skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Why does it says in the Psalms, “Bless God, all you servants of God, who stand in the Temple of God in the nights,” since we know that the main Temple service is during the day! - This refers to those who study at night, and they are considered as if they they were engaged in the Temple service.
Why does the Torah say about every sacrifice, big or small, animal, bird, or flour, that it is a “pleasing sweet smell to God?” - to tell you that whether one does much or little, it is equally pleasing to God, if done with a pure heart.
Art: Gustave Leonhard de Jonghe - Kind Heart
In one promised a sacrifice and brought it in the temple of Chonyo, he has not fulfilled his obligation, but instead transgressed a prohibition of offering sacrifices outside the Temple. Rabbi Shimon says, “His consecration is altogether meaningless.”
Any kohen who served in the temple of Chonyo is treated as blemished: he may never serve in the Temple, but he may claim a share of the offerings to eat.
What is the story of the temple of Chonyo? When the Righteous High Priest Shimon died after eighty years of service, he appointed his son Chonyo as his successor. Chonyo's brother Shimi plotted to remove him: he tricked him to serve in his wife's clothes and told the priests that Chonyo did this out of love for his wife. Chonyo ran away and built his own temple. The Sages did not touch Shimi, to prevent him from acting even worse in pursuit of honor. According to Rabbi Yehuda, the story was the opposite: Chonyo plotted against Shimi, was discovered, and ran away.
Art: Josef von Brandt - The Runaway Cart
One who says, “I specified to bring a peace or a thanksgiving offering but do not recall which,” brings a bull and a cow, a male calf and a female calf, a ram and a ewe, a he-goat and a she-goat, a male kid and a female kid, and a male lamb and a female lamb.
If one promised a specific ox as a burned offering and the ox became blemished, his obligation disappears. Unlike the previous cases, he promised a specific animal and not a sacrifice in general, and once this animal cannot be brought as a sacrifice, he is free from his obligation. He still needs to redeem the ox, and the money then acquires holiness and has to be used for a burned offering, but he can buy greater or smaller animals with it.
Art: Jacomo (or Victor, Jacobus) Victors - Pigeons
If one promises to bring wood for the Altar, he must bring no less than two logs. As we learned before, Rabbi Yehudah the Prince consider the logs themselves to be sacrifices, with all the accoutrements. If he promises to bring frankincense, he brings at least a handful. If he promises gold, he brings a dinar, if silver – he brings a silver dinar, but if he specified how much he promised but cannot recall the amount, then he must bring enough metal until he can honestly say, “That much I could never have intended to bring.”
If he promised wine, he must bring no less than three measures called “log,” or about one-and-a-half liter, because this was the smallest amount brought with any of the sacrifices, that is, with a lamb. If he specified the amount but does not recall it now, he brings as much as was required by the largest sacrifice.
Art: Jan de Beer - The Wine Taster
What is the reason of Rabbi Yehudah? When one brings a large offering and says, “part of it is my obligation, and the rest is a free will offering,” he is mixing the two in one vessel, but aaccording to Rabbi Yehudah, mixing obligatory and voluntary offering is not allowed. Alternatively, according to the Sages, he does not consecrate the remainder, and mixing unconsecrated and consecrated items is allowed. However, Rabbi Yehudah argues that then he would be bringing the unconsecrated items into the Courtyard, which is prohibited on its own.
Art: Diego Rivera - Mathematician
The Torah said “When a soul (person) offers a flour offering to God...” Why “soul?” God said, “Who usually brings flour? A poor man. I consider it as if he offered his soul.” Why are there five different ways to cook the flour offering? This is similar to a king whom his poor friend invited for a meal, and the king said, “Make many types of flour dishes, and I will enjoy them.”
If one promises a “tenth” of an ephah, he should bring one “tenth”, if he promises “tenths,” he should bring two, but if he says, “I specified the size but forgot,” he needs to bring the largest possible offering, 60 tenths, or about 300 pounds. In this last case, he states, “The amount that I promised in my vow is found within these 60 tenths and it goes for the fulfillment of my vow, and the rest I am bringing as a free-will offering.”
Art: Charles Meer Webb - A Satisfying Meal
Everybody agrees to this rule, but they argue about the reason for it. One opinion says that since the largest flour offering that a congregation can bring, which happened on the first day of Sukkot if it fell on Shabbat, amounted to 61 tenths, then an individual cannot exceed that. Rabbi Shimon argues and says that the sixty-one seah of the congregation were all different offerings and not mixed, so that we cannot learn from it. Rather, sixty tenths can be properly mixed with oil, while more than that cannot. They asked him, how can the measure be so precise? There should be a little give and take! He answered that all measures of the Sages are that way, for example, a mikvah of forty seah is valid, a little less than that is not.
Art: Adriaen Jansz. Van Ostade - A Man At a Counter, Holding A Pair Of Scales
However, if he pointed at the flour and said, “This flour is designated to be brought as an offering on a griddle,” and instead he made one in a deep pan, his offering is completely invalid. Why is this difference? In the first case, he created a personal obligation, but he was free to bring another additional offering. In the second case of flour designation, the flour acquired the sanctity of a specific type of offering, and this cannot be changed.
If one promises a flour offering of barley, he nevertheless has to bring one of wheat. His starting words, “flour offering” are considered decisive, and the conclusion “of barley” - which is meaningless, because there are no personal barley offerings – is disregarded.
Art: Marianne Preindelsberger Stokes - Polishing Pans
In this procedure, there is not a moment when its meat can be eaten. However, since there is a time period when it can be redeemed, that is, after slaughter and before its blood is sprinkled, Rabbi Shimon considers it legally as if it had been redeemed, and therefore could have been eaten, with the result that it is now subject to the laws of food contamination.
The principle of “all that stands to...” reappears in various areas. For example, according to Rabbi Shimon, the blood that stands to be thrown can be considered as if thrown. On a more practical level, the debts that stand to be collected by the court can be considered as if collected, with the result that the court can treat monetary obligations transferable as real money.
Art: Giuseppe de Nittis - The Rain Of Ashes
The flour offering and the libation that became ritually impure can be redeemed, provided that they have only been designated for that purpose, but not put in a Temple vessel. Before they are put in the Temple vessel, they possess only monetary sanctity, and that is why the redemption is possible. Once they have been put in a vessel, the vessel sanctifies them with the physical sanctity, now inherent in them, and after that redemption is impossible.
Bird offerings, the wood used to fuel the Altar's fire, the frankincense and the vessels themselves can never be redeemed, even if they become ritually impure. That is because these objects attain physical sanctity immediately upon consecration, and completely miss the stage of monetary sanctity, at which redemption would be possible.
Art: Gustave Caillebotte - Game Birds And Lemons
Rabbi Yose says that even if the priests removed the bread in the morning, and the other priests would put it on in the evening, this too is called “continuously.” They exited the Sanctuary, burned the frankincense, and apportioned the bread among the priest, who would eat it.
From the words of Rabbi Yose we learn that if one learns a little Torah in the morning and a little in the evening, he fulfills “the Torah shall not depart from your mouth,” and even if he just reads the “Sh'ma,” but we don't tell this to the unlearned. Rava said, “It is a mitzvah to tell it to them.”
What could be the five reasons why it is a mitzvah to tell it to them? - Your suggestions are welcome.
Art: James Hayllar - Never Too Late To Learn
Why was the third table made of gold? Because of the rule, “we raise in holiness but never bring down.” What is the source for this rule? When Moses assembled the Tabernacle, he did it all by himself. Once the work was started by him, anyone else doing it would be considered a descent. But this only proves that we do not bring down, how do we know to elevate? Because the first set of Tablets which was broken was nevertheless also put in the Ark.
Art: Franz Xaver Simm - Young Boy Eating Bread
The original measure of length called “amah” or “arm” in English, established by Moses, was six hand-breadths. Since each hand-breadth equals four finger-breadths (actually, thumb-breadths), the amah of Moses was thus 24 finger-breadths. The two Temple measures were slightly longer, one measuring 24.5 finger-breadths, and the other – 25 finger-breadths. When craftsmen took orders for Temple work, they quoted the price according to the amah of Moses, but they delivered their results according to the amah of the Temple, that is, slightly more – to avoid accidental misappropriation of the Temple property. The shorter of the two Temple measure, the 24.5 finger-breadths, was used for golden and silver utensils, and the longer one, the 25 finger-breadths – for construction work.
King Solomon made ten tables in the Temple, with the table of Moses in the center of them. He also made ten menorahs, with the menorah of Moses in the center.
Art: Luigi Ademollo - The Menorah
The table for the breads of vision had two rows, with six compartments each, one above the other, housing the twelve breads. The table was stationary, never carried around, and because of this should not be susceptible to spiritual impurity – except that every holiday the priests took the table and showed it to the pilgrims, to demonstrate that the bread was fresh and warm after a week, just as when it was baked. This is based on the phrase in Samuel, “To place bread that is hot on the day it is taken off.”
There were four props of gold on the table and twenty-eight rods, each like half a hollow reed, to separate the breads from one another, in order that they would not become moldy. This is based on the phrase in the Torah, “For [the table] make bread forms,incense bowls, and side frames, as well as the half tubes that will serve as dividers [between the loaves of bread]. All these shall be made of pure gold.”
Art: Nicolaes Gillis - Laid Table 1611
The two loaves on Shavuot were seven hand-breadths long and four hand-breadths wide. They had strips of dough at the corners, or “horns,” that were four finger-breadths long. The breads of visions were larger: ten hand-breadths long, five hand-breadths wide, and their “horns” were seven finger-breadths in length.
Ben Zoma explained that the “Bread of Vision” can also be translated as the “Bread of Faces,” meaning that it should have many “faces,” or surfaces, thus the complicated shape.
Art: Evaristo Baschenis - Boy With A Basket Of Bread
The bread of vision was kneaded outside the Temple – because vessels did not sanctify the flour – and baked inside the Temple before Shabbat. Rabbi Yehudah disagrees: it was kneaded and baked inside the Temple, on Shabbat, to protect the bread from staying overnight. Rabbi Shimon maintains that both ways are valid. Their proofs are not based on the story of King David and the priestly bread – for David had a case of boulimia – extreme hunger – but on tradition.
Art: Pieter de Hooch - A Woman Preparing Bread and Butter for a Boy
In some aspects leaning on the sacrifice is stricter than waving it: if many partners bring a sacrifice, each one has to lean on it. But in some aspects waving is stricter than leaning: waving applies to the individual and community sacrifices, live or slaughtered ones, and it even applies to non-living matter, such as loaves.
The two loaves on Shavuot were kneaded one by one and baked one by one, but the twelve breads of vision, brought every Shabbat, were kneaded one by one and baked in pairs. The reason for separate kneading is so that every loaf would get its correct amount of flour.
The breads of vision were baked in a mold and then transferred to another golden mold. Baking in a mold was required because of the breads' special shape: according to Rabbi Chanina, they were shaped like an open box, and according to Rabbi Yochanan, they were shaped like a small fast boat dancing on the waves.
Art: Gustave Caillebotte - Boater Pulling On His Perissoire
There are also categories of people who can bring a sacrifice without leaning altogether, and these include a non-Jew, a slave, an agent, and a woman. The agent of a person cannot perform leaning, because it says “your hand” - and not your agent's hand. A woman is not required to lean on her sacrifice because the Torah said “sons of Israel,” to exclude “daughters of Israel” from the requirement of leaning.
Even if one is required to perform leaning and does not do it, the sacrifice is valid – although it is not done completely right. The leaning is done with both hands and is immediately followed with slaughter.
Art: Raphael - The Mute Woman
Communal offerings do not require leaning, except for the bull that comes for communal violations, and the he-goat dispatched to Azazel on Yom Kippur. Rabbi Shimon says that the he-goat for communal idolatry required leaning. There was a tradition that exactly two communal offerings required leaning, but they argued about which they were.
All private offering required leaning, except for the first-born, tithe, and Passover offering. If one's father died and left a sacrifice, his son brings that sacrifice, performs leaning, brings the libations, and even has the power to appoint a replacement sacrifice. As we learned before, when one appoints a replacement, both animals become sacrifices, but to effect this, one needs to be a complete owner, and this teaches us that the son is a complete owner.
Paul Cezanne - Madame Cezanne Leaning On Her Elbow
The Torah said, “When you shall make a fire offering to God, burned offering, or another sacrifice.” I might have thought that any offering that goes on the fire requires libations, and even an offering of flour requires another flour libation with it. The prevent this, the Torah states “burned offering,” to exclude a flour offering. And how do I know that a peace offering requires libations? From the words “another sacrifice.”
Among the sin-offerings, only the sin-offering of a metzorah (spiritual leper) and his guilt-offering require libations. How do I know that? The Torah stated, “the three-tenths of fine flour for a flour offering,” - and this is talking about an animal sacrifice of a metzorah. But perhaps he should bring a flour offering by itself? - Since the Torah later says “the kohen shall offer the burned offering and flour,” this leads me to understand that the Torah is speaking about the flour that comes with the animal offering.
Art: James Hayllar - Guilty Or Not Guilty
