Save "Mei Kiyor - Parshas Pekudei"
Mei Kiyor - Parshas Pekudei
Presumably, the Targum Yonasan is cluing us in on a miracle that occurred at the Mishkan, that the water stayed clear despite it being the same water without having been changed.
The Pardes Yosef asks, why wasn’t this miracle mentioned in the Mishna in Avos (5:5) which enumerates the various miracles that occurred in the Mikdash? The Mishna reads:
“Ten miracles were wrought for our ancestors in the Temple: [1] no woman miscarried from the odor of the sacred flesh; [2] the sacred flesh never became putrid; [3] no fly was ever seen in the slaughterhouse; [4] no emission occurred to the high priest on the Day of Atonement; [5] the rains did not extinguish the fire of the woodpile; [6] the wind did not prevail against the column of smoke; [7] no defect was found in the omer, or in the two loaves, or in the showbread; [8] the people stood pressed together, yet bowed down and had room enough; [9] never did a serpent or a scorpion harm anyone in Jerusalem; [10] and no man said to his fellow: the place is too congested for me to lodge overnight in Jerusalem.”
The Pardes Yosef quotes an answer from the HaIyun V'HaDrash, that that the neis of the Kiyor was similar to the case of the tree of Shlomo (see Yoma 21b), in that the miracle was inherent in the object that was permanently fixed in the Beis HaMikdash, whereas the Mishna in Avos is only enumerating the miracles that were performed externally on a recurrent basis.
I had a question on this answer. The Ohr HaTorah (Rav Shalom Teumim, Parshas Ki Sisa) has a long shtikl about the Kiyor. The Kiyor, like all of the other vessels, were formed by Betzalel. However, he proves (from the usage of the word "v'asisa") that Moshe Rabbeinu is also alluded to in the passuk, something we don't find by any of the other vessels. Rav Teumim goes on to say that the there were in fact two aspects to the making of the Kiyor. 1. There was the physical formation of the Kiyor, done by Betzalel 2. After it was formed and placed between the Ohel Moed and the Mizbe'ach, Moshe poured in water which then immediately* created a miraculous source of running spring water beneath the Kiyor with which the Kiyor was supplied with water throughout their time in the desert.
In the beginning of his shtikl, all of his sources leading to this conclusion are based on pesukim in Parshas Ki Sisa. He goes on to say that this idea is perhaps alluded to in the aforementioned Targum Yonasan in Parshas Pekudei.
He then asks, that the Gemara in Zevachim 22b says that until the time of Bar Katin there was a problem of the water becoming passul with lina overnight, which would seem to contradict the fact that there was this running spring. He answers that perhaps the water only was from the spring water during the daytime, from Alos to Shkia, but after that time the water turned to regular water. (He says that it would be meduyak the lashon of the Targum "kol yomaya.")
The last part is where I'd like to focus; this would suggest that the miracle was not permanent like the tree of Shlomo, rather it renewed on a recurring basis, if so it should have been mentioned in the Mishna, according to the logic of the HaIyun V'HaDerash?
Throughout my research, I'd like to suggest two other possible answers:
1. The Tosfos Yom Tov says that the Mishna is only counting those miracles which have no inference at all in the Torah. In this instance, the passuk in Pekudei does hint to this miracle.
The Sefer Midreshei Agada B'Targumim (R' Chaim Chamiel, printed 2002) says that the source of the Yonasan ben Uziel is inferred from the word "water", because we find a machlokes in the Gemara Zevachim 22b and Sotah 15b how to translate this word. The Yonasan ben Uziel is translating the word like R' Yishmael there. Since there is a Scriptual hint to this miracle, it was left out of the Mishna's list.
(See however, the HaIyun V'HaDerash who asks on this assertion of the Targum Yonasan being rooted in R' Yishamel, that it wouldn't make sense that the Targum Yonasan would be explaining the passuk not according to the Halacha, since we paskin like the Chachamim! He blibes tzarich iyun on this question. I saw an answer to this question, I forgot where, that it could be that the Targum Yonasan isn't paskining like R' Yishmael, rather he holds like the Chachamim in principle, but in reality the Kiyor had running water, and that is what Targum Yonasan is explaining.)
2. I thought to say an answer based on the Tiferes Yisrael to the Mishna in Avos, who says that the Mishna only counts the miracles that provided tangible benefit for the people in the Beis HaMikdash, as opposed to other miracles, such as the many miracles mentioned in Yoma 21b, which were just expressions of the fact that the Shechina rested in the Beis HaMikdash.
The miracle of the running water beneath Kiyor, I wanted to argue, didn't provide a tangible benefit, but was just a manifestation of Hashem's presence, and therefore isn't listed in the Mishna. However, I think this isn't true for a few reasons:
A. The fact that there was this running water made the lives of the Kohanim easier allowing them to not have to keep refilling the Kiyor with new water every day, since if it was regular water brought from an external source, it would become passul night because of lina. The Mishna includes other miracles in which the tangible "benefit" was related to the Halachic aspects, such as that there was never a pesul found in the Omer, Shtei HaLechem, and the Lechem HaPAnim.
B. And one can argue that the miracle was a tangible "convenience" benefit to the Kohanim in that they didn't have to shlep water every day (no less than the benefit mentioned in the Mishna of that the smoke went directly up, which was convenient for the Kohanim to work in clear air instead of smoky air, and the miracle that there were no flies in the slaughtering-area.
(I also don't understand how Tiferes Yisrael understands this to answer the case of the tree of Shlomo which was clearly a benefit to the Kohanim, as the Gemara later in Yoma 39a says, that the Kohanim benefited from the sale of thoe fruit! Tzarich Iyun.
2. The second possible answer I thought of is based on a machlokes in the scenarios of which the Mishna is discussing. Some say that these are miracles that only occured in the First Beis HaMikdash, others say it is also discussing the Second Beis HaMikdash. The Zera Yaakov (haara 71) says in the name of the Maharsham (Sukka 48b) that in the times of the Mishkan, the running water beneath the Kiyor originated from the well of Miriam, and after she died, it came from the same well but in the merit of Moshe. But after Moshe died, where did the water come from? Maharsham suggests that it was through the running water mentioned by the Targum Yonasan, seemingly a miraculous unknown source. However, Zera Yaakov asks, why do we need to come on to that Targum Yonasan, perhaps when Klal Yisrael came into Eretz Yisrael, they found a well, as there were probably many, from which to get the water from, and thus there was no need for a miracle at all? He blibes tzarich iyun on this question. According to this, perhaps the reason this miracle wasn't mentioned in the Mishna was because there was no miracle at all in the Beis HaMikdash, and, as mentioned, the Mishna is only listing miracles that existed in First Beis HaMikdash (or even Second Beis HaMikdash)

Sources and Footnotes

(ל) וַיָּ֙שֶׂם֙ אֶת־הַכִּיֹּ֔ר בֵּֽין־אֹ֥הֶל מוֹעֵ֖ד וּבֵ֣ין הַמִּזְבֵּ֑חַ וַיִּתֵּ֥ן שָׁ֛מָּה מַ֖יִם לְרׇחְצָֽה׃
(30) He placed the laver between the Tent of Meeting and the altar, and put water in it for washing.
(ל) וְשַׁוֵי יַת כִּיּוֹרָא עַל בְּסִיסֵיהּ בֵּינֵי מַשְׁכַּן זִמְנָא וּבֵינֵי מַדְבְּחָא וִיהַב תַּמָּן מַיִין חַיִין לְקִידוּשׁ וְלָא פַּסְקִין וְלָא סַרְיַן כָּל יוֹמַיָא
(30) And he set the laver upon its foundation between the tabernacle of ordinance and the altar, and put living water therein for purification, that it may not fail, nor become corrupt all the days.
(א) עשרה נסים נעשו לאבותינו בבית המקדש. וקא מני להו דלא רמיזו בקרא כלל:
(1) TEN MIRACLES WERE DONE FOR OUR ANCESTORS IN THE TEMPLE. The mishna goes though them because there is no hint to them in any verses.
(ה) עֲשָׂרָה נִסִּים נַעֲשׂוּ לַאֲבוֹתֵינוּ בְּבֵית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ. לֹא הִפִּילָה אִשָּׁה מֵרֵיחַ בְּשַׂר הַקֹּדֶשׁ, וְלֹא הִסְרִיחַ בְּשַׂר הַקֹּדֶשׁ מֵעוֹלָם, וְלֹא נִרְאָה זְבוּב בְּבֵית הַמִּטְבָּחַיִם, וְלֹא אֵרַע קֶרִי לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים, וְלֹא כִבּוּ גְשָׁמִים אֵשׁ שֶׁל עֲצֵי הַמַּעֲרָכָה, וְלֹא נָצְחָה הָרוּחַ אֶת עַמּוּד הֶעָשָׁן, וְלֹא נִמְצָא פְסוּל בָּעֹמֶר וּבִשְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם וּבְלֶחֶם הַפָּנִים, עוֹמְדִים צְפוּפִים וּמִשְׁתַּחֲוִים רְוָחִים, וְלֹא הִזִּיק נָחָשׁ וְעַקְרָב בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם מֵעוֹלָם, וְלֹא אָמַר אָדָם לַחֲבֵרוֹ צַר לִי הַמָּקוֹם שֶׁאָלִין בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם:
(5) Ten wonders were wrought for our ancestors in the Temple: [1] no woman miscarried from the odor of the sacred flesh; [2] the sacred flesh never became putrid; [3] no fly was ever seen in the slaughterhouse; [4] no emission occurred to the high priest on the Day of Atonement; [5] the rains did not extinguish the fire of the woodpile; [6] the wind did not prevail against the column of smoke; [7] no defect was found in the omer, or in the two loaves, or in the showbread; [8] the people stood pressed together, yet bowed down and had room enough; [9] never did a serpent or a scorpion harm anyone in Jerusalem; [10] and no man said to his fellow: the place is too congested for me to lodge overnight in Jerusalem.
(א) מים תיב"ע מיין חיין לקידוש ולא פסקינן ולא סריין כל יומיא, ובהדו"ע הק' למה לא נחשב זאת בין הנסים שנעשו במקדש באבות פ"ה מ"ח שלא הסריח המים בכיור?
וי"ל דניסי דקביעי לא חשוב כמו דלא חשוב עוד נסים שהי' אז כדאי' ביומא כ"א.
וְהָאָמַר רַב אוֹשַׁעְיָא: בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁבָּנָה שְׁלֹמֹה בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ, נָטַע בּוֹ כׇּל מִינֵי מְגָדִים שֶׁל זָהָב, וְהָיוּ מוֹצִיאִין פֵּירוֹתֵיהֶן בִּזְמַנָּן, וּכְשֶׁהָרוּחַ מְנַשֶּׁבֶת בָּהֶן נוֹשְׁרִין, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״יִרְעַשׁ כַּלְּבָנוֹן פִּרְיוֹ״. וּכְשֶׁנִּכְנְסוּ גּוֹיִם לַהֵיכָל יָבַשׁ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וּפֶרַח לְבָנוֹן אוּמְלָל״, וְעָתִיד הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לְהַחֲזִירָן, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״פָּרוֹחַ תִּפְרַח וְתָגֵל אַף גִּילַת וְרַנֵּן כְּבוֹד הַלְּבָנוֹן נִתַּן לָהּ״. נִיסֵּי דִּקְבִיעִי לָא קָא חָשֵׁיב.
The Gemara asks: And are there no more miracles performed in the Temple? But didn’t Rav Oshaya say: When Solomon built the Temple he planted all sorts of precious golden fruits there, and these brought forth their fruit in their appointed season like other trees, and when the wind blew them the fruit would fall, as it is stated: “May his fruits rustle like Lebanon” (Psalms 72:16). This indicates that fruits grew in Lebanon, which the Sages interpreted as a reference to the Temple, which was built with cedar trees from Lebanon. And when the gentiles entered the Sanctuary the golden tree withered, as it stated: “And the blossoms of Lebanon wither” (Nahum 1:4). And the Holy One, Blessed be He, will restore the miraculous trees to Israel in the future, as it is stated: “It shall blossom abundantly, it shall also rejoice and shout, the glory of Lebanon will be given to it” (Isaiah 35:2). Apparently, there were additional miracles in the Temple. The Gemara responds: The tanna does not count perpetual miracles on the list.
גֶּפֶן שֶׁל זָהָב הָיְתָה עוֹמֶדֶת עַל פִּתְחוֹ שֶׁל הֵיכָל, וּמֻדְלָה עַל גַּבֵּי כְלוֹנָסוֹת. כָּל מִי שֶׁהוּא מִתְנַדֵּב עָלֶה, אוֹ גַרְגִּיר, אוֹ אֶשְׁכּוֹל, מֵבִיא וְתוֹלֶה בָהּ. אָמַר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בְּרַבִּי צָדוֹק, מַעֲשֶׂה הָיָה, וְנִמְנוּ עָלֶיהָ שְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת כֹּהֲנִים:
A golden vine stood at the door of the Sanctuary trained on poles, and anyone who offered a leaf or a grape or a bunch used to bring it and hang it there. Rabbi Eliezer bar Zadok said: on one occasion three hundred priests were commissioned [to clear it].
ובפי' על ת"י הק' דמי כיור נפסלין בלינה בזבחים כ'. וער"מ פ"ג הי"ח מבהב"ח וראב"ד וכ"מ, וי"ל דמ"ש התרגום לא פסקו אין הפשט שנשארו תמיד שם ולא נתנו מים אחרים רק שלא הוריקו לגמרי הכיור ורק נתנו תמיד מים חדשים, כזבחים ס"א: דאש שירד משמים בימי משה לא נסתלק אלא בימי שלמה, ומ"מ בכל יום נתנו עצים חדשים להביא מן ההדיוט ביומא כ"א: ומעט מים שבכיור אף שנפסל בלינה נתבטל. ועתו"ס זבחים ע"ט: ד"ה תנן אך מ"ש בת' מים חיים זה שלא כהלכתא בזבחים כ"ב: ר,"א מי מעין חי', וחכ"א שאר מימות הן והלכה כחכמים, עתו"ס סוטה ט"ו: ד"ה ומה, ור"מ פ"ה הי"ב מביאת המקדש וצ"ע.
וע' אריכות בס' משנת אליעזר מ"ת בתשובה ב' דף צ"ט: ואגב אעלה בענין מי"ח בזבה בבכורות נ"ה: וסנהד' פ"ז כ' רש"י דבעי, ובשבת ס"ה: כ' דא"צ ובסתירות רש"י עמ"ש בשו"ת שאילת יעבץ ח"א פ"ה, ורש"ש וחלק שלמה סנהד' וע' אשכול יהוה מקואות, ס' המנהיג יהוה נדה סי' קי"ט, ברמב"ן מצורע (ט"ו י"א) ורד"ק זכריה (י"ג א') כ' ג"כ דבעי, וע"ע בירו' שקלים פ"ו ה"ב ובגליון הש"ס שם, או"ז יהוה נדה שנ"ט, ס' יריאים קצ"ד. מל"מ פ"א ה"ה ממקואות, חת"ס יו"ד קצ"ד, וסוס"י רי"ג, שו"מ תליתאה ח"ב צ"ב ובס' נס לשושנים האריך בזה.
ת"ש בן קטין עשה שנים עשר דד לכיור אף הוא עשה מוכני לכיור שלא יהיו מימיו נפסלין בלינה
Come and hear a proof from a mishna (Yoma 37a): The High Priest ben Katin made twelve spigots for the Basin so that several priests could sanctify their hands and feet at once. He also made a mechanism [mukhani] for sinking the Basin into water during the night so that its water would not be disqualified by being left overnight.
תנאי היא דאמר ר' יוחנן מי כיור ר' ישמעאל אומר מי מעין הן וחכמים אומרים שאר מימות הן:
The issue is a dispute between tanna’im, as Rabbi Yoḥanan says: With regard to the water of the Basin, Rabbi Yishmael says: It must be spring water, i.e., flowing water, and the Rabbis say: It may be another type of water.
(א) כבר ידעת שהמזבח היה באמצע העזרה ואנו עתידים לבאר זה במקומו והיה מגולה לשמים ועם כל זה לא היו מכבין הגשמים אש המערכה ולא היה מפזר הרוח את עמוד העשן העולה מן הקרבנות אבל בעת ההקרבה היה האויר צח והיו עומדים בעזרה כל אחד בצד חברו ובעת ההשתחויה לא היו לוחצים זה את זה לרוב מוראם וישובם במקום ההוא:
(1) You already know that the altar was in the middle of the courtyard - and we will elucidate this in the future in its place - and it was open to the skies. And with all of this, the rains did not extinguish the fire of the wood pile. And the wind did not dissipate the pillar of smoke that arose from the sacrifices. Rather, the air during the time of the sacrificing was fresh. And they would stand in the courtyard one next to another; but at the time of bowing down, they did not push against one another, due to their great awe and tranquility in this place.
*immediately: This idea actually dovetails nicely with a cryptic comment of Mahar"i Shteif to the passuk in Pekudei (Shemos 40,30): "From here we see an allusion to the halacha found in the Gemara in Berachos, that one should make the beracha of netilas yadayim immediately to washing his hands.
כִּי הָא דְּאָמַר רַבִּי חִיָּיא בַּר אָשֵׁי אָמַר רַב: שָׁלֹשׁ תְּכִיפוֹת הֵן: תֵּכֶף לִסְמִיכָה שְׁחִיטָה, תֵּכֶף לִגְאוּלָּה תְּפִלָּה, תֵּכֶף לִנְטִילַת יָדַיִם בְּרָכָה.
that which Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Ashi said that Rav said: There are three pairs that immediately follow each other: Immediately following placing hands on the head of a sacrifice, is its slaughter; immediately following the blessing of redemption recited after Shema, is the Amida prayer; and immediately following the ritual washing of the hands after a meal, is the blessing of Grace after Meals.
The Biur on the bottom there says that this fits with the comment of the Targum Yonasan that the water that was in
the Kiyor was constantly "blessed" and running. I'd like to add that according to the Ohr HaTorah, the allusion can be focused on the on the aspect of the immediacy that the running water came immediately after Moshe poured it in. (Whereas the Biur is more focusing on the continuous refilling "beracha" of the running water)
הַכִּיּוֹר הָיוּ לוֹ שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר דָּד כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּהְיוּ כָּל הַכֹּהֲנִים הָעוֹסְקִים בַּתָּמִיד מְקַדְּשִׁים מִמֶּנּוּ כְּאֶחָד. וּמוּכְנִי עָשׂוּ לוֹ שֶׁיִּהְיוּ בָּהּ הַמַּיִם תָּמִיד. וְהִיא חֹל כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יִהְיוּ הַמַּיִם שֶׁבָּהּ נִפְסָלִין בְּלִינָה שֶׁהַכִּיּוֹר מִכְּלֵי הַקֹּדֶשׁ וּמְקַדֵּשׁ וְכָל דָּבָר שֶׁיִּתְקַדֵּשׁ בִּכְלִי קֹדֶשׁ אִם לָן נִפְסַל:
The washbasin had twelve taps, so that all the priests who were involved in offering the daily sacrifice could sanctify [their hands and feet] at one time.A mechanism was made so that it could be filled with water at all times. [The mechanism itself] was not sacred, and thus, the water remaining in it did not become invalidated [for future use] because the night passed. [This was necessary] because the washbasin was a sacred vessel and sanctified [its contents]. Anything which is sanctified by a sacred vessel becomes invalidated [for future use] after the night passes.
--
(Once an article is placed in a sacred vessel, it must be used in the Temple service on that day. If the night passes, it becomes invalid for future use and must be disposed of.
Since the washbasin was sacred, all its water became sanctified and could only be used for holy purposes. Were the water to remain in the washbasin overnight, it would become invalid for future use.
The Sages felt that it was not fitting to discard a large amount of water every day after it had become sacred, and they tried to devise means of avoiding that difficulty.
Yoma 37a and Zevachim 20a explain that each night the washbasin was lowered into a natural reservoir of water by a pulley-operated crane. Tamid 3:8, explains that the crane was very noisy and it was possible to hear the cranking of its gears as far away as Jericho. Its water was not invalid overnight, and the water it contained when it was lifted up again in the morning, could be used for the Temple service.
Based on the sections of the Talmud mentioned above, the Ra'avad questions the Rambam's description of the washbasin and its mechanism. With the statement, "[The mechanism] was not sacred and thus, the water remaining in it did not become invalid," the Rambam seems to imply that the mechanism itself contained water, but the water did not become disqualified, because the mechanism, unlike the washbasin itself, was not a sacred vessel.
This would seem to contradict the Talmudic passages which describe the mechanism as a crane.
This difficulty is further magnified by the fact that in Hilchot Bi'at HaMikdash 5:14, the Rambam himself writes that each night, the washbasin was submerged in a natural reservoir of water and raised again the next morning.
The Kessef Mishneh explains the Rambam's statements as follows: These Talmudic passages use the expression muchani to refer to the mechanism. Though that expression can be rendered as a pulley-operated crane, as above, it can also be explained as a circular reservoir for water, into which the washbasin was placed. This explanation resolves the contradiction between the Rambam and the Talmud. However, the Kessef Mishneh is also puzzled by the seeming contradiction in the Rambam's own words.
The Tosefot Yom Tov (Tamid 1:4) quotes the Rambam's commentary on the Mishnah (Tamid 3:8). It explains that the "mechanism" was a vessel of water which would be raised each morning and submerged each evening by a pulley-operated crane. It would be placed over the washbasin to keep it filled with water.
The Tzurat Habayit maintains that throughout the ages, various techniques were devised to solve the problem of the water which remained overnight in the washbasin. The Mishnah (Eruvin 10:14) relates that pulley-operated cranes were used to draw water during the days of the prophets. Thus, it was likely that a similar technique was employed for the washbasin. Since ben Katin lived in the later years of the Second Temple, it is likely to suppose that his mechanism was more sophisticated.
HaIyun V'HaDrash (not brought by Pardes Yosef):