Hand/Finger dexterity TB Yoma 49

 I remember my friends who are dentists telling me that when they were applying to dental school besides passing the DAT, Dental Admission Test, they also had to carve something in order to show finger/hand dexterity.

The High Priest also needed finger/hand dexterity in order to execute the required moves to fulfill the burning of the incense. Some Sages on today’s daf TB Yoma 49 hold the position that “the High Priest scoop a handful from the incense once and again scoop a handful a second time in the Holy of Holies… How should the High Priest act in the Holy of Holies, when he needs to place the incense on the coals by taking a handful from the spoon and placing it in his hands? After he places the coal pan on the ground, he holds the front of the ladle, i.e., the spoon of incense, with his fingertips, and some say he holds it with his teeth. At this stage the handle of the spoon rests between his arms. And he pushes it and raises it up slowly with his thumb toward his body until it reaches between his elbows, which he then uses to turn it over. He then returns the incense into his palms, after which he pours it from his hands into the coal pan. And he heaps the incense into a pile on the coals so that its smoke rises slowly. And some say he does the opposite, that he scatters it so that its smoke rises quickly.

“And this taking of a handful of incense is the most difficult sacrificial rite in the Temple. The Gemara asks: This one is the hardest rite, and no other? But there is pinching (manner of slaughtering a burnt offering of a bird), which is also considered extremely difficult; and there is taking a handful of a meal-offering, another complex rite. Rather, this taking of a handful of incense is one of the most difficult rites in the Temple, rather than the single most difficult one. In any event, you can learn from this that the High Priest scoops a handful and again scoops. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, learn from this that it is so.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Having the ability to accomplish these three difficult rites were extremely important when the Temple stood. I wonder if a priest had to pass a “hand/finger” dexterity test in order to become the High Priest just like my dentist friends.

The power of I don’t know TB Yoma 48

Between TB Yoma 47 and daf 48, there are a total of nine dilemmas raised by Rav Pappa, seven of them ending in teyku — which means in essence “We don’t know the answer and we have to wait until Elijah comes to answer this question.” Some of Rav Pappa’s questions are directly related to the mishnah above and some are not. Rachel Scheinerman writes: “The 20th century scholar Rabbi Louis Jacobs wrote an entire book on the word teyku. He notes that it appears 319 times in the Babylonian Talmud and not at all in the Jerusalem Talmud. This strongly suggests it is something the editors of the Babylonian Talmud used to organize and present their material. He also notes that teyku is frequently applied to a set of rabbis we’ll deem the “usual suspects.” Rabba introduces 47 problems that are unresolved and left to stand, Rav Pappa (today’s rabbi) introduces 33, and Rav Ashi and Rabbi Yirmiya each introduce a few dozen” (https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/yoma-48/)

Only demagogues know all the answers. The ability to say “I don’t know” is a sign of a great leader. Moses is the paradigm of a great leader who wasn’t afraid to say “I don’t know.” Parashat Ba’alotekha which we read on the same day we studied TB Yoma 48 gives us a wonderful example of this quality. There are some men who could not offer up the Paschal Lamb because they were ritually unready and would not be ready in time for Passover. They felt it was unfair that they would not be given a chance to participate in such an important ritual. Moses didn’t know what they should do and told them “Stand by, and let me hear what instructions the Lord gives about you.” (Numbers 9:8) Instead of making up an answer pretending that he knew everything, he admitted that he had to ask for further instructions. Ultimately, God told him to institute Pesakh sheni, a makeup Passover opportunity a month later.

Gaurav Gupta wrote the following article entitled “The Power of I Don’t Know.”

We are conditioned to having and providing quick, confident answers as a sign of competence and leadership. We behave as though any gaps in knowledge should be hidden at all cost. But is this desire to have an answer - and have it quickly - actually helping you? How often do we trade factual accuracy and thoughtfulness for immediacy? Why do people find it so hard to say – "I don’t know"?

Effective leaders are able to set a vision and direction, get others to buy into this vision and mobilize them to produce the change required to achieve this vision. None of this requires having all the answers. Yet, many people’s idea of a leader involves someone who has foresight and insight - someone who is able to see what others don’t. This can often translate to never saying “I don’t know.”

The next time your instinct is to provide a conversation stopping quick reply, retort or comment - pause and consider:

Information is cheap and easy to access – just Google it. Being able to synthesize this data to make a robust decision – that is a much rarer skill. This desire to “know all” is particularly strong in areas we consider to be our expertise and where we find it hard to admit not knowing something. Knowledge is important. But overestimating the importance of having all the answers (or the belief that you already possess them) can quiet your curiosity to explore all the facets of a topic with a fresh, learning focused mindset.

Do you sometimes find yourself believing your opinions are facts?

Myths are a great example of the power of repetition. Once an opinion or a half-truth has been repeated a few times, we start believing it to be true. How many times have you stated an opinion confidently and you, and those who trust you, start believing it as fact? Subtly and importantly different from lying, it’s OK to demonstrate confidence in your opinions. Just don’t neglect to acknowledge that’s what it is – an opinion. This leaves the door open for others around you to feel safe sharing their points of view, particularly if they differ from yours.

What do you risk by assuming you know?

Shakespeare famously wrote “The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool.” Try starting from the assumption that you don’t know the answer. What subtleties do you discover? What nuances would you have missed if you assumed or speculated your way to the “right answer” based solely on your own knowledge bank? I am sure we can all remember situations where we have inadvertently created an illusion of knowledge because we didn’t want to admit to not knowing, or not knowing enough.

For leaders, admitting when you don’t know something can be a real opportunity to engage your team if you say, “I don’t know, what do you think?” or “I don’t know, but I would like to. Can you help me figure it out?”  Your willingness to admit when you don’t have all the answers and your curiosity to find them will lead to better decision making and greater trust within your team. This authentic approach will speak to your character as a leader. What is less obvious (but no less true) is that asking good questions to find the right answers will also enhance the view of your competence as a leader.

The next time you are asked something you don’t immediately know the answer to, try starting with “I don’t know…” (https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnkotter/2016/11/29/the-power-of-saying-i-dont-know/?sh=ce8aa7018583)

 

  

You call that a handful? TB Yoma 47

With today’s daf TB Yoma 47 we begin the fifth chapter of our massekhet. This chapter begins to discuss in detail the Avodah service that takes place in the Holy of Holies. After the high Priest sacrifices his bull, he brings the coals and the incense in the Holy of Holies. The first Mishna discusses what turns out to be the inexact amount of incense required. “They brought out the spoon and the coal pan to the High Priest so he may perform the service of the incense. He scoops his handfuls from the incense and places it into the spoon. The High Priest with large hands fills the spoon with incense in an amount corresponding to the large size of his hands, and the High Priest with small hands fills the spoon with incense in an amount corresponding to the small size of his hands. And this was the measure of the spoon, i.e., it was made to correspond to the size of his hands.” (Sefaria.org translation)

The Gemara gives an example of a High Priest who had extremely large hands. “They said about Yishmael ben Kimḥit that his hands were so large that he would scoop up four kav, which he would hold by his handfuls…” (Sefaria.org translation). Kimḥit was his mother’s name. His father’s name was Piavi (פיאבי). The Gemara records “When R. Yishmael ben Piabi died the splendor of the priesthood ceased.” (Mishna, TB Sotah 9:15) He is called here by his mother’s name because he reached his position as High Priest because of his mother’s merits. In fact she had seven sons and each one became a High Priest. In fact twice her son Yishmael became ritually unready and each time a different brother took his place for the day. Kimḥit must’ve been one proud mother because she witnessed two of her sons serve as the High Priest in a single day! One of her outstanding qualities that contributed to her success in raising children worthy to become High Priests was her modesty. Today’s daf does not elaborate her other qualities.

If you had to select other qualities that led to her success, which ones would you choose?

If you’re wondering how a priest scooped up a handful of incense or the flour of the minkha offering, we learn how today. “The Sages taught: “His handfuls” (Leviticus 2:2). I might have thought it should be overflowing from the handful, and therefore the verse states: “His handful” (Leviticus 6:8), which indicates a precise amount. If the halakha is based solely on the phrase “his handful,” I might have thought the priest may pinch a small amount even with just his fingertips, not with his entire finger. Therefore, the verse states: “His handfuls” (Leviticus 2:2), meaning as people usually take a handful, i.e., with their whole hand. How should he perform this service? He scoops by closing his three fingers over the palm of his hand, and takes a handful from the flour of the meal-offering.” (Sefaria.org translation)

 

It wasn’t number nine coal TB Yoma 46

With today’s daf TB Yoma 46 we finish the fourth chapter of our massekhet. This chapter discusses all of the Avodah the High Priest performs wearing his white linen clothing. The list of this section of the Avodah service includes making his first confession over the bull for his sins and the sins of his family, the lottery selecting which goat will go to Azazel and which goat will be offered up as a sacrifice, his second confession over the bull for his sins and the sins of his fellow priests, slaughtering the bull and collecting its blood, taking a shovelful of coal to burn the incense in the Holy of Holies, and finally sprinkling the mixture of the blood of the bull and goat in the Holy of Holies.

When I was a kid, one of my favorite 45s[1] was my father’s record of Tennessee Ernie Ford singing “16 tons (of number nine coal).” I used to listen to that record over and over again. The last sugiyah of our chapter reminded me of that song because it discusses the halakhic definition of a coal removed from the altar.

“The Torah prohibits the fire on the altar to be extinguished: “A perpetual fire shall be kept burning on the altar, it shall not go out” (Leviticus 6:6). With regard to this prohibition, an amoraic dispute was stated: With regard to one who extinguishes the fire of the coals that are taken with the coal pan for the incense on Yom Kippur or the fire of the coals that are taken in order to light the candelabrum, Abaye said: He is liable. Rava said: He is not liable.

“The Gemara elaborates on the dispute: In a case where one extinguished a coal while still standing upon the top of the altar, everyone agrees that he is liable. This is because the verse explicitly is referring to extinguishing a flame “upon the altar.” When they disagree, it is in a case where he brought the coals down to ground level and extinguished a coal there. Abaye said: He is liable, since it is still considered fire of the altar. Rava said: He is not liable, because once it has been removed from the altar it is considered removed and no longer part of the altar’s fire. Therefore, the prohibition does not apply to it.” (Sefaia.org translation)

The Gemara goes on to refine the disagreement between Abaye and Rava. Everybody agrees that one is forbidden to extinguish a coal while it is still standing upon the top of the altar. Everybody agrees that if the intended purpose of the removed coal was for a mitzvah like burning the incense, but became extinguished the person is not liable. They only disagree when somebody removes the coal without the intention of performing a mitzvah with it. If the coal becomes extinguished Abaye says is still considered “a flame upon the altar” and is liable. Rava disagrees and holds that once it is removed from the altar the coal is no longer considered “a flame upon the altar” and the person is not liable.

Amongst the many disagreements between Rava and Abaye, only six times does the halakha follow Abaye and this is not one of them. (see Mishneh Torah, Sefer Avodah, Hilkhot Temidin, chapter 2:halakha 6)

By the way, if you want to listen to a modern version of the song 16 tons follow this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzlT80jQ3lo

---

[1] Ask your grandfather or grandmother what was a 45. If you want to see photos of 45s go to https://www.google.com/search?q=photo+of+a+45+record&sxsrf=ALeKk028dRlubN265RSlcnBLDksstXrxgA:1622147953803&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=NpaktJOMN-s3RM%252C63i3xvV-ibEhcM%252C_&vet=1&usg=AI4_-kTN82OXJ5oO88EzqTqw_bYqC5y6_Q&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjkpLyE3OrwAhVodt8KHcswD1EQ9QF6BAgSEAE&biw=1097&bih=535&dpr=1.75#imgrc=NpaktJOMN-s3RM

A little spatzir TB Yoma 45

 I don’t have to tell anybody that Yom Kippur is qualitatively different from every other day of the year. The Mishnah on daf TB Yoma 43b delineates many of the differences between the Yom Kippur service and a regular weekday service in the Temple. Today’s daf TB Yoma 45 explains the differences. Here is one example:

“On every other day, priests ascend on the eastern side of the ramp. A baraita explains the reason for this: As the Master said: All the turns that you turn should be only to the right, which, after ascending the altar, means one will turn to the east and will mean one will circulate the altar in a counter-clockwise fashion. When they descended, they again turned to the right, which is to the west of the ramp.

“The mishna continues: But on this day the priests ascend in the middle of the ramp and descend in the middle. What is the reason? Due to the eminence of the High Priest he should not walk on the side but in the middle.” (Sefaria.org translation)

On a normal day a priest wanted to take the shortest route possible to accomplish all of his tasks. He didn’t want to start in the middle of the altar and then have to walk all the way to the eastern corner. In other words the priests did not want to take a shpatzir, a Yiddish word that means to walk, to take a stroll, to meander without any real purpose in mind. We treat the altar with great respect; consequently, a shpatzir is inappropriate.

There are a couple reasons why the High Priest walked in the center of the ramp. According to one version, walking up the ramp with him were the Segan (the next priest up if something should happen to disqualify the High Priest) and the head of the court (אב בית דין). One was on the right and one was on the left so the High Priest walked in the middle. Escorting the High Priest was also an act of giving him respect (כבוד) and was not considered part and parcel of the Avodah.

Secondly, the High Priest felt at home in his duties. As the ba’al habayit (בעל הבית), master of his domain, he was afforded a little spatzir.

 

 

 

How we know that gossip is a great sin TB Yoma 44 Part Two

The Yom Kippur Avodah service shows how grievous the sin of gossip, לשון הרע, is. The High Priest has slaughtered his bull after he said his second confession. Another priest stirs the collected blood in a bowl so it won't congeal because the High Priest interrupts this this part of the service to something else first. He takes some hot coals from the outer altar and places them on the golden altar found in the Holy of Holies. Immediately the High Priest burns the incense on the coals without saying a word.

According to the Torah, the sprinkling of blood atones for sins. So why is the bull sacrifice interrupted when on Yom Kippur we long for atonement? The answer is simple. The burning of incense also gains atonement for Israel according to today’s daf TB Yoma 44..

“Does incense effect atonement? The Torah mentions the concept of atonement only with regard to offerings. Yes, as Rabbi Ḥananya teaches in a baraita: We learned of the incense that it effects atonement, as it is stated: “And he put on the incense and made atonement for the people” (Numbers 17:12). And the school of Rabbi Yishmael taught: For what does incense effect atonement? For slander. And why is that? Let something that is done in secret, i.e., the incense, which is burned in seclusion within the Sanctuary, come and effect atonement for an act done in secret, i.e., slander, which is generally said in private. (Sefaria.org translation)

Almost all the time the gossiper doesn’t shout his gossip and slander. He quietly whispers it into the ears of a person or small groups of people. Then these people tell others and those others still tell other people. That is how gossip is spread. Since the sin of gossip is done on the qt, the incense atones for it because during no words are necessary or said as the incense is burned.

The burning of incense shows how great is the sin of gossip. Before the high priest can atone all of his sins, the sins of his family, the sins of his fellow priests, and the sins of all of Israel, he must make atonement for the sin of gossip. Only when our sin of gossip’s slate has been wiped clean, can the High Priest continue and make atonement for Israel.¹

Because the sin of gossip so great, no wonder our tradition constantly warns us to watch what we say.

1 From the Hafetz Hayim’s Shemirat Halashon 

The Torah spared the money of the Jewish people. What about us? TB Yoma 44

“The Mishna (TB Yoma 43b) comments on some of the contrasts between the service and protocols followed on Yom Kippur and those followed throughout the rest of the year: On every other day, a priest would scoop up the coals with a coal pan made of silver and pour the coals from there into a coal pan of gold. But on this day, on Yom Kippur, the High Priest scoops up with a coal pan of gold, and with that coal pan he would bring the coals into the Holy of Holies. On every other day, the coal pan was heavy. But on this day it was light, so as not to tire the High Priest. On every other day, its handle was short, but on this day it was long so that he could also use his arm to support its weight. On every other day, it was of greenish gold, but on this day it was of a red gold. These are the statements of Rabbi Menaḥem.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Today’s daf TB Yoma 44 explains why a silver shovel was used during the year and a gold shovel was used on Yom Kippur. “What is the reason the gold pan was not used to scoop the coals? The Gemara answers: Because the Torah spared the money of the Jewish people. Since the pan is worn away with use, it is preferable to use a less expensive silver pan.” (Sefaria.org translation) Gold is a soft metal and much rarer than silver. Consequently, the heat of the coals would destroy the shovel and the replacement would be very expensive. God understands the financial restraints of the Jewish people and has compassion upon them. A silver shovel is much more durable and would not need to be replaced as often as the gold saving the Jewish people a lot a money.

The entire world including the Jewish people has experienced an economic downturn due to the Covid 19 pandemic. Jews like many other people have seen their income decreased because of cutbacks of employment and even have lost their jobs completely. Back in March 2010 Prof. Jack Wertheimer wrote an article titled “The High Cost of Jewish Living” in Commentary Magazine what he observed back during that recession is still true today 11 years later. He wrote:

“The high cost of Jewish living is evident even from so mundane an item as the grocery bill. Families observing the dietary laws must expect to pay a premium for kosher food. Poultry slaughtered according to Jewish ritual law costs 50 to 100 percent more than its nonkosher equivalent, and when it comes to beef, prices rise by many multiples. Monitoring the spending of an observant family in Houston, a recent CNN report noted the high kosher price differential. Among the anecdotes: a brisket purchased at a kosher store was over seven times more expensive than the same cut of beef at the nearest nonkosher supermarket. Even canned and bottled items sold at many supermarkets can cost several-fold more if they bear a kosher certification on their label. Prices routinely surge around the Jewish holidays, with no time more costly than Passover, an eight-day holiday that can set observant Jews back by many hundreds if not thousands of dollars owing to the numerous dietary practices 

“Then there are membership fees. Synagogue dues can range from a few hundred dollars to well over $3,000 for the purposes of supporting a staff of professionals and maintaining physical facilities. (Some synagogues set the “suggested dues” for families earning more than $250,000 at $6,000 a year.) In addition, they impose a range of payments to help defray expenses for special programs, school tuition, and building funds. When all was said and done, the Jewish family in Houston featured on CNN expended $3,600 a year at its synagogue, which happens to be Orthodox—the Jewish subgrouping that tends to charge the lowest congregational dues. To this we might add a hidden cost: more traditionally observant Jews must live in easy walking distance of a synagogue because they will not drive on the Sabbath and holidays, precisely the days they are most likely to attend religious services. In a Jewish variation of the first law of real estate—location, location, location—the values of homes near synagogues tend to be more expensive.

“Jews often join a local Jewish Community Center where they can partake of cultural and educational programs, arts activities, recreational facilities, and create for themselves and their children a social bond with other Jews. Membership fees covering all these activities can run between $1,000 and $2,500 for a family

“Above and beyond these essentials for Jewish living are contributions in support of charities. Close to home, the local federation of Jewish philanthropy and Jewish educational institutions require support; on the national level, funding is needed by agencies that engage in everything from advocacy to collecting funds for Israeli institutions, sponsoring Jewish religious and cultural life, and aiding Jews abroad. The family monitored by CNN donated $5,000 a year to various charitable causes.

“By far the greatest costs for many families are incurred from Jewish education. A considerable minority of families now enrolls its children in the three most expensive forms of Jewish education: day schools meeting five or even six days a week, usually for seven to 10 hours a day; residential summer camps, which run sessions lasting from three to seven or eight weeks; and extended programs in Israel for a summer, semester, or year. Schools with well-appointed facilities and an enriched educational program matched by a panoply of extracurricular activities can cost about as much as prep school—more than $30,000 a year per student. Schools housed in bare facilities with only a limited number of classes devoted to general studies—which cater primarily to the most insular Orthodox—may charge only a few thousand dollars a year. But most day schools charge somewhere between $15,000 and $20,000 a year for each child. Residential summer camps can cost between $650 to more than $800 a week. And trips to Israel range from $7,000 to $9,000 for a summer, to $18,000 for 10 months at a religious school, and even more for programs in which students can earn college credit.

“Why do parents spend these sums of money? For the same reason so many American parents expend staggering sums on college tuition: they believe they are getting value for their dollar. Immersive Jewish education may not provide the same kind of material payoff as a college diploma, but it greatly increases the chances of children learning the skills necessary for participation in religious life, living active Jewish lives, and identifying strongly with other Jews. Day-school tuition is the cost many parents believe they must bear if their children are to retain their heritage in a society that exerts enormous assimilatory pressures.

“They are right. It takes time and considerable effort to transmit a strong identification with the Jewish religion and people; to nurture a facility in the different registers of the Hebrew language: biblical, rabbinic, and modern; to teach young Jews the classical texts of their civilization; to expose them to Jewish music, dance, and art; and to socialize them to live as Jews—all the while providing a first-rate general education. Ample research has limned the association between the number of “contact hours” young people spend in Jewish educational settings and their later levels of engagement. Simply put, “more” makes a significant difference. It is not hard to find adult alumni of day schools, summer camps, and Israel programs who attest to the formative impact of their experiences. Not surprisingly, many parents committed to Jewish life want their children to enjoy the same benefits.

“Families recognize that they can no longer rely upon institutions that once had been central to the socialization of young Jews: most Jewish parents have neither the time nor, in many cases, the knowledge to transmit Jewish learning to their children; extended families are now widely dispersed, so they cannot play an active role; and few Jews reside any longer in densely populated Jewish neighborhoods, where in years past Jewish mores and customs were internalized through osmosis. Thus, conclude Carmel and Barry Chiswick, two authorities on the economics of Jewish life, “the formation of Jewish human capital must rely on a system of Jewish education.”

“Adding things up, an actively engaged Jewish family that keeps kosher and sends its three school-age children to the most intensive Jewish educational institutions can expect to spend somewhere between $50,000 and $110,000 a year at minimum just to live a Jewish life.

“As the various cost lines have risen, in some cases doubling over the past 10 years, the response has been predictable. Many regard day-school education as out of the question, the cost utterly prohibitive. Even within Orthodox communities, some parents feel compelled to pull their children out of day schools. Anecdotal reports suggest that some families interested in placing their children in Jewish educational settings decide not to proceed for fear of embarrassing encounters with scholarship committees. In a reversal of earlier patterns, when Jewish religious involvement was weighted toward the poor, increasingly in our own time only the well-to-do can afford to live fully as Jews, while many in the middle class are in danger of getting priced out.

“If there was cause for concern a decade ago about how, as Gerald Bubis put it, Jewish families would respond when “cost becomes a barrier,” the affordability of Jewish living should be a central issue on the Jewish communal agenda today, given the staggering surge in costs coupled with the current economic climate. With some noteworthy exceptions, it is not.

_____________

“Most federations of Jewish philanthropy have neither the resources nor the will to make affordability a priority, and other types of organizations don’t even pretend to pay attention. It is not as if they have not been warned about the severity of the problem: for the past 25 years, studies have periodically catalogued rising prices. Nearly two decades ago, in an address to the General Assembly of the federations, Jacob Ukeles urged vigilance:

“Living Jewishly shouldn’t force people into poverty. If a?.?.?.?family is forced by the value it places on living full Jewish lives to use all its discretionary income and then some to buy Jewish education, synagogues, center membership, kosher food, etc., it is left with the effective income of a poor family to meet all its other basic needs.” (For the rest of the article go to: https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/jack-wertheimer/the-high-cost-of-jewish-living/) We have to make Jewish life more affordable.

Why was only the gold shovel used on Yom Kippur? “Due to the weakness of the High Priest. He has to perform the entire service by himself while fasting; using only one pan minimizes his exertion.” (Sefaria.org translation) The High Priest really worked hard all day on Yom Kippur. Not only did he stay up all the night before, he was fasting. Consequently, the rabbis try to lighten his load a bit and make his job a little easier. A gold shovel is lighter than a silver shovel. Compassion on Yom Kippur is a good quality because if we are compassionate with each other, then God will be compassionate when judging us.

What does God really want? TB Yoma 42

Three rituals needs a strip of red crimson thread. One is the scapegoat as “Rav Yosef taught: He ties a strip of crimson to the head of the scapegoat and positions it opposite the place from which it will be sent; and the same is done to the slaughtered one, opposite its place of slaughter. This is done for two reasons: So that each goat, i.e., the goat for God and the goat for Azazel, cannot become mixed up with the other one, and so that the goats cannot become mixed up with other goats.” TB Yoma 41b, Sefaria.org translation) The second is the red heifer as it is written “and the priest shall take cedar wood, hyssop, and crimson stuff, and throw them into the fire consuming the cow.” (Numbers 19:6) The third is the purification ritual of the metzora as it is written “the priest shall order two live pure birds, cedar wood, crimson stuff, and his up to be brought for him who is to be purified.” (Leviticus 14:4)

Even though a crimson thread was used in those three rituals, each required a different weight. The discussion about the different weights begins at the bottom of TB Yoma 41b and continues on the top of TB Yoma 42a.

“When Rav Dimi came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia he said in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan: I heard a teaching that there is a distinction between three strips of crimson: One of the red heifer, and one of the scapegoat, and one of the leper. One of them must have the weight of ten zuz; and one of them must have the weight of two sela, which is eight zuz; and one of them must have the weight of a shekel, which is two zuz, but I cannot explain which is which.

When Ravin came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia he explained in the name of Rabbi Yonatan which weight each item requires, as follows:

The strip of crimson of the red heifer has the weight of ten zuz; and the strip of the scapegoat has the weight of two sela, which is eight zuz; and the strip of the leper has the weight of a shekel, which is two zuz.” (Sefaia.org translation)

The weight of the crimson thread was different in each of the three rituals because of the specific needs of that ritual. The weight of the crimson thread had to be the heaviest for the ritual of the red heifer because the bundle tied together by the crimson thread had to be heavy enough to reach the middle of the fire. The crimson thread had to be long enough that when it is divided half will remain on the scapegoat and half will be placed on a nearby rock. Only the smallest amount was needed for the ritual of the metzora.

The issue of the weight was not settled because the Gemara goes on “And Rabbi Yoḥanan further said: Rabbi Shimon ben Ḥalafta and the Rabbis disagree with regard to the strip of crimson of the red heifer. One said: It has the weight of ten zuz. And one said: It has the weight of one shekel. And your mnemonic for remembering that while both assume that only one of the extreme values was required no one suggests the middle value of two sela is required, is the aphorism from a mishna (TB Menukhot 110a-gg): God equally values both the one who gives much and the one who gives little as long as his intention is to Heaven.” (Sefaria.org translation)”

Kavanah, proper intention, is required if one wants to live a spiritual life. I learned reading the Ba’al Shem Tov stories what does God truly want from each and every one of us? The Ba’al Shem Tov, the founder of the modern Hasidic movement, taught his disciples that when observing the commandments God is more interested in the person’s intention than punctilious observance of the mitzvah. He taught רחמנא ליבא בעי, God wants the heart.

 

The second confessional TB Yoma 41

On daf TB 41 we learn that after the High Priest ties a crimson strip upon the scapegoat and positions it opposite the gate it will be dispatched and positions the sin offering goat opposite the place where it will be sacrificed, he returns to his bull and recites the second confessional on behalf of himself and all the other priests. “He comes and stands next to his bull a second time, and places his two hands upon it, and confesses. And this is what he would say: Please God, I have sinned, I have done wrong, and I have rebelled before You, I and my family and the children of Aaron, your sacred people. Please God, grant atonement, please, for the sins, and for the wrongs, and for the rebellions that I have sinned, and done wrong, and rebelled before You, I, and my family, and the children of Aaron, your sacred people, as it is written in the Torah of Moses, your servant: “For on this day atonement shall be made for you to cleanse you of all your sins; you shall be clean before the Lord” (Leviticus 16:30). And they, the priests and the people in the Temple courtyard, respond after him upon hearing the name of God: Blessed be the name of His glorious kingdom forever and all time.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Many of us grew up praying from the Silverman Makhzor on the High Holidays. Rabbi Silverman incorporated a modern interpretation in the Yom Kippur Avodah service that still resonates today 70 years later.

“Even as the High priest prayed for the members of the Priestly Tribe, the leaders of Israel, so do we pray for the leaders of our day, the teachers of religion, the leaders of labor, industry and commerce, the pathfinders in science, education, and government, leaders in all lofty and useful endeavor. O may they who have in their power the safety and welfare of human beings, all created in Thine image, realize the sacredness of their trust. Guard them from temptation, corruption and greed. Give us men (and women- my updated addition. gg) of faith, daring and vision, who will bring about a society wherein none shall be master and none shall be slave, wherein all shall share the blessings of life liberty and happiness.” (Page 371)

Amen!

The order of the Yom Kippur service TB Yoma 40

 The last quarter of yesterday’s daf and all of today’s daf TB Yoma 40 discusses whether the lottery determining which goat is offered up as a sin offering and which goat is the scapegoat is an essential and critical part of the service or just a mitzvah. If it is only a mitzvah and the lottery does not take place, this part of the service remains kosher and valid. Rabbi Yannai and Rabbi Yoḥanan, two amoraim, begin this disagreement. The Gemara tries to incorporate these two amoraim into the context of a different disagreement between two tannaim, Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Neḥemya. It is a very complex and difficult sugiya to say the least. To best understand the flow of the Gemara, for the first time we have to know the order of the Yom Kippur service. Rashi ד"ה אִי הַגְרָלָה דְּקָאָמְרִיתוּ הַיְינוּ הַנָּחָה provides us with the background we need. Because Rashi gives us the bare-bones order, I’m going to share with you the order of the Yom Kippur service that takes place immediately after the second immersion as found in Rabbi Soloveitchik’s Yom Kippur Machzor. (page 588) 

The second immersion

donning the four white vestments

. washing his hands and feet

3.   . reciting his personal confession over the bull offered as a sin offering

4.      performing the lottery over the two goats

5.     reciting confession for the other Kohanim over the bull

6.     slaughtering the bull

7.     gathering coals from the Inner Altar

8.     scooping a palm of incense into a spoon

9.     bringing the incense and coals into the Holy of Holies

1  sprinkling the blood of the bull in the Holy of Holies

11 slaughtering the goat

    sprinkling the blood of the goat in the Holy of Holies

    sprinkling the combined blood of the bull and the goat on the Curtain and Inner Alter

     reciting confession over the second goat

     sending the goat to the desert

A short passage on today’s daf is interesting to note. First, which action gains atonement for Israel, the sprinkling of blood or the recitation of the confessional?

“As it was taught in a baraita: The verse states that the goat should remain alive “to make atonement” (Leviticus 16:10). This indicates that it must remain alive until it effects atonement. Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Shimon dispute which atonement the verse is referring to. The verse speaks of atonement through the application of the blood of the sin-offering goat. And similarly it states: “When he has made an end of atoning for the Sanctuary, and the Tent of Meeting, and the altar, he shall present the live goat” (Leviticus 16:20). Just as there the reference is to atonement through blood, so too here the verse is referring to atonement through blood. This is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda.

“Rabbi Shimon says: “To make atonement over it”; the verse speaks of atonement through speech, i.e., the verbal confession that is recited over it.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Rambam poskins that the verbal confession is what gains atonement for Israel. (Mishneh Torah, Sefer Avodah, the laws of Yom Kippurim, Chapter 2 Halakha 6) Today just confessing our sins on Yom Kippur is insufficient as we shall learn when we study the last chapter of our massekhet. It is only an early step in the process of real repentance. Stay tuned to find out what else we need to do to gain atonement on Yom Kippur.

Meet Shimon HaTazadik TB Yoma 39

Today we begin the fourth chapter of our massekhet with daf TB Yoma 39. The first Mishna continues describing the lottery of the scapegoat sent to Azazel and the goat chosen to be the sin offering. A wooden box contained two “lottery tickets,” upon one was written “to Hashem” and the other “to Azazel.” When the High Priest selected the “lottery ticket to Hashem” with his right hand, this was seen as an auspicious good sign.

According to tradition the Second Temple stood for 420 years. Today’s daf TB Yoma 39 describes the exceptional merits of Shimon HaTzadik, the very first High Priest of the second Temple. According to Pirkei Avot he was one of the last survivors of the Great Assembly. (Avot 1:2) “Simeon the Righteous is either Simon I (310–291 or 300–273 BCE), son of Onias I, and grandson of Jaddua, or Simon II (219–199 BCE), son of Onias II. Many statements concerning him are variously ascribed by scholars, ancient and modern, to four different persons who bore the same name: Simeon I (by Fränkel and Grätz); Simeon II (by Krochmal in the 18th century, Brüll in the 19th, and Moore and Zeitlin in the 20th); Simon Maccabeus (by Löw); or Simeon the son of Gamaliel (by Weiss). The scholarly consensus of the late 20th century has fallen on Simon II.^[2]

The Talmud, Josephus (who identifies him as Simon I), Sirach and the Second Book of Maccabees all contain accounts of him. He was termed "the Righteous" because of the piety of his life and his benevolence toward his compatriots.^[3] He was deeply interested in the spiritual and material development of the nation. According to Sirach, he rebuilt the walls of Jerusalem, which had been torn down by Ptolemy Soter, and repaired the damage done to the Temple in Jerusalem, raising the foundation-walls of its court and enlarging the cistern into a pool.^[4]

According to the Talmud, when Alexander the Great marched through Land of Israel in the year 332 BCE, Simeon the Just, dressed in his priestly garments went to Antipatris to meet him^[5] although Josephus^[6] states that Alexander himself came to Jerusalem. As soon as Alexander saw him, he descended from his chariot and bowed respectfully before him. When Alexander's courtiers criticized this act, he replied that it had been intentional, since he had had a vision in which he had seen the high priest, who had predicted his victory. Alexander demanded that a statue of himself be placed in the Temple, but the high priest explained that this was impossible. He promised instead that all the sons born of priests in that year would be named Alexander.^[7] Josephus relates the same story, but identifies the high priest in the story as Jaddua rather than Simon.^[8] This story appears to be identical with 3 Maccabees 2, where Seleucus (Kasgalgas) is mentioned.^[9]

In his views, Simeon was midway between the Hasmoneans and the Hellenists. He was an opponent of the Nazirites and ate of the sacrifice offered by that sect only on a single occasion. Once a youth with flowing hair came to him and wished to have his head shorn. When asked his motive, the youth replied that he had seen his own face reflected in a spring and it had pleased him so that he feared his beauty might become an idol to him. He therefore wished to offer up his hair to God, and Simeon then partook of the sin-offering which he brought.^[10] "(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simeon_the_Just)

Because of his merits, our daf recounts the miracles that took place in the Temple. “The Sages taught: During all forty years that Shimon HaTzaddik served as High Priest, the lot for God arose in the right hand. From then onward, sometimes it arose in the right hand and sometimes it arose in the left hand. Furthermore, during his tenure as High Priest, the strip of crimson wool that was tied to the head of the goat that was sent to Azazel turned white, indicating that the sins of the people had been forgiven, as it is written: “Though your sins be as crimson, they shall be white as snow” (Isaiah 1:18). From then onward, it sometimes turned white and sometimes it did not turn white. Furthermore, the western lamp of the candelabrum would burn continuously as a sign that God’s presence rested upon the nation. From then onward, it sometimes burned and sometimes it went out.

“And during the tenure of Shimon HaTzaddik, the fire on the arrangement of wood on the altar kept going strongly, perpetually by itself, such that the priests did not need to bring additional wood to the arrangement on a daily basis, except for the two logs that were brought in order to fulfill the mitzva of placing wood upon the arrangement. From then onward, the fire sometimes kept going strongly and sometimes it did not, and so the priests could not avoid bringing wood to the arrangement throughout the entire day.

“And a blessing was sent upon the offering of the omer; and to the offering of the two loaves from the new wheat, which was sacrificed on Shavuot; and to the shewbread, which was placed on the table in the Temple. And due to that blessing, each priest that received an olive-bulk of them, there were those who ate it and were satisfied, and there were those who ate only a part of it and left over the rest because they were already satisfied from such a small amount. From then onward, a curse was sent upon the omer, and to the two loaves, and to the shewbread, that there were not sufficient quantities to give each priest a full measure. Therefore, each priest received just an amount the size of a bean; the discreet, pious ones would withdraw their hands, a bean-bulk being less that the quantity needed to properly fulfill the mitzva, and only the voracious ones would take and eat it. And an incident occurred with one who took his portion and that of his fellow, and they called him: Son of a robber [ḥamtzan] until the day of his death.” (Sefaria.org translation)

”