כאשר צוה ה' את משה; as God had commanded Moses. The Torah emphasizes this to tell us that the Tabernacle corresponded to God's instructions in all its details as we already explained in connection with 27,20 that God considered that Moses had a personal share, i.e. merit, in every detail of the construction of the Tabernacle although he personally had not been commanded to perform the work.

Another meaning of the verse is simply that when the artisans were about to commence any part of the work, they would first say "as per God's instructions to Moses.⁠"

Another reason the Torah had to write this verse is that there is no commandment which does not contain elements over and beyond its performance with one's hands or other parts of one's body. The Torah never revealed more than a fraction of the totality of a commandment as we know from a statement of Rabbi Yochanan in Gittin 60. There were then intellectual dimensions to the commandments God had given to Moses which are not recorded in the written text. The Torah here testified that all these dimensions were complied with and that the artisans deserved credit for this. Whereas some of these hidden dimensions of a מצוה are alluded to by the way the legislation in question is recorded in the Torah such as the "crowns" on the letters, others are not, though most of the hidden aspects of each מצוה were revealed to Moses while he was on Mount Sinai. We have Rabbi Akiva telling us in Sanhedrin 106 that one could deduce 300 halachot from the shape of the uppper part of the letter ל alone. At any rate, the message of the Torah here is that all the hidden aspects connected with construction of the Holy Tabernacle were carried out by those concerned with constructing it.

על שולי המעיל, on the hem of the robe, etc. The wording makes clear that the sages who hold that the pomegranates were next to the bells as opposed to the bells being inside the pomegranates were correct. Why else would the Torah first report that the pomegranates were attached to the hem of the robe and then report the making of the bells as a separate item in a separate verse? Later the Torah reports that these bells were placed in between the pomegranates "on the hem of the robe.⁠" The repetition of the words "on the hem of the robe" makes no sense if these bells were inside the pomegranates, i.e. surrounded by them. I am very surprised at Nachmanides who has rejected this approach. As to Nachmanides' answer to the above argument that the pomegranates were not actually suspended at the hem of the robe until after the bells had been placed inside them, it seems to me that the text says exactly the opposite. Nachmanides' using the fact that the Torah repeated the statement that the bells were inside the pomegranates as proof for his contention is not tenable. He does not explain why the Torah should have given the command to place the pomegranates from the hem of the robe at that point (compare 28,33). I believe that in this instance Nachmanides did not examine the text with his customary care.

בתוך הרמונים, amongst the pomegranates. The reason the Torah has repeated this instruction is to ensure that these bells should alternate and be on the same level as the pomegranates along the hem of the robe. The bells should not either protrude below the level of the pomegranates or be closer to the hem. We could not have deduced this if the Torah had written the line: "a bell and a pomegranate, a bell and a pomegranate on the hem of the robe,⁠" only once. We would then have thought that the reason the Torah gave these instructions was that the row should commence with a bell followed by a pomegranate, followed by another bell. As it is, the row should begin with the suspension of a pomegranate followed by a bell, followed again by a pomegranate so that the bells were "within,⁠" i.e. flanked each by two pomegranates. These instructions were necessary as the hem of the robe was not round (as was the upper part described in verse 23) but slit in such a way that there were two rows of material which between them made up the "hem.⁠" This is also the reason why in the Baraitha giving details about the robe, it does not say that the number of bells corresponded to the number of pomegranates. There had to be more pomegranates than bells. Zevachim 88 lists only the number of bells not the number of pomegranates.

פעמון ורמון, פעמון ורמון, a bell and a pomegranate, a bell and a pomegranate (alternating). The Torah had to write this as otherwise one could have hung two or three bells between each pomegranate or vice versa and this would still have corresponded to the definition "between the pomegranates.⁠" The first statement teaches that one pomegranate and one bell should alternate, i.e. there should not be two bells between a set of pomegranates. The second statement is to prohibit the reverse, i.e. two pomegranates between each set of bells.