Home About Network of subjects Linked subjects heatmap Book indices included Search by subject Search by reference Browse subjects Browse texts

Tiresias: The Ancient Mediterranean Religions Source Database



8021
Mishnah, Menachot, 10.5


מִשֶּׁקָּרַב הָעֹמֶר, יוֹצְאִין וּמוֹצְאִין שׁוּק יְרוּשָׁלַיִם שֶׁהוּא מָלֵא קֶמַח וְקָלִי, שֶׁלֹּא בִרְצוֹן חֲכָמִים, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, בִּרְצוֹן חֲכָמִים הָיוּ עוֹשִׂים. מִשֶּׁקָּרַב הָעֹמֶר, הֻתַּר הֶחָדָשׁ מִיָּד, וְהָרְחוֹקִים מֻתָּרִים מֵחֲצוֹת הַיּוֹם וּלְהַלָּן. מִשֶּׁחָרַב בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ, הִתְקִין רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי, שֶׁיְּהֵא יוֹם הָנֵף כֻּלּוֹ אָסוּר. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה, וַהֲלֹא מִן הַתּוֹרָה הוּא אָסוּר, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כג), עַד עֶצֶם הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה. מִפְּנֵי מָה הָרְחוֹקִים מֻתָּרִים מֵחֲצוֹת הַיּוֹם וּלְהַלָּן, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן יוֹדְעִין שֶׁאֵין בֵּית דִּין מִתְעַצְּלִין בּוֹ:After the omer was offered they used to go out and find the market of Jerusalem already full of flour and parched grain [of the new produce]; This was without the approval of the rabbis, the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Judah says: it was with the approval of the rabbis. After the omer was offered the new grain was permitted immediately, but for those that lived far off it was permitted only after midday. After the Temple was destroyed Rabbi Yohanan ben Zakkai decreed that it should be forbidden throughout the day of the waving. Rabbi Judah said: is it not so forbidden by the law of the Torah, for it is said, “Until this very day?” Why was it permitted for those that lived far away from midday? Because they know that the court would not be negligent with it.


Intertexts (texts cited often on the same page as the searched text):

15 results
1. Mishnah, Berachot, 9.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

9.5. One must bless [God] for the evil in the same way as one blesses for the good, as it says, “And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul and with all your might” (Deuteronomy 6:5). “With all your heart,” with your two impulses, the evil impulse as well as the good impulse. “With all your soul” even though he takes your soul [life] away from you. “With all your might” with all your money. Another explanation, “With all your might” whatever treatment he metes out to you. One should not show disrespect to the Eastern Gate, because it is in a direct line with the Holy of Holies. One should not enter the Temple Mount with a staff, or with shoes on, or with a wallet, or with dusty feet; nor should one make it a short cut, all the more spitting [is forbidden]. All the conclusions of blessings that were in the Temple they would say, “forever [lit. as long as the world is].” When the sectarians perverted their ways and said that there was only one world, they decreed that they should say, “for ever and ever [lit. from the end of the world to the end of the world]. They also decreed that a person should greet his fellow in God’s name, as it says, “And behold Boaz came from Bethlehem and said to the reapers, ‘May the Lord be with you.’ And they answered him, “May the Lord bless you’” (Ruth 2:. And it also says, “The Lord is with your, you valiant warrior” (Judges 6:12). And it also says, “And do not despise your mother when she grows old” (Proverbs 23:22). And it also says, “It is time to act on behalf of the Lord, for they have violated Your teaching” (Psalms 119:126). Rabbi Natan says: [this means] “They have violated your teaching It is time to act on behalf of the Lord.”"
2. Mishnah, Maaser Sheni, 5.2 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

5.2. [The produce of] a vineyard in its fourth year was brought up to Jerusalem within a distance of one day’s journey on each side. And what is the border [of a day’s journey on each side]? Eilat to the south, Akrabat on the north, Lod to the west, and the Jordan [river] to the east. When produce increased, it was decreed that it can be redeemed even if the vineyard was close to the wall. And there was a stipulation on this matter, that whenever it was so desired, the arrangement would be restored as it had been before. Rabbi Yose says: this was the stipulation after the Temple was destroyed, and the stipulation was that when the Temple should be rebuilt the arrangement would be restored as it had been before."
3. Mishnah, Menachot, 10.3-10.4 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

10.3. How would they do it [reap the omer]?The agents of the court used to go out on the day before the festival and tie the unreaped grain in bunches to make it the easier to reap. All the inhabitants of the towns near by assembled there, so that it might be reaped with a great demonstration. As soon as it became dark he says to them: “Has the sun set?” And they answer, “Yes.” “Has the sun set?” And they answer, “Yes.” “With this sickle?” And they answer, “Yes.” “With this sickle?” And they answer, “Yes.” “Into this basket?” And they answer, “Yes.” “Into this basket?” And they answer, “Yes.” On the Sabbath he says to them, “On this Sabbath?” And they answer, “Yes.” “On this Sabbath?” And they answer, “Yes.” “Shall I reap?” And they answer, “Reap.” “Shall I reap?” And they answer, “Reap.” He repeated every matter three times, and they answer, “yes, yes, yes.” And why all of this? Because of the Boethusians who held that the reaping of the omer was not to take place at the conclusion of the [first day of the] festival." 10.4. They reaped it, put it into the baskets, and brought it to the Temple courtyard; Then they would parch it with fire in order to fulfill the mitzvah that it should be parched [with fire], the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say: they beat it with reeds or stems of plants that the grains should not be crushed, and then they put it into a pipe that was perforated so that the fire might take hold of all of it. They spread it out in the Temple courtyard so that the wind might blow over it. Then they put it into a gristmill and took out of it a tenth [of an ephah of flour] which was sifted through thirteen sieves. What was left over was redeemed and might be eaten by any one; It was liable for hallah but exempt from tithes. Rabbi Akiba made it liable both to hallah and to tithes. He then came to the tenth, put in its oil and its frankincense, poured in the oil, mixed it, waved it, brought it near [to the altar], took from it the handful and burnt it; and the remainder was eaten by the priests."
4. Mishnah, Middot, 5.4 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

5.4. On the south were the wood chamber, the chamber of the exile and the chamber of hewn stones. The wood chamber: Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob says: I forget what it was used for. Abba Shaul says: It was the chamber of the high priest, and it was behind the two of them, and one roof covered all three. In the chamber of the exile there was a fixed cistern, with a wheel over it, and from there water was provided for all of the courtyard. In the chamber of hewn stone the great Sanhedrin of Israel used to sit and judge the priesthood. A priest in whom was found a disqualification used to put on black garments and wrap himself in black and go away. One in whom no disqualification was found used to put on white garments and wrap himself in white and go in and serve along with his brother priests. They used to make a feast because no blemish had been found in the seed of Aaron the priest, and they used to say: Blessed is the Omnipresent, blessed is He, for no blemish has been found in the seed of Aaron. Blessed is He who chose Aaron and his sons to stand to minister before the Lord in the Holy of Holies."
5. Mishnah, Nazir, 5.4 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

5.4. If one vowed to be a nazirite and went to bring his animal [for the sacrifice] and found that it had been stolen: If he had taken the nazirite vow before his animal was stolen, he is [still] a nazirite. But if he had taken the nazirite vow after his animal was stolen, he is not a nazirite. It was this mistake that Nahum the Mede made. When nazirites arrived [in Jerusalem] from the Diaspora and found the Temple destroyed, Nahum the Mede said to them, “Had you known that the Temple would be destroyed, would you have become nazirites?” They answered, no, and Nahum the Mede released them [from their vow]. When the matter came before the sages they said to him: whoever vowed a nazirite vow before the destruction of the Temple is a nazirite, but if after the destruction of the temple, he is not a nazirite."
6. Mishnah, Parah, 3.1-3.11 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

3.1. Seven days before the burning of the [red] cow they would separate the priest who was to burn the cow from his house to a chamber that was facing the north-eastern corner of the birah, and which was called the Stone Chamber. They would sprinkle upon him throughout the seven days with [a mixture of] all the sin-offerings that were there. Rabbi Yose said: they sprinkled upon him only on the third and the seventh days. Rabbi Hanina the vice-chief of the priests said: on the priest that was to burn the cow they sprinkled all the seven days, but on the one that was to perform the service on Yom Kippur they sprinkled on the third and the seventh days only." 3.2. Courtyards were built in Jerusalem over rock, and beneath them there was a hollow which served as a protection against a grave in the depths. And they used to bring there pregt women, and there they gave birth to their children and there they raised them. And they brought oxen, upon whose backs were placed doors, and the children sat upon them with stone cups in their hands. When they reached the Shiloah spring they got down and filled the cups with water and then they ascended and sat again on the doors. Rabbi Yose said: each child used to let down his cup and fill it from his place." 3.3. They arrived at the Temple Mount and got down. Beneath the Temple Mount and the courts was a hollow which served as a protection against a grave in the depths. And at the entrance of the courtyard there was the jar of the ashes of the sin-offerings. They would bring a male from among the sheep and tie a rope between its horns, and a stick or a bushy twig was tied at the other end of the rope, and this was thrown into the jar. They then struck the male [sheep] was so that it started backwards. And [a child] took the ashes and put it [enough] so that it could be seen upon the water. Rabbi Yose said: do not give the Sadducees an opportunity to rule! Rather, [a child] himself took it and mixed it." 3.4. One may not bring a sin-offering by virtue of [the purifications made for] another sin-offering, nor one child by virtue of [the preparations made for] another. The children had to be sprinkle on each other, the words of Rabbi Yose the Galilean. Rabbi Akiva says: they did not need to sprinkle." 3.5. If they did not find the residue of the ashes of the seven [red cows] they performed the sprinkling with those of six, of five, of four, of three, of two or of one. And who prepared these? Moses prepared the first, Ezra prepared the second, and five were prepared from the time of Ezra, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say: seven from the time of Ezra. And who prepared them? Shimon the Just and Yoha the high priest prepared two; Elihoenai the son of Ha-Kof and Hanamel the Egyptian and Ishmael the son of Piabi prepared one each." 3.6. They made a ramp from the Temple Mount to the Mount of Olives, being constructed of arches above arches, each arch placed directly above each foundation [of the arch below] as a protection against a grave in the depths, whereby the priest who was to burn the cow, the cow itself and all who aided in its preparation went forth to the Mount of olives." 3.7. If the cow refused to go out, they may not take out with it a black one lest people say, \"They slaughtered a black cow\" nor another red [cow] lest people say, \"They slaughtered two.\" Rabbi Yose says: it was not for this reason but because it is said \"And he shall bring her out\" by herself. The elders of Israel used to go first by foot to the Mount of Olives, where there was a place of immersion. The priest that was to burn the cow was (deliberately) made unclean on account of the Sadducees so that they should not be able to say, \"It can be done only by those on whom the sun has set.\"" 3.8. They laid their hands upon him and said, \"My Lord the high priest, perform immersion once.\" He went down and immersed himself and came up and dried himself. Different kinds of wood were set in order there: cedar wood, pine, spruce and the wood of smooth fig trees. They made it in the shape of a tower and opened air holes in it; and its foreside was turned towards the west." 3.9. They bound it with a rope of reed and placed it on the pile with its head towards the south and its face towards the west. The priest stood in the east with his face towards the west. He slaughtered with his right hand and received the blood with his left. Rabbi Judah said: he received the blood with his right hand and put it in his left hand. He sprinkled with his right. Seven times he dipped his finger in the blood and sprinkled it towards the Holy of Holies, dipping once again for each sprinkling. When he finished the sprinkling he wiped his hand on the body of the cow, came down and kindled the fire with wood chips. Rabbi Akiva said: with dry branches of palm-trees." 3.10. It burst and he stood outside its pit and he took the cedar wood, hyssop and scarlet wool. He said to them, \"Is this cedarwood? Is this cedarwood?\" \"Is this hyssop? Is this hyssop?\" \"Is this scarlet wool? Is this scarlet wool?\" Three times he repeated each question and they answered him \"Yes, yes\"three times to each question." 3.11. He then wrapped them together with the remains of the strip of wool and cast them into the fire. When it was burnt up they would beat it with sticks and then sift it with sieves. Rabbi Ishmael says: this was done with stone hammers and stone sieves. If there was a black coal on which there were some ashes they would crush it but if there were no [ashes] they would leave it. A bone was crushed in either case. It was then divided into three parts: one part was deposited on the hel, one on the Mount of Olives, and one was divided among the priestly watches."
7. Mishnah, Rosh Hashanah, 2.5-2.6, 4.1, 4.3-4.4 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

2.5. There was a large courtyard in Jerusalem, and it was called Bet Yazek. There all the witnesses used to assemble and the court would examine them there. They would make large feasts for them there so that they would have an incentive to come. Originally they used not to leave the place the whole day, but Rabban Gamaliel decreed that they could go two thousand cubits from it in any direction. And these were not the only ones [who could go two thousand cubits in any direction], but also a midwife who has come to deliver a child, or one who comes to rescue from a fire or from bandits or from a river in flood or from a building that has fallen in all these are like residents of the town, and may go two thousand cubits [on Shabbat] in any direction." 2.6. How do they test the witnesses?The pair which arrives first, they test them first. They bring in the older of them and they say to him, “Tell us, how did you see the moon in front of the sun or behind the sun? To the north of it or to the south? How high was it, and in which direction was it inclined? And how broad was it?” If he says [he saw it] in front of the sun, his evidence is rejected. After that they would bring in the second and test him. If their accounts were the same, their evidence was accepted. And the other pairs were only questioned briefly, not because they were required at all, but so that they should not go out disappointed, so that they would be regular in coming [to testify]." 4.1. If Yom Tov of Rosh Hashanah fell on Shabbat, they would blow the shofar in the Temple but not in the country. After the destruction of the Temple, Rabban Yoha ben Zakai decreed that it should be blown [on Shabbat] in every place where there was a court. Rabbi Eliezer said: Rabban Yoha ben Zakai decreed for Yavneh only. They said to him: both Yavneh and any place where there is a court." 4.3. In earlier times the lulav was taken for seven days in the Temple, and in the provinces for one day only. When the temple was destroyed, Rabbi Yoha ben Zakkai decreed that the lulav should be taken in the provinces for seven days in memory of the Temple, [He also decreed] that on the whole of the day of waving it be forbidden [to eat the new produce]." 4.4. Originally they used to accept testimony with regard to the new moon during the whole day. On one occasion the witnesses were late in arriving, and the Levites went wrong in the daily hymn. They therefore decreed that testimony should be accepted only until the afternoon [sacrifice]. If witnesses came after the afternoon sacrifice that day should be kept as holy and also the next day. After the destruction of the temple Rabban Yoha ben Zakkai decreed that testimony with regard to the new moon should be received during the whole day. Rabbi Joshua ben Korha said: this further did Rabbi Yoha ben Zakkai decree, that not matter where the head of the court might be, the witnesses should have to go only to the place of the assembly."
8. Mishnah, Sotah, 9.9, 9.12, 9.15 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

9.9. When murderers multiplied, the [ceremony of] breaking a heifer’s neck ceased. That was from the time of Eliezer ben Dinai, and he was also called Tehinah ben Perisha and he was afterwards renamed “son of the murderer”. When adulterers multiplied, the ceremony of the bitter waters ceased and it was Rabban Yoha ben Zakkai who discontinued it, as it is said, “I will not punish their daughters for fornicating, nor their daughters-in-law for committing adultery, for they themselves [turn aside with whores and sacrifice with prostitutes]” (Hosea 4:14). When Yose ben Yoezer of Zeredah and Yose ben Yoha of Jerusalem died, the grape-clusters ceased, as it is said, “There is not a cluster [of grapes] to eat; not a ripe fig I could desire [The pious are vanished from the land, none upright are left among men” (Micah 7:1-2)." 9.12. When the former prophets died, the Urim and Thummim ceased. When Temple was destroyed, the shamir and nopheth zufim ceased. And people of faith ceased, as it says, “Help, O Lord, for the faithful are no more” (Psalms 12:2). Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel in the name of Rabbi Joshua: from the day the Temple was destroyed, there is no day without a curse, the dew has not descended for a blessing, and the flavor has departed from produce. Rabbi Yose says: the fatness was also removed from produce." 9.15. When Rabbi Meir died, the composers of fables ceased. When Ben Azzai died, the diligent students [of Torah] ceased. When Ben Zoma died, the expounders ceased. When Rabbi Joshua died, goodness ceased from the world. When Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel died, locusts come and troubles multiplied. When Rabbi Elazar ben Azaryah died, the sages ceased to be wealthy. When Rabbi Akiba died, the glory of the Torah ceased. When Rabbi Hanina ben Dosa died, men of wondrous deeds ceased. When Rabbi Yose Katnuta died, the pious men (hasidim) ceased and why was his name called Katnuta? Because he was the youngest of the pious men. When Rabban Yoha ben Zakkai died, the splendor of wisdom ceased. When Rabban Gamaliel the elder died, the glory of the torah ceased, and purity and separateness perished. When Rabbi Ishmael ben Fabi died, the splendor of the priesthood ceased. When Rabbi died, humility and fear of sin ceased. Rabbi Phineas ben Yair says: when Temple was destroyed, scholars and freemen were ashamed and covered their head, men of wondrous deeds were disregarded, and violent men and big talkers grew powerful. And nobody expounds, nobody seeks, and nobody asks. Upon whom shall we depend? Upon our father who is in heaven. Rabbi Eliezer the Great says: from the day the Temple was destroyed, the sages began to be like scribes, scribes like synagogue-attendants, synagogue-attendants like common people, and the common people became more and more debased. And nobody seeks. Upon whom shall we depend? Upon our father who is in heaven. In the footsteps of the messiah insolence (hutzpah) will increase and the cost of living will go up greatly; the vine will yield its fruit, but wine will be expensive; the government will turn to heresy, and there will be no one to rebuke; the meeting-place [of scholars] will be used for licentiousness; the Galilee will be destroyed, the Gablan will be desolated, and the dwellers on the frontier will go about [begging] from place to place without anyone to take pity on them; the wisdom of the learned will rot, fearers of sin will be despised, and the truth will be lacking; youths will put old men to shame, the old will stand up in the presence of the young, “For son spurns father, daughter rises up against mother, daughter-in-law against mother-in-law a man’s own household are his enemies” (Micah 7:6). The face of the generation will be like the face of a dog, a son will not feel ashamed before his father. Upon whom shall we depend? Upon our father who is in heaven. Rabbi Pinchas ben Yair says, “Heedfulness leads to cleanliness, cleanliness leads to purity, purity leads to separation, separation leads to holiness, holiness leads to modesty, modesty leads to fear of sin, fear of sin leads to piety, piety leads to the Holy Spirit, The Holy Spirit leads to the resurrection of the dead, and the resurrection of the dead comes from Elijah, blessed be his memory, Amen.”"
9. Mishnah, Sukkah, 3.12, 4.4 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

3.12. In earlier times the lulav was taken for seven days in the Temple, and in the provinces for one day only. When the temple was destroyed, Rabbi Yoha ben Zakkai decreed that the lulav should be taken in the provinces for seven days in memory of the Temple, [He also decreed] that on the whole of the day of waving it be forbidden [to eat the new produce]." 4.4. The mitzvah of the lulav how was it carried out? If the first day of the festival fell on Shabbat, they brought their lulavim to the Temple Mount, and the attendants would receive them and arrange them on top of the portico, and the elders laid theirs in the chamber. And they would teach the people to say, “Whoever gets my lulav in his hand, let it be his as a gift.” The next day they got up early, and came [to the Temple Mount] and the attendants threw down [their lulavim] before them, and they snatched at them, and so they used to come to blows with one another. When the court saw that they reached a state of danger, they instituted that each man should take [his lulav] in his own home."
10. Mishnah, Taanit, 2.1-2.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

2.1. What is the order [of service] for fast days?They take the ark out to the open space of the city. And they put ashes on the ark and on the head of the Nasi and on the head of the head of the court (av bet. And everyone [else] puts ashes on his own head. The elder among them says in front of them words of admonition, “Brothers, it does not say of the people of Nineveh, ‘And God saw their sackcloth and their fasting,’ but, ‘And God saw their deeds, for they turned from their evil way. (Jonah 3:10)’ And in the prophets it says, ‘And rend your heart and not your garments” (Joel 2:13)." 2.2. [When] they stand up to pray they bring down before the ark an old man conversant [with the prayers], one who has children and whose house is empty [of food], so that his heart is complete prayer. He recites before them twenty-four benedictions, the eighteen recited daily, to which he adds six." 2.3. These are they [the six additional benedictions:Zikhronot,“If there is famine in the land, if there is pestilence” (I Kings 8:37). Shofarot,“The word of the Lord which came to Jeremiah concerning the droughts” (Jeremiah. “In my distress I called to the Lord and He answered me” (Psalm. “I turn my eyes to the mountains” (Psalm. “Out of the depths I call you, O Lord” (Psalm. “A prayer of lowly man when he is faint” (Psalm. Rabbi Judah says: he need not recite the zikhronot and shofarot, but instead he should recite [the following]: And he ends each [of the additional six] sections with its appropriate concluding benediction." 2.4. For the first he says: He who answered Abraham on Mt. Moriah, He shall answer you and hear the voice of your cry on this day. Blessed are You Lord who redeems Israel. For the second he says: He who answered our fathers at the Sea of Reeds, He shall answer you and hear the voice of your cry on this day. Blessed are You Lord who remembers all forgotten things. For the third he says: He who answered Joshua in Gilgal, He shall answer you and hear the voice of your cry on this day. Blessed are You Lord who hears a blast. For the fourth he says: He who answered Shmuel in Mitzpah, He shall answer you and hear the voice of your cry on this day. Blessed are You Lord who listens to cries. For the fifth he says: He who answered Elijah on Mt. Carmel, He shall answer you and hear the voice of your cry on this day. Blessed are You Lord who hears prayer. For the sixth he says: He who answered Jonah in the belly of the fish, He shall answer you and hear the voice of your cry on this day. Blessed are You Lord who answers in time of trouble. For the seventh he says: He who answered David and Shlomo his son in Jerusalem, He shall answer you and hear the voice of your cry on this day. Blessed are You Lord Who has mercy upon the land. 2.5. It happened in the days of Rabbi Halafta and Rabbi Hanina ben Tradyon that a man passed before the ark [as shaliah tzibbur] and completed the entire benediction and they did not respond, “amen.” [The hazzan called out]: Sound a tekiah, priests, sound a tekiah. [The shaliah tzibbur continued]: He who answered Abraham on Mt. Moriah, He shall answer you and hear the voice of your cry on this day. Then [the hazzan called out]: Sound a teru'ah, sons of Aaron, sound a teru'ah. [The shaliah tzibbur continued]: He who answered our fathers at the Sea of Reeds, He shall answer you and hear the voice of your cry on this day. And when the matter came up before the sages, they said: they only practiced in this way at the eastern gates on the Temple Mount."
11. Mishnah, Tamid, 7.4 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

7.4. The following are the psalms that were chanted in the Temple.On the first day they used to say, “The earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof, the world and they that dwell therein” (Psalms. On the second day they used to say: “Great is the Lord and highly to be praised, in the city of our God. His holy mountain” (Psalms. On the third day they used to say: “God stands in the congregation of God, in the midst of the judges he judges” (Psalms. On the fourth day they used to say: “O Lord, God to whom vengeance belongs. God to whom vengeance belongs, shine forth” (Psalms. On the fifth day they used to say: “Sing aloud unto God our strength, shout unto the God of Jacob” (Psalms. On the sixth day they used to say: “The lord reigns, he is clothed in majesty, the Lord is clothed, He has girded himself with strength” (Psalms. On Shabbat they used to say: “A psalm, a song for the Sabbath day” (Psalms. A psalm, a song for the time to come, for the day that will be all Shabbat and rest for everlasting life. Congratulations! We have finished Tractate Tamid! It is a tradition at this point to thank God for helping us finish learning the tractate and to commit ourselves to going back and relearning it, so that we may not forget it and so that its lessons will stay with us for all of our lives. Tamid may have been one of the more unusual tractates that we have ever learned. Instead of disputes between sages, heaps of logic and laws, we get an intricate description of the Temple service. Indeed, although the language is clearly rabbinic Hebrew, its descriptive style is more characteristic of the Bible than of rabbinic literature. It is likely that these descriptions, or at least parts thereof, come from Temple times. They were preserved because the rabbis fervently hoped that the Temple would be rebuilt during their own lifetimes. While we may or may not share in this wish, I think we can all appreciate the respect in which they held this ceremony. Despite the fact that it was performed each and every day, twice every day, they don’t seem to have lost their sense of wonder at the intimate connection that they received with God through the sacrificial process. I hope you have enjoyed Tamid. Tomorrow we begin Tractate Middot (the last tractate in Seder Kodashim!)."
12. Mishnah, Yoma, 1.3-1.5, 2.2 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)

1.3. They delivered to him elders from the elders of the court and they read before him [throughout the seven days] from the order of the day. And they say to him, “Sir, high priest, you read it yourself with your own mouth, lest you have forgotten or lest you have never learned.” On the eve of Yom HaKippurim in the morning they place him at the eastern gate and pass before him oxen, rams and sheep, so that he may recognize and become familiar with the service." 1.4. All seven days they did not withhold food or drink from him. On the eve of Yom HaKippurim near nightfall they would not let him eat much because food brings about sleep." 1.5. The elders of the court handed him over to the elders of the priesthood and they took him up to the upper chamber of the house of Avtinas. They adjured him and then left. And they said to him [when leaving]: “Sir, high priest, we are messengers of the court and you are our messenger and the messenger of the court. We adjure you by the one that caused His name dwell in this house that you do not change anything of what we said to you.” He turned aside and wept and they turned aside and wept." 2.2. Section one: It once happened that two were even as they ran up the ramp, and one of them pushed his fellow who fell and broke his leg. When the court saw that they incurred danger, they decreed that they would remove the ashes from only by a count. Section two: There were four counts. This is the first count."
13. Tosefta, Rosh Hashanah, 2.9 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

14. Tosefta, Shevuot, 1.4 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)

15. Babylonian Talmud, Yoma, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)

22a. מתני׳ big strongבראשונה /strong /big כל מי שרוצה לתרום את המזבח תורם ובזמן שהן מרובין רצין ועולין בכבש כל הקודם את חבירו בארבע אמות זכה ואם היו שניהן שוין הממונה אומר להן הצביעו,ומה הן מוציאין אחת או שתים ואין מוציאין אגודל במקדש,מעשה שהיו שניהם שוין ורצין ועולין בכבש ודחף אחד מהן את חבירו ונפל ונשברה רגלו וכיון שראו בית דין שבאין לידי סכנה התקינו שלא יהו תורמין את המזבח אלא בפייס ארבע פייסות היו שם וזה הפייס הראשון, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big והא מעיקרא מאי טעמא לא תקינו לה רבנן פייסא מעיקרא סבור כיון דעבודת לילה היא לא חשיבא להו ולא אתו כיון דחזו דקאתו ואתו לידי סכנה תקינו לה פייסא,והרי איברים ופדרים דעבודת לילה היא ותקינו לה רבנן פייסא סוף עבודה דיממא היא,האי נמי תחלת עבודה דיממא היא דאמר ר' יוחנן קידש ידיו לתרומת הדשן למחר אין צריך לקדש שכבר קידש מתחילת עבודה,אימא שכבר קידש מתחילה לעבודה,איכא דאמרי מעיקרא סבור כיון דאיכא אונס שינה לא אתו כיון דחזו דאתו וקאתו נמי לידי סכנה תקינו לה רבנן פייסא והרי איברים ופדרים דאיכא אונס שינה ותקינו לה רבנן פייסא שאני מיגנא ממיקם,ותקנתא להך גיסא הואי תקנתא להאי גיסא הואי דתניא מי שזכה בתרומת הדשן (יזכה) בסידור מערכה ובשני גזירי עצים,אמר רב אשי שתי תקנות הוו מעיקרא סבור לא אתו כיון דחזו דקאתו ואתו נמי לידי סכנה תקינו לה פייסא כיון דתקינו לה פייסא לא אתו אמרי מי יימר דמתרמי לן הדר תקינו להו מי שזכה בתרומת הדשן יזכה בסידור מערכה ובשני גזירי עצים כי היכי דניתו וניפייסו,ובזמן שהן מרובין וכו' אמר רב פפא פשיטא לי ארבע אמות דארעא לא רצין ועולין בכבש תנן קמייתא נמי לא רצין ועולין בכבש תנן והדר כל הקודם את חבירו,דביני ביני נמי לא דלא מסיימא מילתא פשיטא לי דגבי מזבח תנן,בעי רב פפא ארבע אמות שאמרו בהדיה אמה יסוד ואמה סובב 22a. strongMISHNA: /strong bInitially,the practice among the priests was that bwhoever wishes to removethe ashes from bthe altar removes them. And when there are manypriests who wish to perform that task, the privilege to do so is determined by a race: The priests brun and ascend on the rampleading to the top of the altar. bAnypriest bwho precedes anotherand reaches within bfour cubitsof the top of the altar first bis privilegedto remove the ashes. bAnd if both of them were equaland neither preceded the other, bthe appointedpriest says to all the priests: bExtendyour bfingers,and a lottery was performed, as will be explained., bAnd whatfingers bdo they extendfor the lottery? They may extend bone or twofingers, bandthe priests bdo not extend a thumb in the Temple.The reason is that the lottery was conducted by the appointee choosing a number and counting the extended fingers of the priests standing in a circle. As the count progressed, a priest could calculate and manipulate the result in his favor by surreptitiously extending his thumb and an additional finger. Since there is separation between the thumb and the forefinger it could appear as though they belonged to two different priests, skewing the results of the lottery.,Initially, that was the procedure; however, ban incidentoccurred bwhere both of them were equalas they were brunning and ascending on the ramp, and one of them shoved another and he fell and his leg was broken. And once the court saw thatpeople bwere coming topotential bdanger, they instituted thatpriests bwould removeashes from bthe altar onlyby means bof a lottery. There were four lotteries there,in the Temple, on a daily basis to determine the priests privileged to perform the various services, band this,determining which priest would remove the ashes, was bthe first lottery. /b, strongGEMARA: /strong The Gemara questions the original practice of holding a race to determine which priest would remove the ashes: bAnd what is the reason that the Sages did not initially institute a lottery forthe removal of the ashes as they did for other parts of the service? The Gemara answers: bInitiallythey bthought:Since it is ba serviceperformed bat night it would not be important tothe priests, and bnotmany of them would bcometo perform it, so a lottery would be unnecessary. Then, bwhen they saw thatmany priests bdidindeed bcome andthat bthey were coming to dangerby racing up the altar’s ramp, bthey instituted a lottery. /b,The Gemara poses a question against the assertion that nighttime Temple services did not normally require a lottery: bBut there isthe burning of the blimbsof burnt-offerings band the fatsof other offerings, bwhich is a servicethat is performed at bnight, andnevertheless bthe Sages instituted a lotteryfor that from the outset. The Gemara answers: The burning of those parts is not considered a nighttime service but bthe end of a daytime service,as the main part of the sacrificial service, the slaughtering and the sprinkling of blood, took place during the day.,The Gemara asks: If so, it could be argued that bthisservice of removing the ashes is balsonot a nighttime service but bthe start of a daytime service, as Rabbi Yoḥa said:If a priest has bsanctified his handsat night by washing them bfor the removal of the ashes, the next day,i.e., after daybreak, if he remained in the confines of the Temple, bhe need not sanctifyhis hands again, bbecause he already sanctifiedthem bat the start of the service.Apparently, the removal of the ashes, though performed at night, is considered the start of the next day’s service.,The Gemara responds by emending Rabbi Yoḥa’s statement: bSaythe following version of the end of Rabbi Yoḥa’s statement: bBecause he had already sanctifiedthem bat the outset for service.According to this formulation, Rabbi Yoḥa did not say that the removal of the ashes is considered the start of the following day’s service. Rather, he said that although the removal of the ashes is a nighttime service, since the priest sanctified his hands before performing that service, the sanctification remains in effect for the services performed after daybreak as well, since there is no interruption between the two activities., bSome saythat the original practice should be explained as follows: bInitially,the Sages bthoughtthat bsince there isa likelihood of being bovercome by sleepat that time of night, bnotmany priests bwould come. When they saw that they didindeed bcome andthat bthey were also coming to danger, the Sages instituted a lotteryfor this task. The Gemara asks: bBut there isthe burning of the blimbsof burnt-offerings band the fatsof other offerings, a service for bwhich there isthe same likelihood of being bovercome by sleep,and nevertheless bthe Sages instituted a lotteryfor that from the outset. The Gemara answers: bLying downto go to sleep late bis different from risingin the middle of the night. It is not as difficult to stay up late in order to burn limbs on the altar as it is to rise before dawn to remove the ashes from the altar.,The Gemara addresses the substance of the mishna’s claim: bBut was the ordiceto assign the removal of ashes by means of a lottery bdue to that reasoncited in the mishna, the matter of the dangerous incident? bThe ordicewas instituted bdue to this reason:There were other important tasks associated with the removal of the ashes that required a lottery in their own right, bas it was taughtin a ibaraita /i: The priest bwho was privileged toperform bthe removal of the ashes wasalso bprivileged with laying out the arrangement of woodon the altar and with placing bthe two logsthat were placed on the altar each morning. Since these were inherently important tasks, the only way to assign them was through a lottery, which would also determine who removed the ashes.,The Gemara answers: bRav Ashi said: There were twoseparate bordicesinstituted. bInitially,the Sages bthoughtthat priests bwould notcome forward to perform the task of removing the ashes. bOnce they saw thatmany priests bdid come andthat bthey were also coming to danger,the Sages binstituted a lotteryfor this task. bOnce they established a lotteryfor removing the ashes, the priests bdid not comeanymore. bThey said: Who saysthe lottery bwill fall in our favor?Therefore, they did not bother to come. bThenthe Sages binstituted forthe priests that bwhoever was privileged withperforming bthe removal of the ashes wouldalso bbe privileged with laying out the arrangement of woodon the altar and with placing the btwo logs, so thatthe importance of all these tasks combined would ensure that the priests bwould come and participate in the lottery. /b,§ It was taught in the mishna that before the lottery was instituted, bwhen there were manypriests who sought to perform the removal of the ashes, the first priest to reach within four cubits of the top of the altar was privileged with performing the removal of the ashes. bRav Pappa said:It is bobvious to methat the bfour cubitsthe mishna is referring to are not the four cubits adjacent to the ramp bon the ground,because bwe learnedin the mishna that the priests brun and ascend on the ramp,and not adjacent to the ramp. It is balso notreferring to the bfirstfour cubits from the foot of the ramp, because bwe learnedthat the priests brun and ascend on the ramp, and only afterwardit says: bAnypriest bwho precedes anotherand reaches within four cubits of the altar first, indicating that the competition begins only once they have ascended the ramp to some extent.,It is balso notreferring to four cubits somewhere in the bmiddle,between the four on the bottom and the top of the altar, because bthe matter is not definedand there is no clear indication which four cubits on the ramp are the determining cubits. In light of all this, it is bobvious to methat the four cubits bwe learnedin the mishna are referring to the four cubits bthat are adjacent to the altaritself. The priest who reaches those four cubits first is the one privileged to remove the ashes.,Rav Pappa braised a dilemmabased on the above clarification: Are the bfour cubits that they stated,which are the four cubits adjacent to the altar, calculated bincluding the cubit of the baseof the altar band the cubit ofits bledge,as the ramp continues and overlaps these two cubits at the top of the altar


Subjects of this text:

subject book bibliographic info
amitai, ori Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 256
baraitot, altar fall Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 261
bavli, water libation ritual Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 261
bereshit rabba Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 256
berkowitz, beth Cohn, The Memory of the Temple and the Making of the Rabbis (2013) 166
bible, bible, rewritten, Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 261
boethusians, water libation Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 261
boethusians Cohn, The Memory of the Temple and the Making of the Rabbis (2013) 169
boyarin, daniel, border lines Cohn, The Memory of the Temple and the Making of the Rabbis (2013) 169
court, the Cohn, The Memory of the Temple and the Making of the Rabbis (2013) 45
day of atonement narrative, and court authority Cohn, The Memory of the Temple and the Making of the Rabbis (2013) 45
destruction Putthoff, Ontological Aspects of Early Jewish Anthropology (2016) 151
drink Putthoff, Ontological Aspects of Early Jewish Anthropology (2016) 151
elijah Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 256
goldberg, abraham' "278.0_256.0@honi hame'agel" Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 261
halakhah, priestly Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 261
halakhah/halakhot, and aggadah; law and narrative Fraade, Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages (2011) 251
hekhalot Putthoff, Ontological Aspects of Early Jewish Anthropology (2016) 151
honi hame'agel, and elijah" '278.0_256.0@parma scholium Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 256
honi hame'agel rabbinic boundaries" Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 256
interpretation—see also midrash Fraade, Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages (2011) 251
israel Putthoff, Ontological Aspects of Early Jewish Anthropology (2016) 151
law, biblical/rabbinic—see also, halakhah Fraade, Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages (2011) 251
mourning Putthoff, Ontological Aspects of Early Jewish Anthropology (2016) 151
narrative crafting Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 261
patriarchs, texts Fraade, Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages (2011) 251
peikta de rav kahanah Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 256
prayer Fraade, Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages (2011) 251
priests, and sects Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 261
qumran/qumran community Fraade, Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages (2011) 251
rabbis, the Fraade, Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages (2011) 251
redaction, honi story Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 256
rubenstein, jeffery, water libation ritual Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 261
rubenstein, jeffery Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 261
sadducees, water libation Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 261
sadducees Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 261
sectarians, water libation Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 261
sectarians Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 261
shemot rabba Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 256
sifrei Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 261
simeon ben shetah, r. Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 256
simeon the just, r. Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 256
tamid Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 261
tannaim, yoma editing Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 261
taqqanot Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 261
temple Putthoff, Ontological Aspects of Early Jewish Anthropology (2016) 151
torah' Fraade, Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages (2011) 251
tosefta, water libation ritual Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 261
vayikra rabba Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 256
walfish, avraham Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 256
water libation story Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 261
yerushalmi, adar Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 256
yerushalmi, honi hameagel Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 256
yerushalmi, samaritan fires Simon-Shushan, Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna (2012) 261
zion Putthoff, Ontological Aspects of Early Jewish Anthropology (2016) 151