Menachot

or also to the case where the rims were not overlaid? And he replied, It makes no difference whether the overlaying was fixed or the overlaying was not fixed; whether the rims were overlaid or the rims were not overlaid.1 And should you further say that acacia wood,2 being valuable, is not nullified [by the overlaying],3 this would be quite in order according to Resh Lakish who said that they taught this4 only of vessels of common wood5 which come from overseas, but vessels of fine wood6 are valuable and are not nullified [by the overlaying]. But what can one say according to R. Johanan who said that even vessels of fine wood are nullified [by the overlaying]? — One must therefore say that the table [of the Sanctuary] was different, for the Divine Law called it wood. For it is written, The altar was of wood, three cubits high, and the length thereof two cubits; and the corners thereof, and the length thereof, and the walls thereof were of wood; and he said unto me, This is the table that is before the Lord.7 [The verse] begins with the altar and ends with the table! R. Johanan and R. Eleazar both said, While the Temple still stood the altar used to make atonement for a man, but now that the Temple no longer stands a man's table makes atonement for him.8 THERE WERE THERE FOUR GOLDEN PROPS etc. How do we know this? — R. Kattina said, For the verse says, And thou shalt make ke'arothaw, and kappothaw, and kesothaw, and menakiothaw, to cover withal.9 Ke'arothaw are the moulds,10 kappothaw the dishes,11 kesothaw the props,12 and menakiothaw the rods;13 to cover withal: wherewith the bread was covered.14 Raba raised an objection. [We have learnt:] NEITHER THE PLACING OF THE RODS NOR THEIR REMOVAL OVERRODE THE SABBATH. Now if we were to hold [that the rods are enjoined] in the Torah, wherefore do they not override the Sabbath? Later, however, Raba said, What I said was not correct, for we have learnt: R. AKIBA LAID DOWN THIS GENERAL RULE: ANY WORK THAT CAN BE DONE ON THE EVE OF THE SABBATH DOES NOT OVERRIDE THE SABBATH. This,15 therefore, in all probability did not override the Sabbath. For why [were the rods required at all]? So that the bread become not mouldy. But in this short time16 it would not become mouldy. And so it has been taught: What was the procedure? He used to enter on the eve of the Sabbath, draw out the rods, and place them [on the ground] parallel with the length of the table. At the outgoing of the Sabbath he used to enter again, lift up the ends of one cake and insert the rods underneath it, and then lift up the ends of another cake and insert the rods underneath it. The four [middle] cakes each required three rods underneath them, the topmost cake required but two rods underneath it for there was no burden upon it, while the bottom cake required no rods at all for it stood upon the surface of the table. We have learnt elsewhere:17 R. Meir says, All cubit measurements in the Temple were [according to a cubit of] medium size,18 excepting those of the golden altar, the horns, the sobeb,19 and the base [of the outer altar]20 R. Judah says, The cubit used for the [Temple] building was of six handbreadths and that for the vessels was of five handbreadths. R. Johanan said, Both derived their views from the same text: And these are the measures of the altar21 by cubits — the cubit is a cubit and a handbreadth; 22 According to Tosaf. it is the name of a place. the Rabbinical interpretation which follows, hence they are left untranslated. should not break. free circulation of air between the cakes, and thus the cakes were kept clean and free from mouldiness. and the removal of the bread on the Sabbath at midday, or between the setting down of the fresh bread on the Sabbath and the insertion of the rods at the conclusion of the Sabbath. cubit spoken of in this verse, for the latter cubit measured only five handbreadths. And all the parts of the altar mentioned in this verse were measured by a cubit of five handbreadths.