Menachot — Daf 109b

נעשה משרת לעבודת כוכבים

אמר רב נחמן מנא אמינא לה דתניא כהן שעבד עבודת כוכבים ושב קרבנו ריח ניחוח

במאי אילימא בשוגג מאי ושב שב ועומד הוא אלא פשיטא במזיד ואי בזריקה כי שב מאי הוי הא עבד לה שירות אלא לאו בשחיטה

ורב ששת אמר לך לעולם בשוגג והכי קאמר אם שב מעיקרו דכי עבד בשוגג עבד קרבנו ריח ניחוח ואם לאו אין קרבנו ריח ניחוח

השתחוה לעבודת כוכבים רב נחמן אמר קרבנו ריח ניחוח ורב ששת אמר אין קרבנו ריח ניחוח הודה לעבודת כוכבים רב נחמן אמר קרבנו ריח ניחוח ורב ששת אמר אין קרבנו ריח ניחוח

וצריכא דאי אשמעינן הך קמייתא בההיא קאמר רב ששת משום דעבד ליה שירות אבל שחיטה דלא עבד ליה שירות אימא מודה ליה לרב נחמן

ואי אשמעינן שחיטה משום דעבד ליה עבודה אבל השתחוה דלא עבד ליה עבודה אימא לא צריכא

ואי אשמעינן השתחואה משום דעביד ליה מעשה אבל הודה דדיבורא בעלמא אימא לא צריכא:

ואין צריך לומר דבר אחר [וכו']: מדקאמר אין צריך לומר דבר אחר מכלל דבית חוניו לאו עבודת כוכבים הוא

תניא כמאן דאמר בית חוניו לאו עבודת כוכבים הוא דתניא אותה שנה שמת שמעון הצדיק אמר להן שנה זו הוא מת אמרו לו מנין אתה יודע

אמר להן כל יום הכפורים נזדמן לי זקן אחד לבוש לבנים ונתעטף לבנים ונכנס עמי ויצא עמי שנה זו נזדמן לי זקן אחד לבוש שחורים ונתעטף שחורים ונכנס עמי ולא יצא עמי

לאחר הרגל חלה שבעת ימים ומת ונמנעו אחיו הכהנים מלברך בשם

בשעת פטירתו אמר להם חוניו בני ישמש תחתי נתקנא בו שמעי אחיו שהיה גדול ממנו שתי שנים ומחצה אמר לו בא ואלמדך סדר עבודה הלבישו באונקלי וחגרו בצילצול העמידו אצל המזבח אמר להם לאחיו הכהנים ראו מה נדר זה וקיים לאהובתו אותו היום שאשתמש בכהונה גדולה אלבוש באונקלי שליכי ואחגור בצילצול שליכי

בקשו אחיו הכהנים להרגו רץ מפניהם ורצו אחריו הלך לאלכסנדריא של מצרים ובנה שם מזבח והעלה עליו לשום עבודת כוכבים וכששמעו חכמים בדבר אמרו מה זה שלא ירד לה כך היורד לה על אחת כמה וכמה דברי רבי מאיר

אמר לו רבי יהודה לא כך היה מעשה אלא לא קיבל עליו חוניו שהיה שמעי אחיו גדול ממנו שתי שנים ומחצה ואף על פי כן נתקנא בו חוניו בשמעי אחיו אמר לו בא ואלמדך סדר עבודה והלבישו באונקלי וחגרו בצילצול והעמידו אצל המזבח אמר להם לאחיו הכהנים ראו מה נדר זה וקיים לאהובתו אותו היום שישתמש בכהונה גדולה אלבוש באונקלי שליכי ואחגור בצילצול שליכי

בקשו אחיו הכהנים להרגו סח להם כל המאורע בקשו להרוג את חוניו רץ מפניהם ורצו אחריו רץ לבית המלך ורצו אחריו כל הרואה אותו אומר זה הוא זה הוא הלך לאלכסנדריא של מצרים ובנה שם מזבח והעלה עליו לשם שמים שנאמר (ישעיהו יט, יט) (והיה) ביום ההוא יהיה מזבח לה' בתוך ארץ מצרים ומצבה אצל גבולה לה'

וכששמעו חכמים בדבר אמרו ומה זה שברח ממנה כך המבקש לירד לה על אחת כמה וכמה:

תניא אמר ר' יהושע בן פרחיה בתחלה כל האומר עלה לה אני כופתו ונותנו לפני הארי עתה כל האומר לי לירד ממנה אני מטיל עליו קומקום של חמין

שהרי שאול ברח ממנה וכשעלה בקש להרוג את דוד

אמר ליה מר קשישא בריה דרב חסדא לאביי ר' מאיר האי קרא דרבי יהודה מאי עביד ליה

לכדתניא לאחר מפלתו של סנחריב יצא חזקיה ומצא בני מלכים שהיו יושבין בקרונות של זהב הדירן שלא לעבוד עבודת כוכבים שנאמר (ישעיהו יט, יח) ביום ההוא יהיו חמש ערים בארץ מצרים מדברות שפת כנען

for he had become a priest to idols. R. Nahman said, Whence do I derive my view? From the following which was taught: If a priest ministered before idols and repented, his offering is a sweet savour. In what circumstances [did he minister]? Will you say, inadvertently? Then what is the point of ‘and repented’? He has always been repentant!1 It must obviously be [that he ministered] deliberately. And further, if by sprinkling, then even though he repented it avails nought, for he had performed a service [before the idol]! It can only be by slaughtering [before it]. R. Shesheth, however, will say, I still maintain that he ministered inadvertently, and [the Baraitha] means to say as follows: If he had always been repentant, that is to say, when he ministered [before the idol] he ministered inadvertently, his offering [in the Temple] is a sweet savour; otherwise his offering is not a sweet savour. If a priest had prostrated himself before an idol, R. Nahman said, His offering [in the Temple] is a sweet savour; and R. Shesheth said, His offering is not a sweet savour. If he had acknowledged an idol, R. Nahman said, His offering [in the Temple] is a sweet savour; and R. Shesheth said, His offering is not a sweet savour. Now all these disputes had to be stated. For if only the first2 had been stated, I would have said that only there did R. Shesheth say [that his offering was not a sweet savour] since he had performed a service [before the idol], but where he had slaughtered [before the idol], since that was no service, I would have said that he agreed with R. Nahman. [Hence the latter dispute had to be stated.] And if the dispute regarding slaughtering had only been stated, [I would have said that only there did R. Shesheth say that his offering was not a sweet savour] since he had performed some service3 [before the idol], but not where he had prostrated himself before the idol, for that was no service. Hence the latter had to be stated. And if the dispute regarding prostrating [before the idol] had only been stated, [I would have said that only there did R. Shesheth say that his offering was not a sweet savour] since he had done some act [before the idol], but not where he had merely acknowledged the idol, for that was a mere matter of words. Therefore all had to be stated. NEEDLESS TO SAY [THIS IS SO OF PRIESTS WHO MINISTERED TO] ANOTHER MATTER.4 Since it says here, NEEDLESS TO SAY [THIS IS SO OF PRIESTS WHO MINISTERED TO] ANOTHER MATTER, it follows that the Temple of Onias was not an idolatrous shrine. Our Tanna thus concurs with the view of him who said that the Temple of Onias was not an idolatrous shrine. For it was taught: In the year in which Simeon the Just died, he foretold them that he would die. They said to him, ‘Whence do you know it?’ He replied. ‘Every Day of Atonement there met me an old man, dressed in white and wrapped in white, who entered with me [into the Holy of Holies] and left with me; but this year there met me an old man, dressed in black and wrapped in black, who entered with me but did not leave with me’. After the Festival [of Tabernacles] he was ill for seven days and then died. Thereafter his brethren the priests forbore to pronounce the Name in the priestly benediction.5 In the hour of his departure [from this life], he said to them, ‘My son Onias shall assume the office [of High Priest] after me’. His brother Shime'i, who was two years and a half older than he, was jealous of him and said to him, ‘Come and I will teach you the order of the Temple service. He6 thereupon put upon him a gown,7 girded him with a girdle, placed him near the altar, and said to his brethren the priests. ‘See what this man promised his beloved8 and has now fulfilled: "On the day in which I will assume the office of High Priest I will put on your gown and gird myself with your girdle".’ At this his brethren the priests sought to kill him.9 He fled from them but they pursued him. He then went to Alexandria in Egypt, built an altar there, and offered thereon sacrifices in honour of idols. When the Sages heard of this they said, If this is what happened [through the jealousy] of one6 who had never assumed the honour,10 what would happen [through the jealousy] of one who had once assumed the honour [and had been ousted from it]! This is the view of the events according to R. Meir. R. Judah said to him, That was not what happened, but the fact was that Onias did not accept the office of High Priest because his brother Shime'i was two years and a half older than he. For all that Onias was jealous of his brother Shime'i and he said to him, ‘Come and I will teach you the order of the Temple service’. He9 thereupon put on him a gown, girded him with a girdle, placed him near the altar, and said to his brethren the priests, ‘See what this man promised his beloved and has now fulfilled: "On the day that I will assume the office of High Priest I will put on your gown and gird myself with your girdle".’ At this his brethren the priests sought to kill him,6 but he explained to them all that occurred. They thereupon sought to kill Onias; he fled from them but they pursued him. He fled to the King's palace,11 but they pursued him there; and whoever saw him cried out, There he is, there he is. He thereupon went to Alexandria in Egypt, built an altar there, and offered thereon sacrifices in honour of God; for so it is written, In that day shall there be an altar to the Lord in the midst of the land of Egypt, and a pillar at the border thereof to the Lord.12 When the Sages heard of this they said, If this is what happened [through the jealousy] of one13 who had [at first] shunned the honour, what would happen [through the jealousy] of one who seeks the honour! It was taught: R. Joshua b. Perahiah said, At first14 whoever were to say to me ‘Take up the honour’,15 I would bind him and put him in front of a lion; but now16 whoever were to say to me, ‘Give up the honour’,17 I would pour over him a kettle of boiling water. For [we see that] Saul [at first] shunned [the throne], but after he had taken it he sought to kill David. Mar Kashisha son of R. Hisda said to Abaye. How does R. Meir18 interpret that verse12 adduced by R. Judah? — As in the following [Baraitha] which was taught: After the downfall of Sennacherib Hezekiah went out and found princes sitting in their golden carriages. He adjured them not to serve idols, as it is written, In that day there shall be five cities in the land of Egypt that speak the language of Canaan,19 unbecoming to appear in public’ (Jast.). According to Rashi: a leather gown. of R. Meshullam. There is, however, another text found in MS.M. and quoted by R. Gershom, Rashi and Tosaf. which reads: ihnj ka ouenue uhkg khyn hbt vjbn ut vkug rnutv kf vkhj,c: Whosoever pledges a burnt-offering or a meal-offering first (i.e., without having first set apart the animal or the flour for the purpose). I would pour over him a kettle of boiling water. The reason for this denunciation is that later this man might not find an animal or flour available for his purpose and his vow will therefore be left unfulfilled. This subject, however, is entirely out of place here. the Sanhedrin, cf. Hag, 16a; he fled to Alexandria owing to Sadducee hostility but was recalled later by Simeon b. Shetah; v. Sot. 47a.