Comentario sobre Shekalim 8:11

כל הרוקין הנמצאים בירושלם אהורים – and we do not encourage the spittle of a man or woman suffering from an emission because they defile humans and utensils because we follow after the majority.

Introduction This mishnah continues to deal with scenarios in which we determine the status of something based on a majority, a topic which we began discussing in the beginning of chapter seven. The specific topic is spit found in the streets of Jerusalem. If such spit comes from an impure person than the spit is unclean.

חוץ משל שוק העליון – because heathen launderers were found there and the Sages decreed concerning the heathens that they would be like men with a flux in all their matters, and their spittle is ritually impure. But there are those who state that that since the Upper Market did not have the benefit of the crossing found there (i.e., “foot traffic”) and men and women with a flux were alone and distanced themselves from other people that were found there.

Any spit found in Jerusalem is clean except that which is [found] in the upper market, the words of Rabbi Meir. According to Rabbi Meir, we can assume that all spit found in Jerusalem is clean except spit found in the upper marketplace. In most areas people who are unclean are extra cautious since they know that in Jerusalem people need to be extra careful about issues of purity and impurity. This is because in Jerusalem many people eat sacred food, which needs to be eaten in purity. In contrast, outside of Jerusalem we must be concerned lest the spit is unclean. The only exception within Jerusalem is the upper market, towards the southwest of Jerusalem, where non-Jews and unclean persons used to congregate. There, found spit is considered to be unclean.

שבאמצע טמאים – because men and women with a flux are frequently there and walk in the middle of the roads, and the ritually pure individuals remove themselves to the sides of the roads – in a place where there is not much walking found, and are careful of all ritually impure that they should not come in contact with them, but at the time of the Festival, when the majority of Jews are ritually pure, the ritually impure remove themselves to the sides so that they do not defile the people, and the ritually pure walk in the middle of the roads; therefore, at the time of the Festival, the spittle that is found in the middle of the road is ritually pure, but that which is on the sides is ritually impure, and the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yosi.

Rabbi Yose says: at other times of the year [spit found] in the middle [of the road] is unclean but [spit found] at the sides [of the road] is clean; but at festivals time [spit found] in the middle [of the road] is clean, while [that which is found] at the sides [of the road] is unclean, since they are few in number, they remove themselves to the sides of the road. Rabbi Yose distinguishes between times of the year and places in the road in his determining whether we must consider the spit to be unclean. During non-festival times, most of the people of Jerusalem are impure, just as they are in other cities. At these times the pure people walk on the sides of the road to avoid the impure people who are walking in the middle of the road. Hence, spit found in the middle of the road is impure whereas spit found on the sides is pure. The opposite is true during the time of the festivals, when most people are pure. They walk in the middle of the road and the impure people walk on the sides of the road (this seems quite courteous of theme). Hence, only spit found on the sides of the road is considered impure.

דרך ירידה לבית הטבילה – there were two paths to the ritual path – on one, they go down and on the other they go up – so that the ritually impure do not come in contact with the ritually pure, and that of the path going down is certainly impure, because they fell from the hand of those bringing them for ritual immersion.

Introduction Yesterday’s mishnah dealt with the purity of spit found in Jerusalem; today’s mishnah deals with the purity of vessels found in Jerusalem.

שלא כירידתן עלייתן – for one their descent, they were definitely ritually impure; therefore, they would bring them down to the place of ritual immersion and upon their ascent they were ritually pure after they had been immersed.

All vessels found in Jerusalem on the way going down to the place of immersion are unclean, [but those found] on the way going up [from the place of immersion] are clean; for the way down is not the same as the way up, the words of Rabbi Meir. The place of immersion was a place below the Temple Mount where people could go to immerse themselves and their vessels (you can visit there today and still see many mikvaot). According to Rabbi Meir, there was one path to go down and a different path to go up. Furthermore, they would also carry the vessels down in a different way than they would carry them up. Hence, it was possible to distinguish between a vessel making its way down and one making its way up. Obviously, one making its way down is assumed to be unclean and one making its way back up to the Temple Mount was assumed to be clean.

רבי יוסי אומר כולן טהורין – they did not make the decree on doubtful utensils in Jerusalem and the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yosi.

Rabbi Yose says: they are all clean, except the basket and the shovel or pick which are specially connected with [work in] cemeteries. Rabbi Yose says that in Jerusalem people are extra careful to make sure that they don’t leave unclean vessels lying in the streets. Therefore all vessels are unclean except for vessels which were most likely to have been used in cemeteries. The basket referred to here was one in which bones were put into and moved to an ossuary. The shovel was used to collect them and the pick was used to dig graves. Since these almost certainly came into contact with a corpse or with bones, they have to be assumed to be unclean.

מריצה – a tool that crushes and breaks in it the bones of the dead when they want to bring them in a basket to take them from place to place.

שוחט בה מיד – for certainly, its owner immersed it [in a ritual bath] from yesterday in order that it would have a sunset (required after purification, to be deemed entirely clean) and that it would be appropriate to slaughter with it on the day of the Eve of Passover.

Introduction This mishnah deals with a knife found in Jerusalem around the time of Pesah when many people will need to slaughter their pesach sacrifices. The question is: can he rely on the fact that the knife is pure or must he immerse it before he slaughters with it?

בשלשה עשר שונה ומטביל – meaning to say, even though it is possible to state that its owner already immersed it [in a ritual bath], the person who finds it must immerse it a second time for perhaps, its owner had not immersed it and they had a while to wait until it was close to darkness, and even though they did not decree on doubtful utensils in Jerusalem because the stringency of holy objects required immersion for it. But Maimonides explained [the word] "שונה" /”a second time,” to mean to sprinkle upon it for it had become ritually impure through contact with the dead, and he sprinkled [from the ashes of the red heifer] on the third day (see Numbers 19:12), and now sprinkles once again upon it and afterwards immerses it.

A [slaughtering] knife which was found on the fourteenth [of Nisan] he may slaughter with it immediately. [If it was found] on the thirteenth [of Nisan] he must immerse it again. If the slaughtering knife is found on the fourteenth of Nisan, he may use it to slaughter his pesah immediately, without bringing it to be immersed. In this case we assume that its owners immersed it on the thirteenth, knowing that it would need to be pure the following day, the day on which the pesah is slaughtered. However, if it was found on the thirteenth we must assume that it has not yet been immersed and therefore is unclean. Even though we established in the previous mishnah that all vessels (which includes knives) are assumed to be pure, when it comes to a vessel which will be used with a sacrifice we must be more stringent.

But a chopping knife whether [found] on the fourteenth or on the thirteenth, he must immerse it again. If the fourteenth fell on Shabbat, he may slaughter with it immediately. [If found] on the fifteenth, he may slaughter with it immediately. The knife described here is not used for slaughtering but for cutting meat and bones of an already slaughtered animal. The mishnah uses the word “slaughter” with regard to this knife as well, but the intention is not slaughter but to chop. This type of knife will be used during the festival, already on the fifteenth, but it will not be used on the fourteenth. Since we cannot assume that this type of knife was immersed on the thirteenth of Nisan, it must be immersed on the fourteenth in order to use it on the fifteenth and during the remainder festival. If it was found on the fourteenth of Nisan which fell on Shabbat, then we can assume that it was immersed on the thirteenth because it is forbidden to immerse vessels on Shabbat. They would have immersed it on the thirteenth so that they could use it to chop meat and bones on the fifteenth and during the remainder of the festival. If he found it on the fifteenth, he can assume that it was immersed on the fourteenth. Therefore he may use it without immersing it again.

בזה ובזה – whether on the thirteenth or the fourteenth [of Nisan].

If [the chopping knife] was found tied to a [slaughtering] knife it may be treated as the knife. Finally, if he finds the chopping knife tied to the slaughtering knife, he should treat the chopping knife the same way he treats the slaughtering knife.

שונה ומטביל – he immerses it again for the hatchet/curved cutting tool is not appropriate other than for the Hagigah/the Festival Offering for the breaking of a bone is permitted on it, and in the Gemara of Pesahim (Tractate Pesahim 70b) establishes that at the time when the Nasi/head of the Sanhedrin is on his deathbed on the thirteenth [of Nisan], for if he would die, the entire community will be ritually impure and will sacrifice the Passover offering in defilement, but they would not to ritually purify the utensils; therefore, the knife that one needs for the slaughtering of the Passover offering – this is one doubt, for perhaps the Nasi won’t died and they will make the Passover offering in ritual purity, they immerse it and there is a presumption that they purified it on the thirteenth day in order to slaughter the Passover offering on the fourteenth. Bu the hatchet/curved cutting tool, there are two doubts: a) perhaps the Nasi will die and they will make the Passover offering in a state of ritual defilement and they don’t bring the Hagigah/Festival offering, and there is no need for the hatchet/curved cutting tool, and even if he doesn’t die, perhaps the Passover offerings are many and they don’t do the Hagigah/Festival Offering on the fourteenth; therefore, they don’t immerse it and b) it has the presumption that it they did not purify it.

חל י"ד להיות בשבת שוחט בה מיד – but we don’t say that since it is Shabbat, we will not slaughter it out of a doubt that perhaps it was ritually impure and it is found that the Passover offering was ritually impure, and we desecrate the Sabbath not at the place of a commandment. But my teachers explained that we slaughter it immediately with a hatchet/curved cutting tool stating that even though there is no Festival offering/Hagigah on the Sabbath, nevertheless, there is a presumption that he immersed it from the Eve of the Sabbath (i.e., Friday) for the need of the Festival offering/Hagigah on the fifteenth [of Nisan].

בחמשה עשר שוחט בה מיד – because the entire people knows that sprinkling and immersion are prohibited on the Jewish festival/Yom Tov, and we immerse everything from before the Jewish festival.

נמצאת – the hatchet/curved cutting tool

קשורה לסכין – is tied to the knife. We stated that it was definitely immersed with the knife, but Maimonides explained that it is found that an undefined knife is tied with another known knife, it is like the known knife; if it (i.e., the known knife) is ritual impure, it (i.e., the other knife) is ritually impure; if it (i.e., the known knife) is ritually pure, it (i.e., the other knife) is ritually pure.

פרוכת שנטמת בולד הטומאה – [the Curtain] that touched ritually impure liquids that the Sages decreed regarding these liquids that they defile utensils, as a decree because of the liquid of a man or woman with a flux, such as his spittle or nocturnal emission, which are one of the original or direct causes of Levitical uncleanness, and from the Torah, they defile humans and utensils.

Introduction This mishnah discusses the impurity of the curtain which separated the Holy of Holies from the remainder of the Temple.

מטבילין אותה בפנים – and it does not require being sent outside of the camp of the Divine Majesty (from the entrance of the court and further), because it is was not defiled other than by a secondary cause of Levitical uncleanness.

If the curtain [separating the Holy of Holies from the rest of the Temple] was defiled by a derived uncleanness, they immerse it within [the precincts of the Temple] and they bring it back in again. This section discusses a case where the curtain (parochet) was made unclean by a “derived uncleanness”. This term refers to something that has become unclean by virtue of its contact with something that is a “principal uncleanness”. From the Torah (deoraita), only liquids which come into contact with “derived uncleanness” are made unclean. “Derived uncleannesses” do not cause things or people to become unclean. Therefore, the curtain in this case has been made impure with only a low level of impurity, one that is considered to be “derabbanan” of rabbinic origin. The rabbis nevertheless required that it be immersed but they allowed it to be immersed in the mikveh (ritual pool) that was in the precincts of the Temple. Furthermore, it could be brought back again immediately. If it had contracted “deoraita” toraitic impurity, it could not be used again until nightfall, as we shall see in the next clause.

ומכניסין אותה מיד – and it does not require having a sunset (after immersion) for complete purification.

But if it was defiled by a principal uncleanness, they immerse it outside and spread out in the Hel. If it was new it was spread out on the roof of the colonnade, so that the people might behold its workmanship which is beautiful. If it came into contact with a principal uncleanness, for instance a zav or zavah (people with unusual genital discharge), or with a sheretz (a creeping animal) then it must be taken out of the Temple to be immersed. There in an area known as the “Hel”, which was inside the gates of the outer walls but outside the “Ezrat Nashim” (the women’s courtyard) it is let out to dry. If the curtain was knew, they would spread it out in a place where people could see it from far off for it was very beautiful. In its normal place, right in front of the Holy of Holies, few people would have the chance to see this magnificent work.

נטמאת באב הטומאה – with an unclean reptile or a carrion.

מטבילין אותה בחוץ – we immerse it outside for it requires being sent out [of the camp] as we state in the last chapter of Tractate Eruvin (Chapter 10, Mishnah 15; Talmud Eruvin 104b), that a person who brings in an unclean reptile in the Temple is liable.

נימין – “Lytzish” in the foreign language.

Introduction This mishnah describes the curtain in all of its glory. Interestingly, Josephus (Wars of the Jews, Book V, Chapter Five, four) also describes the curtain in exceedingly glorious terms. He writes: “But then this house, as it was divided into two parts, the inner part was lower than the appearance of the outer, and had golden doors of fifty-five cubits altitude, and sixteen in breadth; but before these doors there was a veil of equal largeness with the doors. It was a Babylonian curtain, embroidered with blue, and fine linen, and scarlet, and purple, and of a contexture that was truly wonderful. Nor was this mixture of colors without its mystical interpretation, but was a kind of image of the universe; for by the scarlet there seemed to be enigmatically signified fire, by the fine flax the earth, by the blue the air, and by the purple the sea; two of them having their colors the foundation of this resemblance; but the fine flax and the purple have their own origin for that foundation, the earth producing the one, and the sea the other. This curtain had also embroidered upon it all that was mystical in the heavens, excepting that of the [twelve] signs, representing living creatures.”

עשרים וארבעה חוטין – because it is made from blue, purple and crimson yarns and fine linen and each and every species, its thread is doubled six times as is mentioned in Yoma (Talmud Yoma 87a).

Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says in the name of Rabbi Shimon the son of the chief [of the priests]: the curtain was a handbreadth in thickness and was woven on seventy-two cords, and on each cord there were twenty-four threads. Obviously the curtain was simply a tremendous piece of work. There is a description of the Tabernacle’s curtain in Exodus 26:1. There we learn that it is made of four types of thread: blue, purple, scarlet and fine linen (see also Josephus above). Each type had six strings, which means that there were twenty-four threads on each cord.

ארכה מ' ורחבה כ' – like the measure of the hall leading to the interior of the Temple (see Tractate Middot, Chapter 4, Mishnah 7), that its height (it should be “length,” based upon the commentary of the Tosafot Yom Tov) was forty cubits and its width was twenty cubits (see also Tractate Middot, Chapter 3, Mishnah 6; but we also learn in Chapter 3, Mishnah 7 that the height was also forty cubits).

It was forty cubits long and twenty cubits broad, and was made by eighty-two young girls. The entrance to the hall of the Temple which this curtain hung in front of was forty cubits long and twenty cubits broad. It took 82 young girls to weave the curtain. We should note that this explanation is according to a certain version of the text. According to another textual reading, the curtain was made up of 820,000 strings.

ושמונים ושתים רבוא – this was the number of threads from which it was made. Another explanation: the number of gold dinars that they spent on it. But there are books in which it is written in them that “that with twenty thousand and eighty,” meaning to say that there eighty-two young virgins were engaged in making it.

Two curtains were made every year, and three hundred priests were needed to immerse it. According to the Tosefta’s explanation of this clause, there were two curtains in the Temple, one spread out to cover the doors and one folded up. If the spread out one became impure they would spread out the folded up one and purify the other (see yesterday’s mishnah). On the eve of Yom Kippur they would bring in a new curtain and take out the old one. Because of its great thickness and weight, it required three hundred priests to immerse the curtain outside of the Temple and to spread it out in the Hel (see yesterday’s mishnah). The Talmud admits that three hundred may be an exaggeration, but it still lets us know what a massive undertaking this must have been.

ושלש מאות כהנים היו מטבילין אותה – utensils that were completed even though they were completed in ritual purity, require immersion for holy things, as is found in Tractate Hagigah (Chapter 3, Mishnah 2). The three hundred Kohanim that are taught in our Mishnah is the language of hyperbole and exaggeration, for they did not require so many Kohanim to immerse it.

הכל ישרף בפנים – in the large place where the ashes of sacrifices were deposited which was in the Temple courtyard for there they would burn the unfit/disqualified meat of the most holy sacrifices for everything that was disqualified/unfit for the holy sacrifice, we burn it in the holy [precincts].

Introduction This mishnah discusses “most holy” sacrifices such as burnt-offerings, guilt offerings or sin offerings which were defiled either within the Temple or outside of it. That these sacrifices must be burnt is clear and agreed to by all. However, Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel disagree whether the sacrifice is burned inside or outside of the Temple.

חוץ מנטמא באב הטומאה בחוץ – for since its defilement is stringent and its disqualification occurred outside, one cannot bring it into the Temple courtyard to burn it for its disqualification did not occur in the holy [precincts].

Meat of most holy things which was defiled, whether by a principal uncleanness or by a derived uncleanness, whether inside or outside [the precincts of the temple]:
Bet Shammai say: it must all be burnt within, except when defiled outside by a principal uncleanness. According to Bet Shammai all of these unclean sacrifices must be burned within the Temple precincts, in the place within the courtyard where the ashes were placed (called the “Place of the Ashes”). The only exception is a sacrifice which was defiled by a principal uncleanness while it was outside of the Temple. Since this sacrifice acquired a more serious form of uncleanness it is not brought into the Temple. However, if it had only become unclean through contact with a derived uncleanness, it is brought in and burned in the Temple.

חוץ משנטמא בולד הטומאה בפנים – for it has two [leniencies]: its defilement was inside, and the leniency of its ritual defilement, but if it was defiled by a primary uncleanness, we do not cause the delay of the ritual defilement inside until it is burned but we remove it immediately and burn it outside.

But Bet Hillel say: it must all be burnt outside, except that which was defiled by a derived uncleanness within. Bet Hillel hold that all of these sacrifices are burned outside of the Temple. Anything that was made unclean outside the Temple is not brought inside. Furthermore, they hold that if it came into contact with a serious form of uncleanness within the Temple, it must be brought out and burned outside of the Temple. The only exception to their rule is that if one of the “most holy” sacrifices became impure with a light form of purity within the Temple, it need not be removed and may be burned within the Temple.

את שנטמא בולד הטומאה בין בפנים בין בחוץ ישרף בפנים – since it is ritually pure from the Torah, even if it became defiled outside, we must fulfill its burning in the holy [precincts].

Introduction This mishnah continues the topic begun in yesterday’s mishnah sacrificial “holy of holies” meat which became unclean either within or outside the Temple.

Rabbi Eliezer says: [Sacrificial meat] which was defiled by a principal uncleanness, whether inside or outside [the Temple precincts], must be burned outside [the Temple]. [Sacrificial meat] which was defiled with a derived uncleanness whether inside or outside the Temple, is burned inside the Temple. According to Rabbi Eliezer, the operative distinction is only the level of uncleanness of the sacrifice. If it has a high level of uncleanness it must be burned outside the Temple. This is in order to distance seriously unclean things from the Temple. However, if its uncleanness is of a lower level then it may be burned within the Temple, even if it became unclean outside of the Temple.

Rabbi Akiva says: where it was defiled there it is burned. According to Rabbi Akiva the operative distinction is where the meat became unclean. In order to expedite burning the unclean sacrifice, it should be burned wherever the the impurity was incurred.

מחצי כבש ולמטה במערב – the Kohanim/priests who obtained the privilege by the arbitration regarding the limbs of the daily offering to bring them up would not bring them up all at one time, but would place them on the ramp and walk to the chamber of Hewn Stones (where the Sanhedrin sat) to recite the Shema and afterwards return and offer up the limbs on top of the Altar as it is taught [in our Mishnah] here, that they are placed on the lower half of he Altar-slope. For the ramp was thirty-two cubits long and from its half-way point downward, they would place them, and the width of ramp was sixteen cubits and on its lower half to the western side, they would place them (i.e., the limbs of the daily offering).

Introduction The first half of this last mishnah teaches where the limbs of certain sacrificial animals were placed before they were burned on the altar. We should note that it is quite uncertain as to why this mishnah is placed here. The second half teaches that the laws of shekels and first fruits were only in force when the Temple in Jerusalem still stood.

ושל ראשי חדשים – from it half-way point and upwards which is on the rim of the Altar that surrounds it and toward the east.

The limbs of the daily burnt-offering were placed on the half of the ramp [to the altar] downwards on the west side. On the southern side of the altar there was a ramp, 32 cubits long and 16 cubits wide. When the priests would bring the sacrifices up to the altar, they would not bring them all up at once. Rather they would bring them half way up, place them on the west side of the altar, go back down, read the shema and then they would bring them all the way up to the top of the altar.

אינן נוהגים אלא בפני הבית – Shekalim because they are for the needs of a sacrifice, and since there is no sacrifice, there are no Shekalim. But regarding the First Fruits, as it is written (Exodus 23:19): “The choice first fruits of your soil you shall bring to the house of the LORD your God." At the time when you have a Temple, you have First Fruits; when you don’t have a Temple, you don’t have First Fruits.

Those of the additional offering ( were placed on the half of the ramp downwards on the east side. The limbs of the additional offering were placed on the east side so as not to confuse them with those of the daily offerings.

אבל מעשר דגן וכו' נוהגים בפני הבית ולשא בפני הבית – for the Holiness of the Land [of Israel] is never invalidated. Therefore, it is necessary to separate out Terumot and Tithes and for the Tithe of Cattle, you must separate a tenth. But in Tractate Bekhorot (see Chapter 9, Mishnah 1), they stated that they invalidated the tithe of the cattle so that it should not come regarding it as a stumbling block/snare.

While those of the new moon offerings were placed on top of the rim of the altar. Again, in order to distinguish between the different sacrifices, they put the limbs of the new moon offerings on a rim that went around the altar, instead of on the ramp.

המקדיש שקלים ובכורים – which was not practiced other than when the Temple stood, but if one separated them when the Temple no long existed, they are sanctified.

[The laws of] the shekels and of the first-fruit are in force only when the Temple stands, but [the laws of] the tithe of grain and of the tithe of cattle and of the firstborn are in force both when the Temple exists and when the Temple does not exist. The first fruits (bikkurim) and the shekels must be brought to the Temple. Hence, when the Temple no longer stands, these laws are no longer in force. In contrast, tithes of grain, cattle and the first-born of animals are given to priests and Levites and hence these laws remain in force even when the Temple no longer stands. The cattle tithe and first-born animals cannot be eaten immediately. Rather they wait until the animal becomes somehow flawed and thereby unfit for sacrifice. Then it may be eaten. We should note that according to the Talmud, the rabbis said that the laws of animal tithes are no longer in force, lest someone eats them before they become flawed.

בכורים אינן קדש – since it is explicitly written concerning them (Exodus 23:19): “you shall bring to the House of the LORD your God,” even if he had separated them post-facto, they are not holy and the name/title of Bikkurim/First Fruits does not take effect upon them because the Temple doesn’t exist. But Maimonides explains that one who sanctifies Shekalim and First Fruits for the upkeep and maintenance of the Temple that he already has, but according to his explanation, the reason for why, according to Rabbi Shimon that Shekalim are holy, and First Fruits is not holy is not clear. But the Halakha is according to Rabbi Shimon.

One who dedicates shekels or first-fruits [when the Temple does not exist], they are holy. Rabbi Shimon says: one who says “the first-fruit be holy,” they are not holy. This section deals with someone who dedicates shekels or first fruits to the Temple at a time when the Temple no longer stands. According to the first opinion, the shekels or first-fruits are holy. They therefore both become prohibited for common usage. The shekels must be buried and the fruits are left until they rot. Alternatively, they may be thrown into the Dead Sea or some other place where no one will derive any benefit from them. Rabbi Shimon holds that since the Temple no longer stands, he can’t even dedicate the first fruits to the Temple. His statement is therefore meaningless. Congratulations! We have finished Shekalim. It is a tradition at this point to thank God for helping us to 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. Shekalim is a tractate dedicated to the financial operation of the Temple in Jerusalem. It is interesting that the Mishnah sees this subject as being as worthy of study as any other topic, including the holidays, Shabbat, marital law etc. The financial support of the Temple is a commandment, one to be fulfilled properly and with a sense of its great import. Indeed, by financially supporting the Temple, Jews throughout the world were able to participate in its services. I am not USCJ’s fundraiser, but I would be amiss if I did not use this brief opportunity to thank those who support the Mishnah Yomit project and the other projects of the USCJ. May you continue to show your support by learning and by continuing to help others to learn as well. Most importantly, congratulations on learning another tractate of Mishnah. May you have the strength and time to keep on learning more! Tomorrow we begin Yoma.