If a woman finds a stain of blood on her clothing, she conveys ritual impurity retroactively. This is because it might be uterine blood, and it is not known when it came. This case is thus stricter than the previous ones we discussed. To what does this ritual impurity applies? To food and drinks. However, it is only a doubtful impurity, imposed by the Sages as a precaution, thus although the foods are not eaten, they cannot be burned either – as is done with regular holy foods that became impure.
This impurity imposed by the Sages applies only to the holy foods of the Temple, but not to regular foods. Rav Huna added that it does not apply to terumah – the Kohen's portion of the produce. They challenged Rav Huna based on the following story.
It happened that a maidservant in the house of Rabban Gamliel was baking breads of the Kohen's portion. Between every loaf, she would wash the hands and examine herself. After the last loaf she discovered that she was impure, and Rabban Gamliel rules all the bread impure. She argued, “Didn't I examine myself after every loaf?!” – and Rabban Gamliel said, “If so, they are all pure.” In this story, the breads were terumah, Kohen's portion, and impurity applied! – while Rav Huna said that it should not!? Rav Huna would say, “It was the portion given to the Kohen from the thanksgiving offering.”
Art: Pietro Ricchi - A Maidservant With A Boy In A Larder, A Still Life Of Artichokes, Lemons And Other Kitchen Equipment On A Table Beside Them
Thursday, May 31, 2012
Tuesday, May 29, 2012
Niddah 5 – Fixed Period
If a woman has a fixed period (either her period arrives on the same day of the lunar month, or after a fixed number of days from the previous one), she is not given retroactive impurity: if she finds blood internally at the expected time, all the ritually pure foods she handled prior to this remain pure, and only foods she handles from now on are ritually impure.
If a woman checks herself for blood before and after marital relations, then this check also counts to prevent retroactive food impurity. If the teacher did not tells us this rule, we could have thought that before relations she is rushing “to her house,” that is, to be with her husband, and won't inspect properly. After relations, we could have thought that a small drop of blood the size of a mustard seed may be covered by semen. Therefore, the teacher had to tell us both cases.
Art: Pierre Auguste Renoir - Boating Couple Aka Aline Charigot And Renoir
If a woman checks herself for blood before and after marital relations, then this check also counts to prevent retroactive food impurity. If the teacher did not tells us this rule, we could have thought that before relations she is rushing “to her house,” that is, to be with her husband, and won't inspect properly. After relations, we could have thought that a small drop of blood the size of a mustard seed may be covered by semen. Therefore, the teacher had to tell us both cases.
Art: Pierre Auguste Renoir - Boating Couple Aka Aline Charigot And Renoir
Friday, May 25, 2012
Niddah 4 – The Reasons of Shammai, Hillel, and Sages
We learned earlier how Shammai established no precautions at all, Hillel established too much, and the Sages took an intermediate position. What were their reasons?
Shammai said that if a woman sees blood, there is absolutely no ritual impurity applied to her retroactively, and that only ritually pure foods that she touches from now on will become impure. The Talmud found four possible reasons for his opinion. In the fourth approach, Shammai told to Hillel that if he declares a woman ritually impure retroactively, then he will also affect propagation and increase, because the pair will always be afraid that any blood she sees later will make her a niddah retroactively, and they will have transgressed.
Hillel answered that he is only talking about ritual food, something that would not apply outside the Temple or related requirements, but Shammai answered that even so they will be nervous.
The Sages felt that one position was too lenient, while the other too strict. Among their reasons was the prior Sages have established for women working with ritually pure foods a requirement to check themselves for blood every morning and evening. Since this requirement was taken seriously, they could rely on it and declare retroactive impurity only back to the previous check. If she missed a few checks, they still would not extend the impurity back more than twenty four hours, since it is inconceivable that a discharge would not be noticed for longer than that.
Art: Pierre Auguste Renoir - The Thinker Aka Seated Young Woman
Shammai said that if a woman sees blood, there is absolutely no ritual impurity applied to her retroactively, and that only ritually pure foods that she touches from now on will become impure. The Talmud found four possible reasons for his opinion. In the fourth approach, Shammai told to Hillel that if he declares a woman ritually impure retroactively, then he will also affect propagation and increase, because the pair will always be afraid that any blood she sees later will make her a niddah retroactively, and they will have transgressed.
Hillel answered that he is only talking about ritual food, something that would not apply outside the Temple or related requirements, but Shammai answered that even so they will be nervous.
The Sages felt that one position was too lenient, while the other too strict. Among their reasons was the prior Sages have established for women working with ritually pure foods a requirement to check themselves for blood every morning and evening. Since this requirement was taken seriously, they could rely on it and declare retroactive impurity only back to the previous check. If she missed a few checks, they still would not extend the impurity back more than twenty four hours, since it is inconceivable that a discharge would not be noticed for longer than that.
Art: Pierre Auguste Renoir - The Thinker Aka Seated Young Woman
Niddah 3 – Learning the Laws of Purity from Suspected Wife
The rule about ritual purity is learned from the law of suspected wife: if a husband tells his wife not to seclude herself with a specific man, but she nevertheless goes into seclusion with him, then they need to go to the Temple, where she drinks the bitter water, to prove her innocence.
This is a situation of doubt: it is not known if she was unfaithful or not. Since seclusion is only possible in a private place, we have a rule: any doubt about purity that arose in a public place is declared pure, and in a private place it is impure. For example, if dead mole was found next to a piece of sacrificial meat, so that it might have touched it, then if this happened in a public place, the meat is pure, but in a private place it is ritually impure.
If there was a mikveh, which initially had forty seah of water (about two by two by six feet) but then was found lacking the complete amount, the purity of all objects that were dipped in it is now in doubt. First of all, this rule seems to contradict the retroactive impurity rule we learned before. Secondly, in this case the Sages declare the objects impure – and compare this to suspected wife, who is forbidden to her husband until she proves her innocence. Rabbi Shimon also compares this to suspected wife, but derives that the objects in the public domain are pure. This leads to seeming multiple contradictions, and the Talmud resolves all of them.
Definition of the term "Niddah"
A woman becomes a "niddah" through the discharge of uterine blood. There are two separate areas where this is important.
In the time of the Temple and a while later, when people were careful with the laws of ritual purity, she would have to guard against touching ritually clean foods, so as not to make them ritually impure. Incidentally, a man can also have a discharge which will give him a similar legal status, and this discharge is called "zivah," while he himself in this state is called a "zav."
Secondly, a niddah is prohibited to her husband with a strong prohibition of prohibited relations, and if they cohabit, they both become liable to being cut off from the spiritual source.
Art: Georges Seurat - Seated and Standing Woman
This is a situation of doubt: it is not known if she was unfaithful or not. Since seclusion is only possible in a private place, we have a rule: any doubt about purity that arose in a public place is declared pure, and in a private place it is impure. For example, if dead mole was found next to a piece of sacrificial meat, so that it might have touched it, then if this happened in a public place, the meat is pure, but in a private place it is ritually impure.
If there was a mikveh, which initially had forty seah of water (about two by two by six feet) but then was found lacking the complete amount, the purity of all objects that were dipped in it is now in doubt. First of all, this rule seems to contradict the retroactive impurity rule we learned before. Secondly, in this case the Sages declare the objects impure – and compare this to suspected wife, who is forbidden to her husband until she proves her innocence. Rabbi Shimon also compares this to suspected wife, but derives that the objects in the public domain are pure. This leads to seeming multiple contradictions, and the Talmud resolves all of them.
Definition of the term "Niddah"
A woman becomes a "niddah" through the discharge of uterine blood. There are two separate areas where this is important.
In the time of the Temple and a while later, when people were careful with the laws of ritual purity, she would have to guard against touching ritually clean foods, so as not to make them ritually impure. Incidentally, a man can also have a discharge which will give him a similar legal status, and this discharge is called "zivah," while he himself in this state is called a "zav."
Secondly, a niddah is prohibited to her husband with a strong prohibition of prohibited relations, and if they cohabit, they both become liable to being cut off from the spiritual source.
Art: Georges Seurat - Seated and Standing Woman
Wednesday, May 23, 2012
Niddah 2 - Presumption of Ritual Purity
A woman who discharges uterine blood becomes ritually impure and transmits the impurity to the foods she is working with. That is true even if the blood has not yet descended through the vaginal canal to the outside of her body. In other words, if a woman performs an internal examination by wrapping a cloth around her finger and by carefully wiping it against the sides of the vaginal canal and finds blood on the fabric - she may have been impure for some time before that.
Shammai says that, nevertheless, only those foods that she touches from now on become impure. That is because there is a rule of preserving the status quo: the woman was pure before, so we can assume that she only becomes impure from the moment when she actually sees the blood. Hillel, however, says that we go all the way to the previous examination, even days back, and declare all foods that she touched potentially impure – since the blood may have appeared right after her last examination. Hillel agrees to the status quo principle, but in this case, there is something that weakens the presumption - she sees actual blood.
The Sages take an intermediate position: the food she touches is declared impure retroactively – either to the last examination or twenty-four hours back, whichever is shorter. The Sages agree in principle with Hillel, but they say that the blood cannot remain in the vaginal canal for longer than twenty-four hours.
Art: Esaias Boursse - A Woman Seated at a Table Cutting a Slice of Cheese
Shammai says that, nevertheless, only those foods that she touches from now on become impure. That is because there is a rule of preserving the status quo: the woman was pure before, so we can assume that she only becomes impure from the moment when she actually sees the blood. Hillel, however, says that we go all the way to the previous examination, even days back, and declare all foods that she touched potentially impure – since the blood may have appeared right after her last examination. Hillel agrees to the status quo principle, but in this case, there is something that weakens the presumption - she sees actual blood.
The Sages take an intermediate position: the food she touches is declared impure retroactively – either to the last examination or twenty-four hours back, whichever is shorter. The Sages agree in principle with Hillel, but they say that the blood cannot remain in the vaginal canal for longer than twenty-four hours.
Art: Esaias Boursse - A Woman Seated at a Table Cutting a Slice of Cheese
Tuesday, May 22, 2012
Meilah 37 – The Sanctuary (Tamid)
The Sanctuary, which contained the Holy of Holies, was situated in the western part of the Temple. It had an entrance of twenty amot high (about 30 feet), and 10 amot wide. This entrance had four doors, two on the outside, and two on the inside of the entranceway. Additionally, the main gate had a smaller door to the south and another one to the north. The one to the south, no man ever entered through it, because, as Ezekiel said, “only God, the Lord of Israel, comes through it; it shall be closed.”
Inside the Sanctuary, there were thirty-eight cells (small rooms), arranged in three stories, and they were used to store gold, silver, and other valuable articles owned by the Temple.
The special chamber was the Chamber of Hewn Stone, where the Great Sanhedrin would sit. It was partially inside the Courtyard, where the Kohanim would come with their questions and stand, and the other half of it was outside the Courtyard, where the Sages would sit and judge. A Kohen in whom a disqualification was found would wrap his head in black, leave the chamber and go. And the Kohen in whom no disqualification was found would clothe himself in white, enter the Courtyard, and serve with this brethren the Kohanim. Those in whom no disqualification was found would make a day of celebration, and they would proclaim, “Blessed is the Omnipresent, Who Chose Aaron and his sons to stand an serve before God in the chamber of the Holy of Holies.”
Art: Pieter Bruegel - The Peasant Dance
Inside the Sanctuary, there were thirty-eight cells (small rooms), arranged in three stories, and they were used to store gold, silver, and other valuable articles owned by the Temple.
The special chamber was the Chamber of Hewn Stone, where the Great Sanhedrin would sit. It was partially inside the Courtyard, where the Kohanim would come with their questions and stand, and the other half of it was outside the Courtyard, where the Sages would sit and judge. A Kohen in whom a disqualification was found would wrap his head in black, leave the chamber and go. And the Kohen in whom no disqualification was found would clothe himself in white, enter the Courtyard, and serve with this brethren the Kohanim. Those in whom no disqualification was found would make a day of celebration, and they would proclaim, “Blessed is the Omnipresent, Who Chose Aaron and his sons to stand an serve before God in the chamber of the Holy of Holies.”
Art: Pieter Bruegel - The Peasant Dance
Meilah 36 – The Construction of the Altar (Tamid)
The Altar measured thirty-two amot (about 50 feet) by thirty-two amot at its base. It was constructed by bringing a wooden base of that size, one amah high, and filling it with the mixture of lime, molten lead, and tar. After the mixture hardened and the wooden frame was removed, the remaining structure formed "the base" of the Altar.
The second form was thirty by thirty amot, and it was five amot (about 8 feet) high. It was filled with the same mixture.
The third tier was twenty-eight by twenty-eight amot, and had the height of three amot. On it corners there were protrusions, called “horns,” and the outside of it formed a shelf, known as “the ledge,” which could be used for walking. A ramp led up the Altar from its south side. It was as long as Altar itself, and its width was half that.
Both the stones of the Altar and of the ramp were quarried from the valley of Bait Kerem. They would dig beneath virgin soil and bring from there whole stones that were never touched by iron. Since iron renders the stones, and consequently the whole Altar, unfit by simply touching them, they went to great length to find stones that were unlikely to have been touched by iron. The Altar was protected by a layer coat of lime, and it was only wiped by web cloth.
Art: Gottlieb Daniel Paul Weber - Boulder Crossing, Pennsylvania
The second form was thirty by thirty amot, and it was five amot (about 8 feet) high. It was filled with the same mixture.
The third tier was twenty-eight by twenty-eight amot, and had the height of three amot. On it corners there were protrusions, called “horns,” and the outside of it formed a shelf, known as “the ledge,” which could be used for walking. A ramp led up the Altar from its south side. It was as long as Altar itself, and its width was half that.
Both the stones of the Altar and of the ramp were quarried from the valley of Bait Kerem. They would dig beneath virgin soil and bring from there whole stones that were never touched by iron. Since iron renders the stones, and consequently the whole Altar, unfit by simply touching them, they went to great length to find stones that were unlikely to have been touched by iron. The Altar was protected by a layer coat of lime, and it was only wiped by web cloth.
Art: Gottlieb Daniel Paul Weber - Boulder Crossing, Pennsylvania
Monday, May 21, 2012
Meilah 35 – A Trip To The Temple (Middot)
The area of the Temple Mount was five hundred by five hundred amot, or about 14-20 acres. Most chambers there were in the south, and most people would enter from the south. They would then turn to the right and circle around to their destination, because of the rule that all turns that one takes should be to the right.
The exception to this rule were mourners and people excommunicated by the court. They would turn to the left, and immediately evoke the compassion of the onlookers, who would say to the mourners, “May the One Who dwells in this House console you.” If he told them that he was excommunicated, they would say to him, “May the One Who dwells in this House instill compassion in the judges' hearts,” - these are the words of Rabbi Meir. However, Rabbi Yehudah said to him, “You have made the judges out as if they overstepped the bounds of the law.” Rather, they said to him, “May the One Who dwells in this House put reason into your heart, and you listen to the words of your colleagues.”
Inside the Temple Mount wall was a lattice-work fence. At one point in history there were thirteen breaches in it, made by the Greek kings. Later these were repaired, and the Sages instituted thirteen prostrations corresponding to them.
Further inside the Temple were the Women's Courtyard with the balcony, Israelite's Courtyard, the Courtyard of the Kohanim, the Altar, and the Temple proper.
Art: Carl Wilhelm Hübner - Mourning Their Loss
The exception to this rule were mourners and people excommunicated by the court. They would turn to the left, and immediately evoke the compassion of the onlookers, who would say to the mourners, “May the One Who dwells in this House console you.” If he told them that he was excommunicated, they would say to him, “May the One Who dwells in this House instill compassion in the judges' hearts,” - these are the words of Rabbi Meir. However, Rabbi Yehudah said to him, “You have made the judges out as if they overstepped the bounds of the law.” Rather, they said to him, “May the One Who dwells in this House put reason into your heart, and you listen to the words of your colleagues.”
Inside the Temple Mount wall was a lattice-work fence. At one point in history there were thirteen breaches in it, made by the Greek kings. Later these were repaired, and the Sages instituted thirteen prostrations corresponding to them.
Further inside the Temple were the Women's Courtyard with the balcony, Israelite's Courtyard, the Courtyard of the Kohanim, the Altar, and the Temple proper.
Art: Carl Wilhelm Hübner - Mourning Their Loss
Meilah 34 – The Dimensions of the Temple (Middot)
The study of the construction of the Temple is the current substitute for actually building it.
The Kohanim stood honorary guard in three places in the Temple, and the Levites – in twenty-one more places. The Officer of the Temple Mount would make rounds to each and every guard, with torches lit before him. The Levite guards, being posted on the Temple Mount rather than in the Courtyard, had the permission to sit there, but it was expected that they would rise to their feet, when they perceived the light of the torches. If they did not stand, the Officer would tell them, “Peace unto you,” to preclude the possibility that the guard was too absorbed in his thoughts. If it was apparent that the guide was sleeping, the Officer had the right to strike him with his staff, or even burn his outer garment.
The walls surrounding the Temple Mount had five gateways, each with its own name and function. The Temple Courtyard, too, was enclosed by walls on all four sides, and there were seven major gateways that led to the Courtyard. The Hall of Fire – where, as we have described, slept the Kohanim during the night – had four chambers that opened into it, like suites that open into a ballroom. Two of them were in the consecrated portion – The Chamber of Sacrificial Lambs, and the Chamber of the Vision Bread, and two in the unconsecrated part – in one they hid the pieces of the Altar defiled by idol worship, and the other one led to the Immersion Room.
Art: Simon Kick - Guards from a Guild
The Kohanim stood honorary guard in three places in the Temple, and the Levites – in twenty-one more places. The Officer of the Temple Mount would make rounds to each and every guard, with torches lit before him. The Levite guards, being posted on the Temple Mount rather than in the Courtyard, had the permission to sit there, but it was expected that they would rise to their feet, when they perceived the light of the torches. If they did not stand, the Officer would tell them, “Peace unto you,” to preclude the possibility that the guard was too absorbed in his thoughts. If it was apparent that the guide was sleeping, the Officer had the right to strike him with his staff, or even burn his outer garment.
The walls surrounding the Temple Mount had five gateways, each with its own name and function. The Temple Courtyard, too, was enclosed by walls on all four sides, and there were seven major gateways that led to the Courtyard. The Hall of Fire – where, as we have described, slept the Kohanim during the night – had four chambers that opened into it, like suites that open into a ballroom. Two of them were in the consecrated portion – The Chamber of Sacrificial Lambs, and the Chamber of the Vision Bread, and two in the unconsecrated part – in one they hid the pieces of the Altar defiled by idol worship, and the other one led to the Immersion Room.
Art: Simon Kick - Guards from a Guild
Meilah 33 – The Prayer of a Kohen (Tamid)
Since the Kohanim were busy with the Temple service, they could say only the absolutely necessary prayers. At the command of the appointed Kohen, they would say the blessing before the “Shema Israel” prayer, the one that deals with the study of the Torah, then the Ten Commandments, then the Shema itself, then the blessing for the Divine acceptance of the Temple service, and then the blessing of the Kohanim for the people. Then they went back to the service.
The appointed Kohen told them, “Those who are new to the incense service, come and draw lots” – since this service was conducive to riches. After that, all of the Kohanim would draw lots for bringing the sacrificial limbs to the fire (these limbs were previously left on the ramp). Some say that six Kohanim won that, and some say that it was one Kohen. Rabbi Eliezer ben Yakov says that the same Kohanim who put the limbs on the ramp now carried them to the fire.
The non-selected Kohanim would return their holy garments and dress into their own. Those who continued the service brought the incense and the limbs, and then one of them threw a specially designated shovel on the floor, whose sound signaled for the Kohanim to go prostrate in the Hall, the Levites to start singing, and Kohanim who became impure to stand at the eastern entrance, either to preclude suspicion of eschewing the service, or to shame them into being more careful in the future.
Art: Ludwig Deutsch - At Prayer
The appointed Kohen told them, “Those who are new to the incense service, come and draw lots” – since this service was conducive to riches. After that, all of the Kohanim would draw lots for bringing the sacrificial limbs to the fire (these limbs were previously left on the ramp). Some say that six Kohanim won that, and some say that it was one Kohen. Rabbi Eliezer ben Yakov says that the same Kohanim who put the limbs on the ramp now carried them to the fire.
The non-selected Kohanim would return their holy garments and dress into their own. Those who continued the service brought the incense and the limbs, and then one of them threw a specially designated shovel on the floor, whose sound signaled for the Kohanim to go prostrate in the Hall, the Levites to start singing, and Kohanim who became impure to stand at the eastern entrance, either to preclude suspicion of eschewing the service, or to shame them into being more careful in the future.
Art: Ludwig Deutsch - At Prayer
Meilah 32 – Alexander of Macedon and the Elders of the South (Tamid)
Since on the previous page we mentioned the sun, the Talmud here recounts a story that also mentions the sun: Alexander asked the Sages about ten matters, the first dealing with the sun. He said, “Which distance is greater, from heaven to earth, or from east to to west?” The question was of a spiritual nature, concerning the two types of Divine Providence for the righteous, but nevertheless it had to be clothed in physical matters. They answered, “From east to west is greater, since people can see the sun in the east and in the west, but not when it is directly above.”
He asked, “Were the heavens created first, or the earth?” They answered, “The heavens,” based on the verse, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” He then asked “What was created first, light or darkness?” They said, “This matter has no resolution.” But let them respond that darkness was created first, based on the verse, “And darkness was upon the face of the earth, and God created light!” They did not want to give him the answer, lest he continues exploring what was before the Creation. If so, they should not have answered the first question either! At first they thought that he was asking about the plain meaning of the verses in the Torah, but when they saw that he was intent on knowing the mysteries also, they stopped there. He also asked many questions about proper conduct in life, and an advice in war.
Art: Ivan Fedorovich Choultse - Sunrise
He asked, “Were the heavens created first, or the earth?” They answered, “The heavens,” based on the verse, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” He then asked “What was created first, light or darkness?” They said, “This matter has no resolution.” But let them respond that darkness was created first, based on the verse, “And darkness was upon the face of the earth, and God created light!” They did not want to give him the answer, lest he continues exploring what was before the Creation. If so, they should not have answered the first question either! At first they thought that he was asking about the plain meaning of the verses in the Torah, but when they saw that he was intent on knowing the mysteries also, they stopped there. He also asked many questions about proper conduct in life, and an advice in war.
Art: Ivan Fedorovich Choultse - Sunrise
Sunday, May 20, 2012
Meilah 31 – The Order Of The Morning Sacrifice (Tamid)
Usually, when one transports a sheep to the market for sale, he binds all of its legs together, to prevent the sheep from running away. However, it would be disgraceful for the morning lamb sacrifice, so instead they bound it in the manner of the binding of Isaac: the right foreleg with the right back leg, and the left foreleg with the left back leg, except that in the case of Isaac his hands and feet were bound behind his back.
There were multiple rings in the floor of the Temple, between the Altar and the Temple Hall, because the slaughter had to be done “in front of God,” which meant opposite the Hall entrance. Each group of the Kohanim had a ring assigned to them, and each group served for a week about two times a year. However, for the morning sacrifice all groups used the same ring, near the northwest corner of the Altar, because the sacrifice had to be slaughtered in a sunlit area. The daily afternoon sacrifice was slaughtered, correspondingly, using the ring in the northeast corner.
The ring itself was used to immobilize the sacrifice before slaughter. The sheep was positioned with its head pointing to the south, its face to the west, while the slaughterer was to the east of the sheep, with his face to the west. They would hang the lamb using a hole in its knee, not like the butchers who break its leg, then they would skin, dismember, wash, and salt the lamb, and carry the pieces to the Altar.
Art: Theo van Sluys - Sheep And Chickens In A Farm Interior
There were multiple rings in the floor of the Temple, between the Altar and the Temple Hall, because the slaughter had to be done “in front of God,” which meant opposite the Hall entrance. Each group of the Kohanim had a ring assigned to them, and each group served for a week about two times a year. However, for the morning sacrifice all groups used the same ring, near the northwest corner of the Altar, because the sacrifice had to be slaughtered in a sunlit area. The daily afternoon sacrifice was slaughtered, correspondingly, using the ring in the northeast corner.
The ring itself was used to immobilize the sacrifice before slaughter. The sheep was positioned with its head pointing to the south, its face to the west, while the slaughterer was to the east of the sheep, with his face to the west. They would hang the lamb using a hole in its knee, not like the butchers who break its leg, then they would skin, dismember, wash, and salt the lamb, and carry the pieces to the Altar.
Art: Theo van Sluys - Sheep And Chickens In A Farm Interior
Meilah 30 – Temple Morning (Tamid)
After the Kohanim enter the Chamber of Hewn Stone, the appointed Kohen tells them, “Come and cast lots for the services: Who slaughters the morning daily offering? Who throws its blood on the Altar? Who clears the ashes of the Inner Altar? Who clears the ash from the Menorah? Who brings the limbs of the morning offering to the ramp of the Altar?”
The Kohanim cast lots by each raising a finger and counting, and one on whom the count would end would get the first service, while the other Kohanim to his right would get the rest. The bringing of the limbs to the ramp, together with libations, required nine Kohanim, and larger sacrifices required more.
The appointed Kohen would tell them, “Go out and see if the time for slaughtering the morning offering has arrived.” If it had, the observer says, “Dawn!” To prevent a possible error, they restate, “Has the entire eastern sky lit up?” and the observer says, “Yes!”
The would go and bring a lamb from the Chamber of the Lambs, and give it to drink from a golden up. The would offer it, and proceed with the other services. Some of the sounds of the Temple were heard as far as Jericho.
Art: Dwight William Tryon - Dawn
The Kohanim cast lots by each raising a finger and counting, and one on whom the count would end would get the first service, while the other Kohanim to his right would get the rest. The bringing of the limbs to the ramp, together with libations, required nine Kohanim, and larger sacrifices required more.
The appointed Kohen would tell them, “Go out and see if the time for slaughtering the morning offering has arrived.” If it had, the observer says, “Dawn!” To prevent a possible error, they restate, “Has the entire eastern sky lit up?” and the observer says, “Yes!”
The would go and bring a lamb from the Chamber of the Lambs, and give it to drink from a golden up. The would offer it, and proceed with the other services. Some of the sounds of the Temple were heard as far as Jericho.
Art: Dwight William Tryon - Dawn
Thursday, May 17, 2012
Meilah 29 – The Pyre (Tamid)
After the Kohanim saw the one who removed the ashes descend from the Altar, with the pan of consumed coals in his hands, they would rush to sanctify their hands and feed with water from a special vessel. Then they took the shovels and forks and went on the top of the Altar. There they removed the limbs of the burned offering remaining from the day before, and put to them to the side of the Altar, or on the ramp. They would not remove them altogether, so as not to disqualify them.
They would begin piling the ashes on top of the mound, located in the center of the Altar. At times, this mound was like 300 kors in volume (50,000 cubic feet, which is an exaggeration, one of the few found in the Torah, Prophets, and Talmud). On the Festivals, they would not remove it, because it is an adornment for the Altar, but normally they were never lax to remove the ashes out of the city, when the mound became too large.
They began bringing up shaven and smooth logs and arranging the pyre toward the east side of the Altar. They would leave spaces between rows of logs and insert small chips there, to start the fire. They also brought fine pieces of fig-tree wood for the second pyre, opposite the Temple Hall door, for coals to burn the incense. Now they would return the leftover limbs to the fire, descend from the Altar, and proceed to the Chamber of Hewn Stone, where they drew lots for the remaining services.
Art: Niko Pirosmanashvili - Firewood Seller
They would begin piling the ashes on top of the mound, located in the center of the Altar. At times, this mound was like 300 kors in volume (50,000 cubic feet, which is an exaggeration, one of the few found in the Torah, Prophets, and Talmud). On the Festivals, they would not remove it, because it is an adornment for the Altar, but normally they were never lax to remove the ashes out of the city, when the mound became too large.
They began bringing up shaven and smooth logs and arranging the pyre toward the east side of the Altar. They would leave spaces between rows of logs and insert small chips there, to start the fire. They also brought fine pieces of fig-tree wood for the second pyre, opposite the Temple Hall door, for coals to burn the incense. Now they would return the leftover limbs to the fire, descend from the Altar, and proceed to the Chamber of Hewn Stone, where they drew lots for the remaining services.
Art: Niko Pirosmanashvili - Firewood Seller
Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Meilah 28 – Temple at the Break of Dawn (Tamid)
After settling the question of who would be doing the first service, separating the ashes, the appointed Kohen would take a key and open a small door that led from the Hall of Fire into the Courtyard. The main door would be opened later on in the day. Two groups of Kohanim followed him, and each carried a torch. Once in the Courtyard, one group walked in the east colonnade and one in the west, checking the vessels as they walked. If all the vessels were in order, they said, “Peace, all is well.”
When they met again, they appointed from among their number the makers of the wafers that the High Priest would bring. At that point, one chosen to remove the ash from the Altar would go to his task. They would tell him, “Be careful not to touch the shovel until you sanctify your hands and feet with water” – not because he actually had to, but because, being alone, he might be carried away and start the real service, which would be prohibited.
No one entered with him between the Altar and the Antechamber, and he had no lamp but rather walked in the light of the pyre. They would not see or hear him until he started pulling the vessel out of the mikveh with a wooden wheel, and the other Kohanim would say, “Time to sanctify the hands and feet” and be ready to do it.
He would take a silver shovel, ascend to the top of the Altar, and scoop from the most consumed, innermost coals. He would then descend, walk along the northern side, and pile the coals on the floor at a distance of three handbreadths from the ramp.
Art: Boy blowing at a Lamp by Georges de La Tour
When they met again, they appointed from among their number the makers of the wafers that the High Priest would bring. At that point, one chosen to remove the ash from the Altar would go to his task. They would tell him, “Be careful not to touch the shovel until you sanctify your hands and feet with water” – not because he actually had to, but because, being alone, he might be carried away and start the real service, which would be prohibited.
No one entered with him between the Altar and the Antechamber, and he had no lamp but rather walked in the light of the pyre. They would not see or hear him until he started pulling the vessel out of the mikveh with a wooden wheel, and the other Kohanim would say, “Time to sanctify the hands and feet” and be ready to do it.
He would take a silver shovel, ascend to the top of the Altar, and scoop from the most consumed, innermost coals. He would then descend, walk along the northern side, and pile the coals on the floor at a distance of three handbreadths from the ramp.
Art: Boy blowing at a Lamp by Georges de La Tour
Meilah 27 – Use of Priestly Garments (Tamid)
In addition to the Kohanim guarding the Temple Courtyard from the outside (because they were forbidden to sit inside), there were twenty-one guards of the Levites guarding the Temple at the gates and other places from the inside.
The Kohanim did not sleep in their garments to return to the previous subject but rolled them under their heads. Do we see from here that only sleeping in them was prohibited, but daytime use, such as walking in them, was in fact allowed, even when not doing the service? – No, this is no proof. Perhaps daytime use was also prohibited, but the teacher chose to speak about sleep to tell us that the garments should be treated respectfully. If so, how could they put the garments under their heads? – Don’t read “under” but read “next to” their heads.
But consider the story of Alexander the Macedonian marching to destroy the Temple at the incitement of the Cutheans. What did Shimon the Righteous, High Priest, do? He donned the priestly garments and went to meet Alexander. They were traveling all night, and at dawn, when Alexander saw the High Priest, he alighted from his horse and bowed down to him. They asked Alexander, "Why are you bowing down to this Jew?" He replied, "I see this image every time I go into battle, and it protects me." Don’t we see from this story that priestly garments can be used for personal needs? – No, we don’t. Perhaps they were garments fit for service, but not actual priestly garments. Or perhaps they were the real garments, but “Time to act for God” is an exception.
The conclusion is that priestly garments can be used, but then there is further disagreement about using them even before the service or not taking them off after the service.
Art: Alexander the Great in the Temple of Jerusalem by Sebastiano Conca
The Kohanim did not sleep in their garments to return to the previous subject but rolled them under their heads. Do we see from here that only sleeping in them was prohibited, but daytime use, such as walking in them, was in fact allowed, even when not doing the service? – No, this is no proof. Perhaps daytime use was also prohibited, but the teacher chose to speak about sleep to tell us that the garments should be treated respectfully. If so, how could they put the garments under their heads? – Don’t read “under” but read “next to” their heads.
But consider the story of Alexander the Macedonian marching to destroy the Temple at the incitement of the Cutheans. What did Shimon the Righteous, High Priest, do? He donned the priestly garments and went to meet Alexander. They were traveling all night, and at dawn, when Alexander saw the High Priest, he alighted from his horse and bowed down to him. They asked Alexander, "Why are you bowing down to this Jew?" He replied, "I see this image every time I go into battle, and it protects me." Don’t we see from this story that priestly garments can be used for personal needs? – No, we don’t. Perhaps they were garments fit for service, but not actual priestly garments. Or perhaps they were the real garments, but “Time to act for God” is an exception.
The conclusion is that priestly garments can be used, but then there is further disagreement about using them even before the service or not taking them off after the service.
Art: Alexander the Great in the Temple of Jerusalem by Sebastiano Conca
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
Meilah 26 – The First Service of the Day (Tamid)
The first service of the day in the Temple was “separation of the ashes.” Since the Torah said, “and he will separate the ash… and place it beside the Altar,” the Kohen would go up on the Altar, scoop a shovelful of ash, then come down, and deposit it to the east of the Altar ramp. Any Kohen who wanted to do this service would wake up early, immerse himself in a mikveh, and be ready before the Kohen appointed over the distribution of services arrives. If more than one Kohen wanted to do the service, they would draw lots.
At what time did the appointed Kohen arrive? Sometimes a little before and sometimes a little after the rooster’s cry. He would knock upon the Temple gates, and they would open it for him. He would say to them, “Whoever has immersed himself should come and participate in the lottery.” They made a lottery (we will learn about this in the tractate Yoma), and whoever won, won.
Art: Rooster with Hens and Chicks by Carl Jutz
At what time did the appointed Kohen arrive? Sometimes a little before and sometimes a little after the rooster’s cry. He would knock upon the Temple gates, and they would open it for him. He would say to them, “Whoever has immersed himself should come and participate in the lottery.” They made a lottery (we will learn about this in the tractate Yoma), and whoever won, won.
Art: Rooster with Hens and Chicks by Carl Jutz
Meilah 25 – Kohanim Guarding The Temple (Tamid)
There were three places in the Temple where Kohanim stood honorary guard. These were chambers elevated above floor of the Temple, and one of them was called “The Hall of Fire.” It was a dome, where large fires were burning throughout the night, because Kohanim had to perform their service barefoot and in only one layer of clothing. Young Kohanim were used for guarding: since they could not yet bring sacrifices, they could therefore afford to be up all night.
The Hall of Fire was a large structure, whose interior was encircled with ledges of stone. The heads of the group of Kohanim who were to serve the next day slept on these ledges. The ledges were not sanctified, which allowed sitting and sleeping on them, for otherwise sitting in the Temple is prohibited for everybody except for kings of the Davidian dynasty. Young Kohanim were not accorded this privilege, but slept each with his cushion on the ground. They would not sleep in their holy vestments, but would rather remove them, and fold them under their heads, and cover themselves with their personal garment.
If one of them experienced a seminal emission during the night, he would exit the Hall of Fire and proceed through an underground tunnel, where lamps were burning to illuminate his way, until he reached the Immersion Room, where he would immerse himself in a mikveh. A large fire was burning there for people to dry and warm themselves after immersion. There was also a “latrine of dignity,” whose door was closed when someone was there, and thus one never had to speak in it.
Art: Charles Bargue - A Footman Sleeping
The Hall of Fire was a large structure, whose interior was encircled with ledges of stone. The heads of the group of Kohanim who were to serve the next day slept on these ledges. The ledges were not sanctified, which allowed sitting and sleeping on them, for otherwise sitting in the Temple is prohibited for everybody except for kings of the Davidian dynasty. Young Kohanim were not accorded this privilege, but slept each with his cushion on the ground. They would not sleep in their holy vestments, but would rather remove them, and fold them under their heads, and cover themselves with their personal garment.
If one of them experienced a seminal emission during the night, he would exit the Hall of Fire and proceed through an underground tunnel, where lamps were burning to illuminate his way, until he reached the Immersion Room, where he would immerse himself in a mikveh. A large fire was burning there for people to dry and warm themselves after immersion. There was also a “latrine of dignity,” whose door was closed when someone was there, and thus one never had to speak in it.
Art: Charles Bargue - A Footman Sleeping
Monday, May 14, 2012
Meilah 24 – Kohen Who Did Not Consult
All of the cases of mixed-up bird sacrifices that we learned above were in a situation where a Kohen comes to the Sages and asks them what to do in each doubtful situation. However, if the Kohen did not consult anybody but simply took all birds from all women and brought all of them as burned offerings, above the red line in the middle of the Altar, exactly half of them are valid – because indeed half of all birds were burned offerings. If he brought all birds as sin-offerings, below the line, again half of them are valid. Finally, if he brought some of them as burned offerings above and some as sin-offerings below, half in the first group and half in the second group are valid.
If during her pregnancy a woman promised an additional pair of birds as a voluntary offering, they are burned offerings, and the Kohen who brings the resulting four birds, must make three of them burned offerings, and one – a sin-offering. If the Kohen did not do so, but rather made two of them burned offerings and two – sin-offerings, she has to bring an additional burned offering.
If she tries to designate the offerings, in order to correct for errors, and the Kohen keeps making mistakes, she may bring up to seven extra bird pairs. Better she be silent, and this agrees with a popular saying that a live ram has just one voice, but when dead, it has seven uses: shofar, flutes, drums, harps, etc. And in the same vein, simple men, when growing old, have their minds more and more confused, but Sages who study all their lives, the older they grow, the more their mind matures.
Art: Govert Teunisz. Flinck - Rembrandt as Shepherd with Staff and Flute
If during her pregnancy a woman promised an additional pair of birds as a voluntary offering, they are burned offerings, and the Kohen who brings the resulting four birds, must make three of them burned offerings, and one – a sin-offering. If the Kohen did not do so, but rather made two of them burned offerings and two – sin-offerings, she has to bring an additional burned offering.
If she tries to designate the offerings, in order to correct for errors, and the Kohen keeps making mistakes, she may bring up to seven extra bird pairs. Better she be silent, and this agrees with a popular saying that a live ram has just one voice, but when dead, it has seven uses: shofar, flutes, drums, harps, etc. And in the same vein, simple men, when growing old, have their minds more and more confused, but Sages who study all their lives, the older they grow, the more their mind matures.
Art: Govert Teunisz. Flinck - Rembrandt as Shepherd with Staff and Flute
Meilah 23 – A Bird Flew Away (Kinnim)
If one bird of the pair flew away, either to freedom, or it landed among birds that cannot be offered, one simply has to add a bird to the one that remained, and then can bring a pair. However, if the bird that flew away landed among other pairs, then we have a problem. If the remaining bird is brought, for example, as a burned offering, then its pair, the escapee, becomes a sin offering. This, in turn, makes all the birds in the group that it flew into invalid, and we lose all these offerings. To prevent this, we declare the remaining bird invalid, which makes the one that flew away also invalid. Thus we have a rule: if a bird flies away but lands with other birds, it is invalid, and makes one bird in the group that it left also invalid.
For example, if one woman had a pair of birds, the next – two pairs, and so on, until a woman with seven pairs, and a bird flew from the first woman to the second, from the second to the third, and so on, until the seventh, then each time a bird flies away, it makes one remaining birds in the group it leaves invalid. If a bird then flew back from the seventh to the sixth, from the sixth to the fifth, and so on, until the first, each woman lost two pairs of birds, except the seventh – since for her there was only one bird that flew in and left, not two.
Art: Martin Johnson Heade - Two Hummingbirds With Their Young
For example, if one woman had a pair of birds, the next – two pairs, and so on, until a woman with seven pairs, and a bird flew from the first woman to the second, from the second to the third, and so on, until the seventh, then each time a bird flies away, it makes one remaining birds in the group it leaves invalid. If a bird then flew back from the seventh to the sixth, from the sixth to the fifth, and so on, until the first, each woman lost two pairs of birds, except the seventh – since for her there was only one bird that flew in and left, not two.
Art: Martin Johnson Heade - Two Hummingbirds With Their Young
Sunday, May 13, 2012
Meilah 22 – Bird Pairs (Kinnim)
The next three Tractates are relatively short, and their pages are numbered as if they were part of the Me'lah Tractate. They deal respectively with bird pairs brought as sacrifices, order of the day in the Temple, and dimensions of the Temple.
A pair of birds is brought in a number of cases, such as anyone who has to bring an animal sin-offering but is too poor for the expense, a woman who gave birth, or a spiritual leper on his purification. The birds have to be either two turtledoves, or two young pigeons.
One of the birds is a burned offering, whose blood is sprinkled on the upper part of the Altar wall, above the red line that designates the middle, and the other one is a sin-offering, and its blood is applied on the lower part of the wall. Therefore, the offerings are completely incompatible, and if one is brought as another, it is invalid. For example, if in a pair two birds were already designated, one as a burned offering, and the other as a sin-offering, and then they become mixed, the offering cannot be brought at all, and the birds have to die.
Therefore, the owner would prefer not to designate the birds, but allow the Kohen to do it, just before sacrificing them, and the Kohen is given the power of designating them. The owner can actually designate the birds when he or she buys them, and these are the only to moments in time when a designation can be done.
If a bird pair of one woman mingled with the the pair of another, only two out of four birds can be brought. Why? We can definitely bring one pair, since the mixture contains two undesignated burned offerings, and two sin-offerings. However, we cannot bring the second pair, because perhaps the first two birds were really burned offerings, and there are no more burned offerings left. The same is true if two pairs mixed with two pairs, three with three pairs, and so on – half of them can be brought, but not more.
Art: (After) Pieter Aertsen - A woman holding a duck and a bird cage with chickens and a dove
A pair of birds is brought in a number of cases, such as anyone who has to bring an animal sin-offering but is too poor for the expense, a woman who gave birth, or a spiritual leper on his purification. The birds have to be either two turtledoves, or two young pigeons.
One of the birds is a burned offering, whose blood is sprinkled on the upper part of the Altar wall, above the red line that designates the middle, and the other one is a sin-offering, and its blood is applied on the lower part of the wall. Therefore, the offerings are completely incompatible, and if one is brought as another, it is invalid. For example, if in a pair two birds were already designated, one as a burned offering, and the other as a sin-offering, and then they become mixed, the offering cannot be brought at all, and the birds have to die.
Therefore, the owner would prefer not to designate the birds, but allow the Kohen to do it, just before sacrificing them, and the Kohen is given the power of designating them. The owner can actually designate the birds when he or she buys them, and these are the only to moments in time when a designation can be done.
If a bird pair of one woman mingled with the the pair of another, only two out of four birds can be brought. Why? We can definitely bring one pair, since the mixture contains two undesignated burned offerings, and two sin-offerings. However, we cannot bring the second pair, because perhaps the first two birds were really burned offerings, and there are no more burned offerings left. The same is true if two pairs mixed with two pairs, three with three pairs, and so on – half of them can be brought, but not more.
Art: (After) Pieter Aertsen - A woman holding a duck and a bird cage with chickens and a dove
Meilah 22 – Money-changer And Storekeeper
If one deposited money with a money-changer, and it was tied up in a bundle, the money-changer may not use it. Therefore, if the money-changer spent the money, and it was later discovered that it belonged to the Temple, he is liable for misappropriation. However, if the money was loose, the money-changer may use it, and if it was the Temple's, it is the depositor who is guilty of misappropriation. The money-changer's main occupation is to deal with money, and it is presumed that he has the permission to use the loose coins deposited with him.
If one deposited money with a private householder, whether it was tied or untied, the householder may not use it. Therefore, if the householder spent the money, and it belonged to the Temple, the householder has committed misappropriation.
A storekeeper is treated like a private householder. Even though he often gives change, money-changing is not his main occupation – these are the words of Rabbi Meir. However, Rabbi Yehudah treats a storekeeper like a money-changer: since he often gives change, it is presumed that he can use loose coins that are deposited with him. Appropriate laws of misappropriation apply to him.
Art: Frederick Childe Hassam - Provincetown Grocery Store
If one deposited money with a private householder, whether it was tied or untied, the householder may not use it. Therefore, if the householder spent the money, and it belonged to the Temple, the householder has committed misappropriation.
A storekeeper is treated like a private householder. Even though he often gives change, money-changing is not his main occupation – these are the words of Rabbi Meir. However, Rabbi Yehudah treats a storekeeper like a money-changer: since he often gives change, it is presumed that he can use loose coins that are deposited with him. Appropriate laws of misappropriation apply to him.
Art: Frederick Childe Hassam - Provincetown Grocery Store
Friday, May 11, 2012
Meilah 21 – Money From The Wrong Bag
If one said to his agent, “Bring me money from an alcove or from the bag,” and he meant that alcove or bag that contained his private money, but the agent brought it from another bag, with the money of the Temple, he has committed misappropriation. Actually, he is a Temple treasurer, just like before, and he will commit it when he uses the money. However, if he said, “from an alcove,” and the agent brought money from the bag, then the agent commits misappropriation, since deviated from the instruction.
If one sends an agent to a store, unintentionally giving him money of the Temple, but then recalls that it was consecrated money, then, to spare the store-owner the unwitting transgression, he should take his own perutah (small coin) and say, “The perutah of the Temple, wherever it maybe is hereby deconsecrated on upon this perutah.”
Art: Ernst Graner - The General Store Vienna
If one sends an agent to a store, unintentionally giving him money of the Temple, but then recalls that it was consecrated money, then, to spare the store-owner the unwitting transgression, he should take his own perutah (small coin) and say, “The perutah of the Temple, wherever it maybe is hereby deconsecrated on upon this perutah.”
Art: Ernst Graner - The General Store Vienna
Thursday, May 10, 2012
Meilah 20 – An Agent Who Did As He Was Told
If one picked up a stone belonging to the Temple, he has not misappropriated it yet. Actually, this is talking about a Temple treasurer, who is authorized to handle Temple's property. Even though lifting normally effects acquisition, his lifting leaves it in the domain of the Temple. If he then gave it to another, he has transgressed, but his fellow has not. The treasurer, by his giving the stone over, removed it from the domain of the Temple, and no further misappropriation will apply. If he built it into his house, he also has not transgressed, until he has lived in the house, deriving the benefit of a perutah (small coin).
If an agent misappropriated the property of the Temple, by following precisely the instruction given him by another, the one who gave the instruction is responsible for misappropriation, but the agent is not. However, if the agent deviates from the instruction, he becomes liable. For example, if one told his agent, “Give my guests meat,” and the agent gave them liver, (and later it was discovered that it was Temple property) the agent has committed misappropriation.
If one told his agent, “Give my guests one piece of meat each,” and the agent told them to take two, but they took three – then all of them: the host, his agent, and his guests, have committed misappropriation.
Art: Gustave Courbet - The Stone Breakers
If an agent misappropriated the property of the Temple, by following precisely the instruction given him by another, the one who gave the instruction is responsible for misappropriation, but the agent is not. However, if the agent deviates from the instruction, he becomes liable. For example, if one told his agent, “Give my guests meat,” and the agent gave them liver, (and later it was discovered that it was Temple property) the agent has committed misappropriation.
If one told his agent, “Give my guests one piece of meat each,” and the agent told them to take two, but they took three – then all of them: the host, his agent, and his guests, have committed misappropriation.
Art: Gustave Courbet - The Stone Breakers
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
Meilah 19 – How Misappropriations Do Not Combine
If one benefited from an article belonging to the Temple in the amount of half a perutah (small coin), and also deteriorated it for half a perutah (for example, he wore a garment for a short time and also tore it while wearing), he has not committed misappropriations. Also, if he used one article but caused deterioration in another – he is still not liable, since both the amount of benefit and of deterioration must be at least a perutah.
Misappropriation cannot be committed twice. For example, if one used a Temple's ax, it became deconsecrated through his action. Now if he or someone else uses it again, they do not commit misappropriation. The exception to this rule are sacrificial animals and Temple vessels: since they cannot be redeemed, they cannot be deconsecrated either, and if people rode on a sacrificial animal one after another, they have all committed misappropriation.
Rabbi Yehudah the Prince states a rule: whatever cannot be redeemed is subject to misappropriation after misappropriation. But that is the same as the first teacher!? – Rabbi Yehudah refers to his own opinion that we saw a while back, that if one donates wooden blocks, they are viewed as a sacrifice, and other blocks of wood are needed to burn these ones. Accordingly, donated wood cannot be redeemed, and one who uses it commits misappropriation.
Art: Blaise Alexandre Desgoffe - Still Life with Gold Box
Misappropriation cannot be committed twice. For example, if one used a Temple's ax, it became deconsecrated through his action. Now if he or someone else uses it again, they do not commit misappropriation. The exception to this rule are sacrificial animals and Temple vessels: since they cannot be redeemed, they cannot be deconsecrated either, and if people rode on a sacrificial animal one after another, they have all committed misappropriation.
Rabbi Yehudah the Prince states a rule: whatever cannot be redeemed is subject to misappropriation after misappropriation. But that is the same as the first teacher!? – Rabbi Yehudah refers to his own opinion that we saw a while back, that if one donates wooden blocks, they are viewed as a sacrifice, and other blocks of wood are needed to burn these ones. Accordingly, donated wood cannot be redeemed, and one who uses it commits misappropriation.
Art: Blaise Alexandre Desgoffe - Still Life with Gold Box
Tuesday, May 8, 2012
Meilah 18 – Does One Have To Ruin The Temple Property?
The remaining combinations that the Talmud discusses include pieces of sacrifices brought with wrong intentions, and those left over, meat of reptiles and animals killed without slaughter, items with different levels of ritual impurity, items carried on Shabbat, and foods eaten on Yom Kippur; sometimes they combine, and sometimes they don't.
One commits misappropriation of Temple property as soon as he uses it, even if the item itself did not loose anything because of it, and did not suffer deterioration – this is the opinion of Rabbi Akiva. However, the Sages make this distinction: if an item does not deteriorate, like a golden vessel, then one commits misappropriation once he uses and derives some benefit, worth at least perutah (small coin). If it does deteriorate, then one is liable if he used up some of it (like a garment), in the amount of a perutah. Actually, Rabbi Akiva only disagrees with the Sages about items that can deteriorate but are normally kept very carefully, such as very expensive garments of fine material, or the middle garments.
What is the source for the requirement of using up some of the item? Misappropriation is compared to terumah, kohen's portion, and just as with terumah, one needs to eat and reduce it, to be liable, so too with misappropriation.
Art: Willem Kalf - Still Life with Chafing Dish, Pewter, Gold, Silver, and Glassware
One commits misappropriation of Temple property as soon as he uses it, even if the item itself did not loose anything because of it, and did not suffer deterioration – this is the opinion of Rabbi Akiva. However, the Sages make this distinction: if an item does not deteriorate, like a golden vessel, then one commits misappropriation once he uses and derives some benefit, worth at least perutah (small coin). If it does deteriorate, then one is liable if he used up some of it (like a garment), in the amount of a perutah. Actually, Rabbi Akiva only disagrees with the Sages about items that can deteriorate but are normally kept very carefully, such as very expensive garments of fine material, or the middle garments.
What is the source for the requirement of using up some of the item? Misappropriation is compared to terumah, kohen's portion, and just as with terumah, one needs to eat and reduce it, to be liable, so too with misappropriation.
Art: Willem Kalf - Still Life with Chafing Dish, Pewter, Gold, Silver, and Glassware
Meilah 17 – How Reptiles Meats Combine
There are eight reptiles that transmit ritual impurity. Their blood and meat combine to form the volume of a lentil, and if one eats this volume, he transgresses a full prohibition. They combine to transmit impurity in the same way.
Rabbi Yehoshua stated a general rule: all items that transmits impurity in the same amount (for example, blood and meat of reptiles), and make one impure for the same length of time (one day, until nightfall, in our case), combine. However, if they transmit impurity in different amounts (for example, flesh of a dead human transmits impurity when there is an olive volume of it), or for a different length of time (impurity of a dead human body lasts for seven days) – these items do not combine with one another.
Art: Dirk Valkenburg - Still Life of Fruits from Surinam and Reptiles
Rabbi Yehoshua stated a general rule: all items that transmits impurity in the same amount (for example, blood and meat of reptiles), and make one impure for the same length of time (one day, until nightfall, in our case), combine. However, if they transmit impurity in different amounts (for example, flesh of a dead human transmits impurity when there is an olive volume of it), or for a different length of time (impurity of a dead human body lasts for seven days) – these items do not combine with one another.
Art: Dirk Valkenburg - Still Life of Fruits from Surinam and Reptiles
Sunday, May 6, 2012
Meilah 16 – How Prohibited Foods Combine
All five foods called “terumah” - “first portion” combine to create a prohibition. That is, if one ate small amounts of them, but together it was an olive volume, he is liable. The foods are terumah of the Kohen, terumah that the Levi gives to a Kohen, doubtful terumah (also called “demai”, “what is it?”), terumah of the dough (called “challah”), and first fruit – the last two, because they have an additional name of “terumah.”
All of the “nevelah” meats (animals that were not properly slaughtered) combine with one another, and so do all creeping creatures. In commenting on that, Rav said that "nevelah" meat of kosher and non-kosher animals do not combine for the prohibition of eating, because they are prohibited by different phrases in the Torah, and because one prohibition cannot be superimposed on the previous one. In our cases, a non-kosher animal is already prohibited, and it cannot become more prohibited as “nevelah” - not slaughtered.
However, Levi said that they do combine anyway. In principle, Levi agrees that prohibition don't get superimposed, but nevelah is an exception, because of an extra prohibition for it in the Torah.
Art: Jacob Foppens Van S - Still Life With Oysters
All of the “nevelah” meats (animals that were not properly slaughtered) combine with one another, and so do all creeping creatures. In commenting on that, Rav said that "nevelah" meat of kosher and non-kosher animals do not combine for the prohibition of eating, because they are prohibited by different phrases in the Torah, and because one prohibition cannot be superimposed on the previous one. In our cases, a non-kosher animal is already prohibited, and it cannot become more prohibited as “nevelah” - not slaughtered.
However, Levi said that they do combine anyway. In principle, Levi agrees that prohibition don't get superimposed, but nevelah is an exception, because of an extra prohibition for it in the Torah.
Art: Jacob Foppens Van S - Still Life With Oysters
Meilah 15 – How Misappropriations Combine
Items consecrated to be brought on the Altar combine with one another for misappropriation. For example, if one ate half an olive volume of meat of an animal sacrifice, and another half an olive volume from another, he committed misappropriation, because he ate an olive volume of Temple's property. Additionally, if those half-olive volumes were of sacrifices left beyond permitted time, and he ate the total volume of an olive, he is liable to be cut off from his spiritual source. Two half-olive volumes of something fit for Temple treasury but not for the Altar also combine. Finally, even meat of a sacrifice and meat consecrated to the Treasury, also combine with one another for prohibition.
Actually, the last rule is the biggest unexpected teaching of them all, and it should be sufficient to teach just that, and we would deduce the rest. However, the first part of the rule mentions meat left over, which is specific to sacrifices, and thus had to be taught separately.
The five different components of burned offering: meat, forbidden fat, flour, wine, and oil – all combine with one another for form a complete olive volume for misappropriation. The six components of a thanksgiving offering – the five above plus loaves – also combine.
Art: Italian School - A Still Life Of A Lemon And Seeds, A Terracotta Jar, A Plate
Actually, the last rule is the biggest unexpected teaching of them all, and it should be sufficient to teach just that, and we would deduce the rest. However, the first part of the rule mentions meat left over, which is specific to sacrifices, and thus had to be taught separately.
The five different components of burned offering: meat, forbidden fat, flour, wine, and oil – all combine with one another for form a complete olive volume for misappropriation. The six components of a thanksgiving offering – the five above plus loaves – also combine.
Art: Italian School - A Still Life Of A Lemon And Seeds, A Terracotta Jar, A Plate
Tuesday, May 1, 2012
Meilah 14 – A Bird Nest Atop A Tree
A bird nest atop a tree consecrated to the Temple should not be used, by the decree of the Sages, but there is not prohibition of misappropriation. Even if we assume that it was built from the twigs that grew after consecration, they may be prohibited, but not with the serious misappropriation laws. If that nest was on top of a tree planted for worship, he should knock it down with a stick, then take it.
Rabbi Yochanan and Resh Lakish were discussing a different subject, and in doing so elucidated our ruling. If an idol broke on its own, is it permitted for use? Rabbi Yochanan said that no, because only an idol worshiper can nullify an idol. However, Resh Lakish said that yes, because the idol worshiper reasons as follows, “This idol could not save itself, how can it save me?!” - and nullifies it in his heart.
Resh Lakish then asked Rabbi Yochanan, “The nest on top of a worshiped tree was made of twigs broken off by birds, so it is the same as an idol that broke on its own, and it is nevertheless permitted!” Rabbi Yochanan replied though that the birds brought the twigs from elsewhere.
Art: Neville Henry Peniston Cayley - Kookaburras Feeding at a Nest in a Tree
Rabbi Yochanan and Resh Lakish were discussing a different subject, and in doing so elucidated our ruling. If an idol broke on its own, is it permitted for use? Rabbi Yochanan said that no, because only an idol worshiper can nullify an idol. However, Resh Lakish said that yes, because the idol worshiper reasons as follows, “This idol could not save itself, how can it save me?!” - and nullifies it in his heart.
Resh Lakish then asked Rabbi Yochanan, “The nest on top of a worshiped tree was made of twigs broken off by birds, so it is the same as an idol that broke on its own, and it is nevertheless permitted!” Rabbi Yochanan replied though that the birds brought the twigs from elsewhere.
Art: Neville Henry Peniston Cayley - Kookaburras Feeding at a Nest in a Tree
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)