Zevachim

for it is written, And the days that David reigned over Israel were forty years: seven years reigned he in Hebron, [and thirty and three years reigned he in Jerusalem].1 Now of Solomon it is written, And he began to build . . . in the fourth year of his reign.2 Thus three hundred and seventy less one was left for Shiloh.3 WHEN THEY CAME TO NOB AND GIBEON etc. How do we know it? — Because our Rabbis taught: For ye are not as yet come to the rest and to the inheritance, [which the Lord your God giveth thee]:4 ‘to the rest’ alludes to Shiloh, ‘inheritance’ alludes to Jerusalem. Why does Scripture separate them?5 In order to grant permission between one and the other.6 Resh Lakish said to R. Johanan: If so,7 let [the Mishnah] teach second tithe too?8 — As for tithe, he replied, the implication of ‘there’ is derived from ‘there’ [written] in connection with the Ark:9 since there was no Ark [at Nob and Gibeon],10 there was no tithe either. If so, the Passover-offering and [other] sacrifices are the same, for we learn the meaning of ‘there’ [in their case]11 from ‘there’ [written] in connection with the Ark: since there was no Ark, these too were not [offered]? — Who has told you [this]? he replied: R. Simeon,12 who maintained that even the community could only offer Passover-offerings and obligatory offerings which have a fixed time,13 but obligatory offerings for which there was no fixed time might not be offered at either place. Now, animal tithe is an obligatory offering without a fixed time, and corn tithe is assimilated to animal tithe. Hence it follows that in R. Judah's view [second tithe] is offered?14 — Yes. For surely R. Adda b. Mattenah said: Second tithe and animal tithe were eaten in Nob and Gibeon [only], in R. Judah's opinion. Yet surely a birah [Divine residence] was required?15 — Did not R. Joseph recite: There were three Divine residences, [viz.,] at Shiloh, [at] Nob and Gibeon,16 and [at] the Eternal House? He [R. Joseph] recited it, and he explained it: [These were] in respect of second tithe, and in accordance with R. Judah. WHEN THEY CAME TO JERUSALEM etc. Our Rabbis taught: For ye are not as yet come to the rest and to the inheritance: ‘rest’ alludes to Shiloh; ‘inheritance’, to Jerusalem. And thus it says, My inheritance is become unto Me as a lion in the forest; and it says, Is My inheritance unto Me as a speckled bird of prey?17 this is R. Judah's opinion. R. Simeon said: ‘Rest’ alludes to Jerusalem; ‘inheritance’, to Shiloh, as it is said, This is My resting-place for ever; here will I dwell, for I have desired it; and it says, For the Lord hath chosen Zion; He hath desired it for His habitation. 18 On the view that ‘rest’ alludes to Shiloh, it is well: hence it is written, ‘to the rest and to the inheritance’.19 But on the view that ‘rest’ alludes to Jerusalem while ‘inheritance’ alludes to Shiloh, [Moses] should say, ‘to the inheritance and to the rest’? — This is what he said: Not only have ye not reached the ‘rest’ [Jerusalem]; you have not even reached the ‘inheritance’ [Shiloh]. The school of R. Ishmael taught: Both [words] allude to Shiloh;20 R. Simeon b. Yohai said: Both allude to Jerusalem.21 It is well on the view that ‘rest’ alludes to until Solomon began building the Temple. Thus we have 20 and 33 (which he reigned in Jerusalem) and 4 =57. sixty-nine is arrived at by deducting the forty years in the wilderness, the fourteen at Gilgal, and the fifty-seven of Nob and Gibeon. ‘right in his own eyes’ (v. 8 — sc. at the bamoth)? until you come to the rest, i.e., to Shiloh, and then bamoth will be forbidden. Now, if they were to remain permanently forbidden, Scripture need say nothing more. By adding ‘and to the inheritance’ it intimates that when they come to Jerusalem bamoth will again be forbidden, and thus implies that they were permitted between the destruction of the Tabernacle at Shiloh and the consecration of the Temple in Jerusalem. name to dwell there, the tithe of thy corn etc.; Ark, Ex. XL, 3: And thou shalt put there the ark of the testimony. The use of ‘there’ in both cases implies that they are connected. there; and therefore it was unnecessary to bring corn tithe there either, since the two are assimilated. (Though the two are not really alike: whereas the law of firstling and animal tithe was not operative, and these could not be brought at Nob and Gibeon or anywhere else, second tithe need not be brought at Nob and Gibeon, but might be eaten anywhere.) Tabernacle. permitted even after the destruction of the Temple at Jerusalem (cf. Meg. 10a).