מנחות 96 — Soncino English Talmud

¹for he is in danger of his life. R. Judah and R. Simeon, however, differ as to the tradition. And there is in fact evidence for this, for it reads: R. SIMEON SAYS, ACCUSTOM THYSELF TO SAY, THE TWO LOAVES AND THE SHEWBREAD WERE VALID WHETHER MADE IN THE TEMPLE COURT OR IN BETH PAGE. This proves it. MISHNAH. THE KNEADING, THE SHAPING, AND THE BAKING OF THE HIGH PRIEST'S GRIDDLE-CAKES WERE PERFORMED WITHIN [THE TEMPLE COURT], AND THEY OVERRODE THE SABBATH; THE GRINDING [OF THE CORN FOR IT] AND THE SIFTING DID NOT OVERRIDE THE SABBATH. R. AKIBA LAID DOWN THIS GENERAL RULE: ANY WORK THAT CAN BE DONE ON THE EVE OF THE SABBATH DOES NOT OVERRIDE THE SABBATH, BUT THAT WHICH CANNOT BE DONE ON THE EVE OF THE SABBATH OVERRIDES THE SABBATH. ALL MEAL-OFFERINGS REQUIRE A VESSEL [OF MINISTRY FOR THOSE WORKS THAT ARE PERFORMED] WITHIN, BUT DO NOT REQUIRE A VESSEL [OF MINISTRY FOR THOSE WORKS THAT ARE PERFORMED] OUTSIDE. THE TWO LOAVES WERE SEVEN HANDBREADTHS LONG AND FOUR WIDE AND THEIR HORNS WERE FOUR FINGERBREADTHS. THE [CAKES OF THE] SHEWBREAD WERE TEN HANDBREADTHS LONG AND FIVE WIDE AND THEIR HORNS WERE SEVEN FINGERBREADTHS. R. JUDAH SAYS, LEST YOU ERR [REMEMBER BUT THE WORDS] ZADAD YAHAZ. BEN ZOMA SAYS, AND THOU SHALT SET UPON THE TABLE SHEW BREAD BEFORE ME CONTINUALLY: ‘SHEWBREAD’ SIGNIFIES THAT IT SHALL HAVE ALL ITS SURFACES VISIBLE. THE TABLE WAS TEN HANDBREADTHS LONG AND FIVE WIDE; THE CAKES OF THE SHEWBREAD WERE TEN HANDBREADTHS LONG AND FIVE WIDE. EACH CAKE WAS PLACED LENGTHWISE ACROSS THE BREADTH OF THE TABLE, AND TWO AND A HALF HANDBREADTHS WERE TURNED UP AT EITHER SIDE SO THAT ITS LENGTH FILLED THE ENTIRE BREADTH OF THE TABLE. THIS IS THE VIEW OF R. JUDAH. R. MEIR SAYS, THE TABLE WAS TWELVE HANDBREADTHS LONG AND SIX WIDE; THE CAKES OF THE SHEWBREAD WERE TEN HANDBREADTHS LONG AND FIVE WIDE. EACH CAKE WAS PLACED LENGTHWISE ACROSS THE BREADTH OF THE TABLE, AND TWO HANDBREADTHS WERE TURNED UP AT EITHER SIDE; AND THERE WAS A SPACE OF TWO HANDBREADTHS BETWEEN [THE TWO SETS] SO THAT THE WIND COULD BLOW BETWEEN THEM. ABBA SAUL SAYS, THERE THEY USED TO PUT THE TWO DISHES OF FRANKINCENSE PERTAINING TO THE SHEWBREAD. THEY SAID TO HIM, IS IT NOT WRITTEN, AND THOU SHALT PUT PURE FRANKINCENSE UPON [‘AL] EACH ROW? HE REPLIED, BUT IS IT NOT WRITTEN, AND NEXT UNTO [‘AL] HIM SHALL BE THE TRIBE OF MANASSEH? THERE WERE THERE FOUR GOLDEN PROPS, BRANCHED AT THE TOP, WHICH SUPPORTED THE CAKES, TWO FOR THE ONE ROW AND TWO FOR THE OTHER ROW. AND THERE WERE TWENTY-EIGHT RODS, EACH [SHAPED] LIKE THE HALF OF A HOLLOW REED, FOURTEEN FOR THE ONE ROW AND FOURTEEN FOR THE OTHER ROW. NEITHER THE PLACING OF THE RODS NOR THEIR REMOVAL OVERRODE THE SABBATH, BUT [A PRIEST] USED TO ENTER ON THE DAY BEFORE THE SABBATH, DRAW OUT THE RODS, AND PLACE THEM PARALLEL WITH THE LENGTH OF THE TABLE. EVERY ARTICLE THAT STOOD IN THE TEMPLE WAS PLACED WITH ITS LENGTH PARALLEL WITH THE LENGTH OF THE HOUSE. GEMARA. ALL MEAL-OFFERINGS REQUIRE A VESSEL [OF MINISTRY FOR THOSE WORKS THAT ARE PERFORMED] WITHIN. Rabbi was asked, How do you know it? And he replied, Behold it is written, And he said unto me, This is the place where the priests shall boil the guilt-offering and the sin-offering, where they shall bake the meal-offering; that they bring them not forth in the outer court. The meal-offering is placed alongside with the guilt-offering and the sin-offering; as the guilt-offering and the sin-offering require a vessel of ministry, so the meal-offering also requires a vessel of ministry. THE TABLE WAS TEN HANDBREADTHS LONG. R. Johanan said, According to him who says that two and a half handbreadths [of each cake] were turned up [at either side], it will be seen that the table could hallow [whatsoever was put upon it] to the height of fifteen handbreadths; and according to him who says that two handbreadths were turned up [at either side] it will be seen that the table could hallow to the height of twelve handbreadths. But there were the rods! — The rods were sunken in. But what was the purpose [of the rods]? To prevent the bread from becoming mouldy, was it not? But as now suggested the bread would still become mouldy! — It was raised a little. Then that little [should also be taken into account]! — Since in all it did not amount to a handbreadth it was of no significance. But there were the dishes [of frankincense]! — They were placed in the bread and rose to the same height as the bread. Then there were the corners! — The corners were bent inward and the bread rested upon them.^ᵃ^ᵇ^ᶜ^ᵈ^ᵉ^ᶠ^ᵍ^ʰ^ⁱ^ʲ^ᵏ^ˡ^ᵐ^ⁿ^ᵒ^ᵖ^ᵠ^ʳ^ˢ^ᵗ^ᵘ^ᵛ^ʷ^ˣ^ʸ^ᶻ^ᵃᵃ^ᵃᵇ^ᵃᶜ^ᵃᵈ^ᵃᵉ

^ᵃnote:For David had been overcome by faintness by reason of his hunger, and in order to save life all laws may be superseded.
^ᵇnote:As to whether or not the oven hallows whatsoever is baked in it.
^ᶜnote:R. Simeon's expression clearly shows that he is referring to a tradition that he had received from his teachers.
^ᵈnote:The meal-offering prepared on a griddle which was offered daily by the High priest, half of the tenth being offered in the morning and the other half in the evening. V. Lev. VI, 12-15.
^ᵉnote:For the half-tenth measure by which the tenth was divided was, according to all views, a hallowed vessel, so that the flour became hallowed therein; hence it was necessary to knead it inside the Temple court.
^ᶠnote:As the grinding and sifting can be done before the Sabbath they do not override the Sabbath, but the kneading, the shaping and the baking cannot be done before the Sabbath, for since the flour has already been hallowed in the half tenth measure the offering would become invalid if kept overnight; accordingly they override the Sabbath.
^ᵍnote:Or: Every (work in connection with the) meal-offering that is prepared in a vessel of ministry must be performed within (the Temple court), but every work that is not prepared in a vessel of ministry may be performed outside.
^ʰnote:There is considerable doubt among the commentators as to what these horns were. According to Rashi and Bertinoro they were lumps of dough, four fingerbreadths long (in the Shewbread, seven), put on the four upper corners of the cake after the manner of the horns of the altar. For further suggestions v. Cohn J. Menachot (Mischnayot) Berlin, 1925 a.l.
^ⁱnote:The consonants of these two words have the numerical values of 7, 4, 4 and 10, 5, 7, which correspond to the dimensions of the Two Loaves and the Shewbread respectively. The mnemonical words are meaningless.
^ʲnote:Ex. XXV, 30.
^ᵏnote:Lit., ‘it shall have faces (on all sides)’. Another interpretation, based on the reading ohbhp is: it shall have corners, i.e., the horns mentioned above; v. supra p. 586, n. 5.
^ˡnote:For according to R. Judah the cubit consisted of five handbreadths, and the dimensions of the table are given in the Torah as two cubits long and one wide. Cf. Ex. XXV, 23.
^ᵐnote:And stood perpendicularly; these were the sides of the cakes.
^ⁿnote:For the cubit according to R. Meir consisted of six handbreadths.
^ᵒnote:This free circulation of air between the two rows would prevent the cakes from becoming mouldy.
^ᵖnote:Lev. XXIV, 7. The Heb. kg generally means upon; thus the frankincense was to be put upon the bread.
^ᵠnote:Num. II, 20. In this verse kg clearly denotes ‘next to’, ‘by the side of’. Likewise, argues Abba Saul, in the case of the Shewbread kg denotes by the side of and not upon.
^ʳnote:V. supra p. 579 and notes thereon.
^ˢnote:I.e., the rods were placed on the ground to lie parallel with the length of the table (Tosaf.).
^ᵗnote:The rods were removed on the Friday, on the Saturday fresh cakes were set on the table without, however, putting the rods in their place, and in the evening after the Sabbath the rods were inserted between the cakes.
^ᵘnote:I.e., east to west; e.g., the table.
^ᵛnote:Ezek. XLVI, 20.
^ʷnote:For those services which are performed inside the Temple court, e.g., the cooking of the offering, which is expressly spoken of in this verse.
^ˣnote:As each cake was two and a half handbreadths high each row of six cakes rose to a height of fifteen handbreadths above the surface of the table.
^ʸnote:That were placed between the cakes; accordingly the six cakes rose to a greater height than fifteen handbreadths, for there must be added thereto five times the thickness of the rods.
^ᶻnote:There were notches at the top of each cake and the rods were laid therein so that there was no intervening space between one cake and that above it.
^ᵃᵃnote:In spite of the rods, since there is no space between the cakes.
^ᵃᵇnote:The rod did not lie actually, as was assumed supra, upon the sides of the cake (v. diagram p. 580), but was raised above it, and the ends of the rod rested in the grooves of the upright props; accordingly the upper cake did not come into contact with the one below it, and the air could circulate freely between the cakes.
^ᵃᶜnote:It would make each row rise to a greater height than fifteen handbreadths.
^ᵃᵈnote:I.e., in the air-space of the top cake between the two perpendicular sides.
^ᵃᵉnote:Or ‘horns’, v. supra p. 586, n. 5.

²But there was also the border of the table! — It is in accordance with the view of him who says that the border was underneath [the table]. But [what can be said] according to him who says that the border was above [the table]? — It slanted outwards so that the bread actually rested on the table. As was taught: R. Jose says, There were no props there at all but the border of the table supported the bread. But they said to him, The border was beneath [the table]. R. Johanan said, According to him who says that the border was beneath the table, it follows that a board which can be used on either side is susceptible to uncleanness; but according to him who says that the border was above the table, there is still a doubt as to whether a board which can be used on either side [is susceptible to uncleanness or not]. It is evident [from the above] that the table was susceptible to uncleanness, but surely it is a wooden vessel made to rest, and a wooden vessel made to rest is not susceptible to uncleanness! For what reason? We require it to be like a sack: just as a sack is movable both full and empty so everything that is movable both full and empty is susceptible to uncleanness! — The table, too, was movable both full and empty, in accordance with Resh Lakish's statement. For Resh Lakish said, What is the meaning of the verse, upon the clean table? The inference is that it is susceptible to uncleanness. But why? It is a wooden vessel made to rest and cannot therefore contract uncleanness! It teaches that they used to lift it up and exhibit the Shewbread thereon to those who came up for the Festivals, saying to them, Behold the love in which you are held by God! This is in accordance with R. Joshua b. Levi; for R. Joshua b. Levi said, A great miracle was wrought in regard to the Shewbread: it was taken away as [fresh as] when it was set down, as it is written, To put hot bread in the day when it was taken away. But surely you can arrive at this from the fact that it was overlaid [with gold]! For we have learnt: If a table or a side-table was damaged, or was overlaid with marble, yet room enough was left to set cups thereon, it is still susceptible to uncleanness. R. Judah says, There must be room enough left to set portions [of food thereon]. Now if there was room enough left it is [susceptible] but if there was not room enough left it is not [susceptible]. And should you say that in the one case the overlaying was fixed, whereas in the other it was not fixed; but [it has been reported] that Resh Lakish enquired of R. Johanan, [Does it apply only] to a fixed overlaying or also to an overlaying that is not fixed? And furthermore does it apply only to the case where the rims were also overlaid^ᵃᶠ^ᵃᵍ^ᵃʰ^ᵃⁱ^ᵃʲ^ᵃᵏ^ᵃˡ^ᵃᵐ^ᵃⁿ^ᵃᵒ^ᵃᵖ^ᵃᵠ^ᵃʳ^ᵃˢ^ᵃᵗ^ᵃᵘ^ᵃᵛ^ᵃʷ^ᵃˣ^ᵃʸ^ᵃᶻ

^ᵃᶠnote:It is assumed that the border was a rim or a ledge which rose above the table; accordingly the bread would have to be placed above this ledge, and as the border was one handbreadth wide each row of bread would then reach to a height of sixteen handbreadths above the table.
^ᵃᵍnote:The border was a frame which joined together the four legs of the table. The top of the table, however, was a flat board and not attached to the frame, so that either side of the board could have been used as the table top.
^ᵃʰnote:Lit., ‘which can be turned over’. i.e., a flat board without rim or ledge on either side.
^ᵃⁱnote:For such was the top of the Sanctuary table, and that was susceptible to uncleanness, v. infra.
^ᵃʲnote:Accordingly the table top could not have been reversed, but with its proper side up it formed a receptacle, and so it was susceptible to uncleanness.
^ᵃᵏnote:A wooden vessel in order to be susceptible to uncleanness must in the manner of its use be like a sack, for the two are mentioned together in one verse in respect of uncleanness (Lev. XI, 32).
^ᵃˡnote:This would exclude wooden vessels not intended to be moved at all.
^ᵃᵐnote:Lev. XXIV, 6. V. supra 29a.
^ᵃⁿnote:So in MS.M., and in all the parallel passages; omitted in cur. edd.
^ᵃᵒnote:I Sam. XXI, 7. V. supra p. 287, n. 6.
^ᵃᵖnote:That the Sanctuary table was susceptible to uncleanness even though it was intended to rest in one place.
^ᵃᵠnote:This establishes it as a metal vessel, and metal vessels are susceptible to uncleanness even though made to rest, for they are not likened to a sack. (v. p. 590, n. 4).
^ᵃʳnote:Kel. XXII, 1; Hag. 26b.
^ᵃˢnote:heckus. V. Jast. s.v. hepks ‘(delphica, sub. mensa) a three-legged table used as a toilet table or a waiter, contrad. from ijka (eating table)’.
^ᵃᵗnote:Damaged tables which can no longer be used for their original purpose are not susceptible to uncleanness.
^ᵃᵘnote:Stone vessels are not susceptible to uncleanness.
^ᵃᵛnote:I.e., part of the table was left undamaged or was not overlaid with marble, and that part could still be used for its original purpose.
^ᵃʷnote:Thus if the entire table was damaged, or if it was entirely overlaid with marble, it is not susceptible to uncleanness; hence it is evident that we consider a vessel in regard to uncleanness according to the material of its overlaying.
^ᵃˣnote:In the Mishnah quoted.
^ᵃʸnote:The golden overlaying of the Sanctuary table was not fastened to it permanently but was removable, hence the table could not be regarded as a metal vessel.
^ᵃᶻnote:Sc. the teaching of the above-quoted Mishnah viz., that the material of the overlaying of a vessel is regarded for the purposes of uncleanness as the material of the vessel.