Menachot 88b (פח:) — the Talmud in English

It is outside:

outside the camp they would purify the leper; so why do we need to sanctify the water

? But if

you might say that it was in order to sanctify the oil for my loaves of the

nazirite,

as explained in the Mishna, where it says that they would measure a quarter-log of oil for the nazirite; this too cannot be said, for:

The nazirite’s loaves become sanctified with sanctity of the body through the slaughter of the ram

as explained in the Mishna above, on page 78b; so why do we need to sanctify the oil

? Rabbi Hiyya said to him:

The quarter-log measure was anointed for this purpose,

as with it they would measure a quarter-log of oil for each loaf of the High Priest’s griddle-cakes,

and the oil became sanctified through the quarter-log measure.

He applied to him—Rabbi, who was in the Land of Israel, said this about Rabbi Hiyya, who had come up from Babylonia, when he heard his answer—

He applied to him—Rabbi, who was in Eretz Yisrael, applied this verse to Rabbi Hiyya, who had come up from Babylonia, when he heard his answer:

“From a distant land, a man of his counsel.”

We learned in the Mishna:

For what purpose was the half-log used?

A half-log of water for a sota and a half-log of oil for the thanksgiving offering:

Rabbi was sitting and having difficulty with this: Why was the half-log measure anointed?

For:

If

it was in order to sanctify the water

of the sota,

as we learned in the Mishna that this was the purpose for which this measure was used, this too cannot be said, for:

Are

the water

of the sota ordinary water?

But

“holy water”

is written

with regard to the water taken for the sota; this means water from the basin, in which it had become sanctified. If so, there is no need to sanctify it a second time

!? If

it was to sanctify the oil of the loaves of the

thanksgiving offering,

as explained in the Mishna, which states that it was used to measure the half-log for the loaves of the thanksgiving offering, this too cannot be said, for

the loaves of the thanksgiving offering become sanctified through the slaughter of the thanksgiving offering,

as explained above, on page 78b. If so, why do I need to sanctify the oil

?

Rabbi Shimon, son of Rabbi, said to him, [

Rabbi Shimon answered his father]:

With it they would apportion a half-log of oil for each and every lamp

of the Menorah

.

He said to him: “Lamp of Israel [who illuminates the eyes of the Sages]—indeed

this was so.”

Rabbi Yohanan said in the name of Rabbi:

If a lamp

of the Menorah

goes out

during the night, before the time allotted for kindling, which is during the day, has ended:

The oil is considered refuse and

the wick is considered refuse,

meaning that the oil and the wick are like refuse, and one does not kindle with them again. Rather,

what does he do? He cleans it,

meaning that he removes the oil and the wick from the lamp,

and puts oil

into it,

and another wick,

and kindles it.

and kindles it.

Rabbi Zeira was sitting and raising a question

that is, Rabbi Zeira was sitting and was uncertain:

When he puts into it—

the lamp that went out in the middle of the night—

oil,

does he put in it:

According to the original measure

Rabbi Zeira was sitting and asking [

Rabbi Zeira sat and was uncertain]:

When he puts into it—into a lamp that went out in the middle of the night—

oil,

does he:

Give it according to the original measure, that is, a half-log of oil, just as he had placed in it at night when he kindled it— or does he put into it only as much oil as it lacked, that is, he puts back the amount of oil that he had removed ?

answered

Rabbi Zeira’s uncertainty:

It is obvious that he puts into it according to the original measure,

for if he were to put in only the amount that it lacked, how would we know what it lacked?

How would we know how much he removed?

Rabbi Jeremiah said

that he resolved

Rabbi Zeira’s uncertainty:

It is obvious that he gives it according to the original measure,

he puts that amount into it,

for if he were to give it according to the amount it lacked,

how would we know what it lacked?

How would we know how much he removed

?

And should you say that he estimates it,

that he measures the oil remaining and fills the lamp with that same measure, this is impossible, for

if so, were there only

seven measures

of liquids in the Temple? Surely

there would be many more measures [

so that he would need many measures in addition to the seven] in order to estimate the amount of oil remaining in the lamp.

Rabbi Zeira applied to Rabbi Jeremiah the verse:

“And your splendor, prosper, ride on, on behalf of truth and humble righteousness,”

[meaning: You are sharp, as we expounded in Shabbat 63b, “‘And your splendor, prosper, ride on’—these are two Torah scholars who sharpen one another in halakha.”]

It was also stated: Rabbi Abbahu said in the name of Rabbi Yohanan, and some say Rabbi Hanina said in the name of Rabbi:

A lamp

—that is, all the lamps—

of the

Menorah

of the Temple was made in sections,

meaning that the lamps were fashioned as one piece with the Menorah, but in a manner that enabled them to be bent.

And the reason is that

Rav Sheshet held:

held:

when it is written concerning the menorah: “

regarding the menorah:

a talent” [“It shall be made of one talent of pure gold”]

and “

and “

hammered” [“the whole of it was hammered from a single piece of pure gold”]

“

with regard to the menorah and also concerning

also concerning

its lamps it is written. Therefore, the lamps and the menorah were a single piece of gold, and one could not detach the lamps from the menorah—

then the lamps and the menorah were one piece of gold, and it was impossible to remove the lamps from the menorah—

And

since the menorah required

the menorah required

cleaning every morning—that is, removing the burned wick from it and cleaning it—

every morning—that is, removing the burnt wick from it and cleaning it—

if it had not been made in sections, it could not have been cleaned [Since it required cleaning, the lamps necessarily had to be made in a manner that allowed them to be bent; otherwise, it would not have been possible to clean them properly].

They raise an objection from

Meitiv i from a beraita that we learned:

baraita, a tannaitic source not included in the Mishna, in which we learned:

How does he perform the cleaning every morning? He

the cleaning every morning? He

removes

the lamps

and places them in the Tent [He removes the lamps from the menorah and places them in the Temple],

and

and wipes

the lamps

with a sponge, puts oil in them, and lights them. It is explicitly stated, then, that the lamps were not a single piece with the menorah, and that the cleaning was not performed by bending them?!

It is therefore explicitly stated that they were not one piece with the menorah, and that the cleaning was not performed by bending them.

And we answer:

he,

Rav Sheshet,

follows this tanna, as it was taught:

The Sages say: They would not move it from its place, meaning that they did not move the lamps from their places on the menorah at the time of cleaning, because they were a single piece with it.

meaning that the lamps were not moved from their places on the menorah during the cleaning, because they were made as one piece.

And we raise a difficulty: On the contrary,

by inference, if he wanted to move it, he could move it [If he wished to move them from their places, he could], and if so, this is not in accordance with Rav Sheshet, who holds that they were a single piece?!

Rather, say: It was not moved from its place,

Rather, say: It did not move from its place,

because he could not move it, as it was a single hammered piece.

And who are the Sages,

who hold that the lamps were a single piece with the menorah?

It is Rabbi Elazar bar Tzadok, as it was taught: Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Tzadok, says:

It had something resembling a golden plate on its back,

a golden cover for each lamp, each of which was made like a small boat—

and

when he cleaned it, he pushed it

against the plate

toward its mouth [of the lamp, which is where the wick was], exposing the lamp, and he bent the lamp downward.

And

And

when he put oil in it, he pushed it

against the plate

toward its head [toward the place where the lamp was attached to the menorah], and he poured the oil through the opening in the plate.

And

this dispute among the tannaim as to whether the lamps were a single piece with the menorah is

a dispute between these tannaim,

who likewise disagreed about it,

as it was taught:

The menorah and its lamps are made from the kikkar

and were a single piece,

but its tongs and its fire pans are not made from the kikkar.

Rabbi Nehemiah says: The menorah was made from the kikkar, but neither its lamps nor its tongs nor its fire pans were made from the kikkar.

Thus, we find that the tannaim disagreed as to whether the lamps were made from the kikkar and were a single piece with the menorah, or not.

And we explain:

With regard to what do they disagree,

the tannaim who disagreed concerning whether the lamps were a single piece with the menorah?

They disagree over this verse, as it was taught:

It is written: “

It shall be made of one talent of pure gold,”

we learn that the menorah was made from the kikkar—

From where is it derived to include

also

its lamps,

so that they too would be made from the kikkar and would be a single piece with it?

The verse states: “It shall be made of one talent of pure gold,

all these vessels.”

all these vessels.”

One might have thought that I should include also

tongs and its fire pans

its tongs and its fire pans,

so that they would be made from the kikkar—

The verse states: “It shall be made of one talent of pure gold,

which means: It, but not the vessels.

it,”

implying: it, but not the vessels.

These are the words of Rabbi Nehemiah.

Before the Gemara finishes bringing the entire beraita and the dispute among the tannaim contained in it concerning whether the lamps were a single piece with the menorah, the Gemara raises a difficulty:

The statement of Rabbi Nehemiah in the first beraita, in which he holds that even the lamps are not made from the kikkar,

in the second baraita, where he holds that its lamps were made from the talent!?

conflicts with the statement of Rabbi Nehemiah in the second beraita, in which he holds that the lamps are made from the kikkar?!

There are two tannaitic opinions in accordance with Rabbi Nechemya,

And we answer:

There are two tannaim who report opinions in accordance with Rabbi Nehemiah,

that is, there are two tannaitic approaches as to Rabbi Nehemiah’s opinion.

Here the Gemara returns to the continuation of the beraita:

Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korha says:

The menorah was made from the kikkar, but neither its tongs nor its fire pans nor

even

its lamps were made from the kikkar,

for it is stated “it,” [in accordance with Rabbi Nehemiah’s opinion in the first beraita].

But how do I understand “It shall be made of one talent of pure gold,

that they should all be made of gold,

all these vessels”?

It teaches

that they should all be made of gold,

but not from the kikkar.

Thus, we find tannaim who likewise disagreed as to whether the lamps were a single piece with the menorah. And we raise a difficulty against Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korha, who interpreted the verse as referring to making the vessels from gold, rather than to the kikkar and the single hammered piece:

But

gold is explicitly written with regard to them,

for it is written: “

You shall make its seven lamps, and he shall raise its lamps and cause light to shine toward its front; and its tongs and its fire pans shall be pure gold.” This explicitly states that the lamps and the vessels were gold; why, then, do we need to include these from “all these vessels”?!

It was necessary for the words “

And we answer:

It is necessary to state “

all these vessels”

only

to teach

the bases of the lamps—

the place where the wick burns—that this, too, must be of pure gold. For had the verse not taught us this,

it would have entered your mind to say:

Since the mouths of the lamps become blackened [because the gold becomes blackened by the flame of the wick at that place], it would follow that

the Torah has spared the money of Israel,

the Torah is considerate of the money of the Jewish people,