2. in the beginning of vayakhel, the torah, immediately before discusing building the mishkan, mentions the prohibition of shabbos, to imply that shabbos takes precendence over the building of the mishkan.

3. in kedoshim, the pasuk says es shabsosai tishmoru vi-es mikdashi tirau ani hashem.  this one is the one rashi mentions in rosh hashanah, so we'll focus on this one.  before explaining, lets look at a very similar limmud.  also in kedoshim, the pasuk says, fear your parents and keep shabbos, ani hashem.  say chazal, you and your father are both commanded in hashem's kavod (= keeping shabbos).  therefore, if your father commands you to violate shabbos, dont listen to him.  chazal use the same phraseology here: you and the mikdash are commanded in hashem's kavod; therefore dont violate shabbos for the mikdash. (see rashi shavuos 15b about this)

the mikdash is commanded in hashem's honor??  i understand that phrase about one's father.  but how does that make any sense when applied to the mikdash?

theres a wild tosfos in yevamos 6b.  the gemara darshens: es shabsosai tishmoru umikdashi tirau - you might think you should fear the mikdash itself, comes the torah and compares it to shabbos - just like by shabbos you dont fear shabbos, but rather, hashem who commanded us about shabbos, so too by mikdash, even though the simple reading of the torah sounds like one should fear the mikdash, it means to fear hashem who commanded us about the mikdash.  what exactly was the hava amina to "fear the mikdash"?

i challenge anyone to look at tosfos and tosfos harosh there and not come away with the following conclusion:  the hava amina was to be ישתחוה לו לשם אלהות - to worship the beis hamikdash - what??!!??!

biderech drush , perhaps we can explain as follows.  mikdash represents formal, ritual worship of g-d.

while some people see lots of technical rules concerning shabbos and think, thats ritual, i think it is in fact exactly the opposite.  shabbos is primarily about NOT doing anything: resting from creative work (see what i wrote on parshas beshalach) and imitating g-d.  mikdash, however, requires an elaborative formal procedure  = ritual.  

the rambam famously describes in hilchos avodah zarah how avodah zarah came to be.  people thought that worshiping g-ds servants was a kavod to hashem. whats the problem with that?  one problem is just the slippery slope problem.  but even more, the problem  is to take a means to an end; a servant of g-d who use is solely to help us come closer to g-d, and make it into an end, worthy of worship itself.

yachol mimikdash atah misyareh - i might have thought that ritual worship is an end in and of itself - it has an inherent value. (in some sense, it does.  see the sefer hachinuch on this weeks parsha where he goes into great detail explaining the spiritual significance and meaning of the avodah in the beis hamikdash) talmud lomar es shabsosai tishmoru - mikdash is like shabbos - its value is only inasmuch as it is a fulfillment of the commands of hashem.  but by itself, it is meaningless. as the pasuk says, lama li rov zivcheichem amar hashem.  mikdash has no inherent value - a karbon of a rasha brings no atonement.

mikdash isnt docheh shabbos because the mikdash is "metzuveh" in kavod hashem - ritual cannot be allowed to be an end to itself - it only has meaning in that it is a fulfillment of ratzon hashem; g-d commanded us to do it.  as such, to use mikdash/ritual to ignore other commands of hashem is untenable.

(one might ask on me, if so, then how come bringing karbanos is docheh shabbos?  isnt that allowing ritual to take precedence over dvar hashem.  i dont have a great answer to this question, but  i think that chazal might be addressing this point with a rashi/mechilta in parshas yisro.  chazal have a whole list of things that were said by hashem bidibbur echad.  the famous one is zachor vishamor.  among the list is the pasuk that commands about shabbos and the pasuk that commands bringing karbanos on shabbos. i think that may be in response to this tension that really, mikdash shouldnt be docheh shabbos.)

coming back to the daas zekenim, we cant build the mikdash on shabbos because it would mean that we're taking a means and making it into an end in and of itself.  but that isnt shayach to hashem - its impossible for hashem to make the mikdash into an end separate of Himself - he's doing it for himself.  the whole limmud doesnt apply to hashem, hence, he is allowed to build the beis hamikdash on shabbos.