Yoma 26: Sadducee Priests and the Water Libation

For the source text click/tap here: Yoma 26

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The Gemara sees this as a proof that the nisukh ha-mayim was done in the morning, since the people were all carrying their etrogim.The background to this story involves the different sects that lived during the second Temple period and their approaches to the Oral Law taught by the Sages.Many of the kohanim were Tzedukim, who did not accept the traditions of the Sages. Unlike nisukh ha-yayin – the wine libation –which is clearly written in the Torah, the nisukh ha-mayim – the water libation – was a tradition handed down from Moshe on Mount Sinai, and it was not accepted by the Tzedukim.

The particular story referred to in our Gemara, is described in great length in Josephus. According to him, the individual who poured the water on his feet rather than on the altar was a Hasmonean king, AlexanderYannai, who rejected the teaching of the Sages. After the people – who supported the interpretation of the Sages – pelted him with etrogim, the king summoned the non-Jewish guard, and they killed many of the people who were on the Temple grounds.

Yoma 25: Kiyor

For the source text click/tap here: Yoma 25

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Our Daf Yoma 25 inquires: Who receives the blood? Do we say that he who slaughtered it receives it, for if you were to say that the one who throws the blood receives it, perhaps in his enthusiasm (to throw the blood), he may not receive the whole blood; or does the thrower receive it, for if you were to say that he who slaughters the animal receives the blood, occasionally a non-Kohen slaughters the animal?

The Gemora resolves this from the following braisa:

B Ben Katin made twelve spouts for the Kiyor, so that his twelve brethren, the Kohanim, who are involved with the tamid offering, may simultaneously wash their hands and feet. Now, if you were to think that he who slaughters the animal also receives its blood, there would be thirteen. Must we not therefore infer from there that he who throws the blood receives the blood? This indeed proves it.

We will be meeting this Ben Katin in the next perek but for now we examine the Kiyor and its metaphorical significance for our spiritual journey.

Yoma 24: Commotion on the Floor

For the source text click/tap here: Yoma 24

To download, click/tap here: PDF

בְּרָֽגֶשׁ : an ambivalent expression to say the least!

The term is used alternatively translated as thong, multitude, bustle, restlessness, company and excitement and feeling and even “fear and dread”!

In our daf Why do they make a lottery and then return to make another lottery?

R’ Yochanan said that it was to cause a commotion in the Azarah, as the pasuk ( Ps 55:15) states: Together we take sweet counsel, In the house of Hashem we walk with excitement. (Beregesh)

This leads to the NETZIV's psychological insight into commotion as distracting the KG and its going to his head....

Yoma 23: Murder on the (Oriental) Altar Ramp

For the source text click/tap here: Yoma 23

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Our Daf (Yoma 23) cites a braisa: It once happened that two Kohanim were even as they ran and ascended the ramp, and when one of them came first within four amos of the altar, the other took a knife and thrust it into his heart. The father of the boy, i.e., the young priest who was stabbed, came, and found that he was still convulsing. He said: May my son's death be an atonement for you. But my son is still convulsing and has not yet died, and as such, the knife, which is in his body, has not become ritually impure through contact with a corpse. If you remove it promptly, it will still be pure for future use. The Tosefta comments: This incident comes to teach you that the ritual purity of utensils was of more concern to them than the shedding of blood. Even the boy's father voiced more concern over the purity of the knife than over the death of his child.

We explore this horrific tale from the perspective of the Tosefta as well as modern feminist literary perspectives.

Yoma 22: Census and Censure

For the source text click/tap here: Yoma 22

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The Mishnah discusses the Payis, the drawing of the lots, that was performed each day in order to select the Kohen who would perform the Terumas ha'Deshen. The Mishna on our daf teaches that there was a race every morning in the Temple, as all of the kohanim interested in performing the terumat ha-deshen would line up and race up the ramp to the top of the altar. The one who arrived first had the honor of cleaning the ash. Due to injury the lottery was instituted.

This leads to an objection in counting the priests since It is prohibited to count Jews directly, even for the purposes of a mitzva, as it is written concerning King Saul and his count of his soldiers.

Bringing us to a discussion of the Census Taboo and the resistance even in the modern State of Israel to census compliance by the gedolim...

Yoma 21: Ten Miracles

For the source text click/tap here: Yoma 21

To download, click/tap here: PDF

It is so ironic we learn about the miracle of the expanding space of the temple following the tragedy of Meron where people were crushed …..may their memory be for a blessing...

Rav Yehuda said in the name of Rav, “When they stood, they were extremely crowded, but when they bowed down they had a lot of room.”

This was one of the ten miracles that that Hashem did in the era of the First Beit Hamikdash — some of which were in the Beit Hamikdash and some of which were in Jerusalem. The mishna in Pirkei Avot (5:5) lists all ten miracles. The one referenced on our daf is the miracle that “They stood crowded but had ample space in which to prostrate themselves.”

Although these are all described as miracles, in his commentary on Aggada, Shem-Tov ibn Shaprut argues that they can all be explained rationally.

Yoma 20: The Sounds of Gavini and Silence

For the source text click/tap here: Yoma 20

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Our Daf is concerned with the Temple Crier gavini who could be heard 3 parssangs (8miles) from the Temple. The mishna (Tamid) speaks of 6 sounds that could also be heard that far emanating from the Temple. Even Agrippa was so enamored he sent him gifts! To which Rabbi Levi comments on a verse from Daniel to prove why sound carries less by day than by night.

Leading us to examine the "Luxembourg effect" as well as a recent contemporary exhibit on sound and silence.

While studying this daf, the memories of Simon and Garfunkel's "Sounds of Silence" inexplicably haunted me, as I followed the horrific news of the tragedy in Meron.

In the iconic lyric: Hello darkness, my old friend / I’ve come to talk with you again. The author has no one to talk to but the dark, to whom he tells, almost like a confession, about a dream he had. The first theme of the ‘vision’ is loneliness: the narrator finds himself walking alone on a narrow path, when the cold night is suddenly lit up by the flash of a neon light; he is dazzled by it, and we are told that the glare is icy, naked and unnatural. The neon conveys an idea of cold modernity, serving as a symbol for present-day industrial society, which has replaced the traditional warmth of the fireplace, bearer of communion and togetherness, with the impersonality of artificial light.

Yoma 19: The Tears of the Elders

For the source text click/tap here: Yoma 19

To download, click/tap here: PDF

When the preparations of the Kohen Gadol were done, he was transferred by the Sages to the priestly elders who had him take an oath that his performance of the service would be done according to the teachings of the Sages. The Mishna concludes that following the oath, both the Kohen Gadol and the elders who executed it turned away and cried.

The Gemara explains: He turned aside and cried due to the indignity that they suspected him of being a Sadducee; and they turned aside and cried, as Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: One who suspects the innocent of indiscretion is afflicted in his body. The High Priest might in fact be beyond reproach and they may have suspected him falsely.

We review how come he had to kept awake all night and the fear of the Sadducean influence...

Yoma 18: Martha bas Boethus

For the source text click/tap here: Yoma 18

To download, click/tap here: PDF

A High Priest may not marry a widow, but Joshua ben Gamla and Martha are an example of a High Priest married to a widow,although he betrothed her prior to becoming a High Priest. It can be assumed that Martha saw to it that her future husband achieved a high position, and perhaps even used her wealth to bring about the change in the halakhah. The Sanhedirn had not approved his appointment.

Marta bat Boethus was from the illustrious Boethus family, a family of high priests known for their wealth and strength. Her name is used in the Talmud to symbolize thep rototypical rich woman. She was, as well, the wife of the Kohen Gadol R.Yehoshua ben Gamla, one of the few high priests from the Second Temple who is remembered positively by the Rabbis. We contrast her with Miriam/Mariamme a similar tragic woman, who was killed by Herod.

Yoma 17: Showbread

For the source text click/tap here: Yoma 17

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The Kohen Gadol receives one of the two loaves that are brought on Shavu'ot and four or five of the loaves of shewbread that is distributed weekly from the shulhan. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi's position is that he always gets five, since he deserves half of the ten loaves that are distributed, based on the passage: Lev 29...

וְהָיְתָה לְאַהֲרֹן וּלְבָנָיו, וַאֲכָלֻהוּ בְּמָקוֹם קָדֹשׁ: כִּי קֹדֶשׁ קָדָשִׁים הוּא לוֹ, מֵאִשֵּׁי יְהוָה--חָק-עוֹלָם.

The Rashash points out that there is support for the idea that the Kohen Gadol received five loaves of the lehem ha-panim from the story related in Sefer Shmuel (21:4) when David is running away from King Sha'ul, and arrives in Nov, the city of kohanim.

David must rely on his wits (that is, falsely represent himself to the priest at Nob) in order to obtain needed food and weapons.

Yoma 16: Defiled Stones of the Altar

For the source text click/tap here: Yoma 16

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Much of our daf  is devoted to a description of the plan of The Temple Mount itself, with detailed descriptions of the area from the Ezrat Yisrael (Court of the Israelites) and south of it. The furthest north that a Jewish person who was not a kohen could enter was the Ezrat Yisrael . Kohanim were allowed in the Ezrat Kohanim (The Priests’ Courtyard), as well.

The Altar was defiled by the Seleucid Greeks when they controlled Eretz Yisroel. Later, the remnants of this Altar were taken and placed into the chamber in the northeast corner of the courtyard.

Those familiar with the story of Hanukkah will remember that after recapturing the Temple from the Greeks, Judah Maccabee and his band purified and rededicated the sanctuary. They also saw that the altar itself had been used to offer impure sacrifices to foreign gods. Could it be purified as well? 

As the stones retained a degree of holiness and could not simply be discarded. Hence: storage in the Temple in a convenient place which, according to the mishnah in Middot, turned out to be a room off of the Hall of the Hearth.

Yoma 15: Tamid/Chirality

For the source text click/tap here: Yoma 15

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Earlier, in describing the order of the day of the High Priest in preparation for Yom Kippur, we mentioned that he would “burn the incense and prepare the Menorah.” We can assume that every day the service follows this order. If so, we have a problem: the order of the service in the Tractate “Tamid,” which is specifically dedicated to Temple procedure , is listed differently: first the Menorah and then the incense.

This leads us to a review of the tamid offering and the comment “what does it matter if he sprinkles first on the northeast corner of the altar and then on the southwest corner? Let him sprinkle first on the southwest corner and then on the northeast corner!

It is because the master said: All turns should be only to the right, to the east, sprinkling that which he encounters first.

What doe the preference to the right (chirality) mean, both culturally and scientifically?

Yoma 14: Para (doxical) Aduma

For the source text click/tap here: Yoma 14

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Our Daf on Yoma 14a records a dispute between Rabbi Akiva and the Sages about the meaning of the opening phrase of Bamidbar Chapter 19, verse 19:

והזה הטהור על הטמא

“And the pure will sprinkle on the impure”

According to the Sages, this means that Red Heifer Ash-water loses its spiritual and halakhic potency on something which is incapable of becoming impure.

According to Rabbi Akiva, it means that sprinkling Red Heifer Ash-water on a tamei person makes them tahor, but the person sprinkling becomes tamei.

The Rabbis object to Rabbi Akiva’s argument – isn’t this needlessly paradoxical, they ask? Even if your reading makes sense in the text, shouldn’t we prefer an interpretation that fits with reason?

The struggle between Rabbi Akiva and the sages as to the rational vs textual origin of the Para Aduma is reflected in the chassidic non-rational approach to divine service as reflected in the Chok of Para Aduma as a paradigm for the whole torah.

These Rebbes have redefined the notion of Torah study in the spirit of the Baal Shem Tov.

No longer is the study a mere intellectual approach sufficient. They have raised the stakes of Torah learning to include a mystical inclusion of study and access to the inner light that was hidden for the righteous in the future (midrash) and as explained by the Baal Shem Tov, accessible to the righteous of every generation (not merely for the messianic future) since it is hidden in the Torah.

What are these parts? They do not instruct us how to learn with these tools of the non-rational mind. I can only imagine from two examples.

The first is listening to music. The mind analyzes a complex Bach fugue for its mathematical simplicity and complexity, its genius for troping on the Well-Tempered octave, but at the end of the day the non-dominant hemisphere takes sheer pleasure in listening to the piece without musical analysis.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdD_QygwRuY

The second example is a love poem. As much as I may analyze the song of songs for its literary marvel, its symmetry, its use of metaphor and metimony at the end of the day I am moved by the sheer majesty of the love poem and how it moves me emotionally.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGorjBVag0I

Yoma 13: Marital Contingency Plans

For the source text click/tap here: Yoma 13

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Just as they prepare a substitute Kohen for the High Priest, so they prepare a substitute wife for him - in the event that his wife will die. Since the Torah said, "He will atone for himself and his house (euphemism for wife)" - he must have one - this is the opinion of Rabbi Yehudah. The Sages, however, say that if so, they would have to prepare another wife, and another wife, and so on, to no end - therefore, conclude the Sages, they don't prepare a second wife for him.

Which leads us to struggle with the rabbinic notion of marriage and high office.

Yoma 12: Benjamin’s Anxiety

For the source text click/tap here: Yoma 12

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Why did Benjamin merit the reposing of the Shechinah in his portion? This may be compared to (the situation of) a king, who visited his sons from time to time. Each one said let him stay with me. The youngest said: Is it possible that father will leave my big brothers and stay with me? — whereupon he was completely crestfallen. His father, seeing him in this state, said: I will eat by you and sleep by him. Thus, the Holy One Blessed be He said: The Temple will be in the portion of Benjamin, and sacrifices offered by all of the tribes. This mashal for me, expresses a deep rabbinic imaginative concern for the fate of the youngest son of Jacob once ensconced in the land of Israel.

We review the rabbinic reasons for splitting the mikdash between Jacob and Benjamin

Yoma 11: Liminal Spaces and Thresholds

For the source text click/tap here: Yoma 11

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Since the Torah said, " Write the words about God on the doorposts of your house and on your gates ," we understand that just as the gates of your house are included, so too the gates of your courtyards, provinces and cities. However, just as a house, it should be inhabited. For example, strictly speaking a synagogue requires a mezuzah only of the sexton lives there.

What about such a gate that is straight at the bottom but oval at the top? Rabbi Meir says that it still needs a mezuzah, while the Sages say that it does not.

All these discussions leads us to an exploration of thresholds and liminal spaces in hilchot mezuzah (and in TS Eliot)

Yoma 10: Sasmagor Worm and Bas Kol

For the source text click/tap here: Yoma 10

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Our Daf asks what rot infests cedar? Ulla said: It is sasmagor, a type of worm. The Gemara asks: What does sasmagor have to do with the Divine Presence during the Second Temple era?

Rabbi Abba said: Just as little remains from a cedar tree infested by this worm, similarly, all that remained from the Divine Presence during the Second Temple period was a bat kol.

Since discussing the worm sasmagor and its effect in destroying the tree yet leaving the appearance on the surface of intactness and wholeness as a metaphor for the bas kol, and the lowering of the level of Schechina manifestation by the time of the second temple… we review Blakes enigmatic poem The Sick Rose…

Yoma 9: Churban Bayis I vs II

For the source text click/tap here: Yoma 09

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The Gemara on our daf discusses the destruction of two Temples, as well as the Mishkan that stood in Shiloh for a period of time after the Jewish people entered the Land of Israel.

Aside from the wars that brought about the physical destruction of the house of God in each of these cases, the Gemara quotes a well-known tosefta that explains the underlying reasons for their destruction. According to the tosefta, the First Temple was destroyed because of the three cardinal sins of idol worship, forbidden sexual relations, and bloodshed that existed during that period.

The Second Temple, however, was destroyed during a period when the people were involved in Torah study and fulfillment of the commandments. In that case, the tosefta explains, the underlying cause for its destruction was the sin’at hinam – wanton hatred – that existed between the people. This leads us to a critical examination of the difference between the two temples.

Yoma 8: Degeneration of Priesthood

For the source text click/tap here: Yoma 08

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The Mishna said that the kohen was sequestered into the Parhedrin chamber. The Gemora cites a braisa in which Rabbi Yehuda says that the original name of the chamber was the chamber of balvati – nobility. However, in later generations, when people would buy the position of kohen gadol, each year a new kohen gadol would arrive and rebuild this chamber. They therefore called it the Parhedrin chamber, in reference to the parhedrin, appointees of the king, who would serve 12 month terms. The term parhedrin referred to a Roman official who was appointed to a position for a single year term. This was commonplace whether the individual was elected by the Senate or if he acquired the position by paying off the right people. Among the officials appointed by this method were those who were responsible for controlling prices on a variety of goods and services. It was not uncommon for people in this position to try to acquire significant wealth by collecting exorbitant taxes during their short terms, well beyond the amount prescribed by Roman law. Since the occupants of the position of Kohen Gadol were more interested in their honor than in the spiritual importance of the position, each of them tore down the office and rebuilt it to show off their wealth and position of authority.

Yoma 7: Tzitz and Tefillin

For the source text click/tap here: Yoma 07

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Ex 29:38

38 And it shall be upon Aaron's forehead, and Aaron shall bear the iniquity committed in the holy things, which the children of Israel shall hallow, even in all their holy gifts; and it shall be always upon his forehead, that they may be accepted before the LORD.

Reb Yehuda holds "always" /Tamid means that while he wears it he must constantly be cognizant of its presence and its kedusha. Reb Shimon holds it means that the Tzitz brings Ratzon - appeasement of the Ribono shel Olam" -constantly, even if it is not being worn at that moment.

The Gemara at the end of our daf says that "if we learn like Reb Yehuda, then if the Tzitz, which has the written name of Hashem only once, mandates constant respectful awareness, how much more so this is true for Tefillin which have Hashem's name written twenty one times."

Which leads us to examine the relationship between the two and the influence of "hesech hadaas" prevents us from wearing tefillin all day.