Kohanim in the Jewish Quarter

The Lord spoke to Moses saying: “Make yourself two trumpets of hammered silver; they shall be used by you to summon the congregation and to announce the departure of the camps. The descendants of Aaron, the priests, shall blow the trumpets; this shall be a permanent statute throughout your generations.” Numbers 10:1-2, 8         

Last week we took a virtual tour of the Jewish Quarter in the footsteps of the Levi’im. This week we shall return and tour in the footsteps of the Kohanim.

            As there are alleyways of the Jewish Quarter named for the jobs of the Levi’im and for their musical instruments, so too there are alleyways which received their names from the functions of the Kohanim in the Temple.

            The only musical instrument used in the Temple which was played specifically by Kohanim is the trumpet, as the verses above make clear. Indeed, there is an alleyway of the Quarter which is named “Haẓoẓrot” (Trumpets).

            Sefer Ḥinuch writes of the mitzva of making trumpets [#382]:

(The mitzva) is to blow the trumpets daily when the sacrifices are offered, as well as in times of distress, as the verse states: “When you enter into battle in your Land against an adversary who is attacking you, sound short blasts on the trumpets, and you will be remembered before the Lord your God and be delivered from your enemies.” [Numbers 10:9] The following verse is: “You are to sound the trumpets over your burnt offerings and your ascent offerings (olah) and on the days of your rejoicing, on your appointed festivals, and the beginning of each of your months. They will serve as a reminder for you before your God: I am the Lord your God.” Even though the verse states “On the day of rejoicing, on your appointed festivals, and the beginning of each of your months,” this is not exclusive, and our Sages taught [Babylonian Talmud, Rosh haShana 29a] that the trumpet was blown in the Temple on a daily basis.

            Indeed, Midrash Sifrei [Numbers 1:40] elucidates:

“On the days of your rejoicing” – Rabbi Natan says “this refers to the daily perpetual sacrifices (t’midim) because it is joyous for Israel when their offerings are accepted by their Father in Heaven.”

            Aruch haShulḥan heAtid [Laws of Temple Vessels 27:9] writes that the use of trumpets in conjunction with the sacrifices apparently is a tradition dating to Moses at Sinai.

            Kohanim blew the trumpets specifically when the wine offered along with the t’midim was poured on the altar:

When the wine offering was poured on the altar, the Levi’im sang, and the daily psalm was divided into three sections, after each the Kohanim blew the trumpets and the people bowed, as is taught in Tractate Tamid [7:3]: When they came to a break (in the Psalm) a tekiah was blown, and the public prostrated themselves; at every break there was a tekiah and at every tekiah a prostration. [Kehati commentary on Mishna, Rosh haShana 3:4]

            Second Chronicles thus describes the dedication of the First Temple:

The Levitical singers of Asaph, of Heman, of Jeduthun, and of their sons and their relatives, dressed in fine linen, with cymbals, harps and lyres, were standing east of the altar, and with them were one-hundred-twenty Kohanim blowing trumpets. The trumpeters and singers joined together to praise and thank the Lord with one voice in praise to the Lord: “For He is good; His faithful love endures forever”; the Temple, the Lord’s Temple, was filled with a cloud. [5:12-13]

            Concerning the founding of the Second Temple we read:

When the builders had laid the foundation of the Lord’s temple, the Kohanim, dressed in their robes and holding trumpets, and the Levites descended from Asaph, holding cymbals, took their positions to praise the Lord, as King David of Israel had instructed. [Ezra 3:10]

            The Mishna [Sukka 5:5] notes that the number of trumpet blasts in the Temple ranged between twenty-four and forty-eight:

There were no fewer than twenty-four trumpet blasts in the Temple and no more than forty-eight. Each day there were twenty-four: three when the gates were opened in the morning, nine for the daily morning offering and nine for the daily afternoon offering, totaling twenty-one. When additional offerings (musaf) were sacrificed, nine blasts were added. On Shabbat eve they would add six blasts, three to stop the people from working and three to distinguish between sacred and profane. On Shabbat eve of the festival of Sukkot, there were forty-eight blasts: three (in the morning) for the opening of the gates; three for the upper gate; and three for the lower gate; and three for filling the vessel (for the water libation); three when poring the water on the altar; nine for the daily morning offering; and nine for the daily afternoon offering; and nine for the additional offerings; three to stop the people from work; and three more to distinguish between sacred and profane.

            Despite the Mishna’s enumeration, Maimonides [Commentary on the Mishna] notes that the Mishna is not exact, since it is possible to reach a maximum of fifty-seven trumpet blasts:

(The Mishna) is not exact, rather it intends (that forty-eight is the maximum number of blasts) under usual circumstances, but there are years during which one day can have fifty-seven blasts, namely when the eve of Passover is on Shabbat. Since we have been taught that the Paschal offering was slaughtered in three groups, and when each entered the courtyard of the Temple there were three trumpet blasts which accompanied the recitation of Hallel, and the Hallel could be recited by a given group as many as three times, it is possible to reach twenty-seven blasts for Hallel; add to this eighteen blasts for the two daily offerings, nine for the Musaf of Shabbat, and three for the opening of the gates in the morning, the total would be fifty-seven. This is the number of blasts cannot be exceeded in the Temple.

            To summarize, in addition to blowing the trumpets when the t’midim were offered, they were blown at the start of the work day of the Temple, with the opening of the gates of the Temple courtyards, on Shabbat eve, at the water libation ceremony during Sukkot and when the Paschal lambs were slaughtered.

            Maimonides codifies the law that no fewer than two trumpets are to be blown, and no more than one-hundred-twenty. Clearly, Maimonides based his ruling on our sources. The Torah itself commands the use of two trumpets, while the verse in Second Chronicles cites the maximum number.

            While Sefer haḤinuch [mitzva 384] infers from Maimonides’ wording [Laws of Temple Vessels 3:4] that the daily trumpet blasts are not required to be done specifically by Kohanim, since they are in force only by rabbinic decree, Aruch haShulḥan heAtid [Laws of Temple Vessels 20:17] posits that all the blasts in the Temple were exclusively with trumpets blown by Kohanim.

            There is a second alleyway in the Jewish Quarter which commemorates the work of the Kohanim in the Temple: Mishmerot Kehuna Street, which is perpendicular to Haẓoẓrot Street.

            The Talmud [Ta’anit 27a] teaches that Moses divided the Kohanim into eight groups (mishmarot), four composed of descendants of Elazar and four of the descendants of Itamar. This was the situation until the days of the prophet Samuel, who, along with King David, reorganized the Kohanim into twenty-four mishmarot.

            At the end of the list of mishmarot in First Chronicles, the verse states: “These are their appointment[s] to their service, to come to the House of the Lord according to their ordinance by the hand of Aaron their father, as the Lord God of Israel had commanded him.” [24:19] We also read in the Book of Ezra [6:18] “Now they set up the priests in their divisions and the Levites in their classes over the service of God, which was in Jerusalem, as is written in the Book of Moses,” clearly indicating that the division of Kohanim into mishmarot originates with the Torah. Indeed, our Sages saw this is implied by the verse in Deuteronomy [18:8], which states “They shall eat equal portions, except what was sold by the forefathers.” Midrash Sifrei elucidates:

“Except what was sold by their fathers” – that which the fathers “sold” in the days of David and Samuel, when the mishmarot were fixed and they “sold” each other the rights to work in the Temple, (saying) “you take your week and I my week.”

Nonetheless, Naḥmanides’ opinion [Comments on Maimonides’ Book of Mitzvot, positive mitzva 36] is that the division into mishmarot was a “decree of the prophets, not mandatory.”

            Each mishmar worked for a week at a time, from Shabbat to Shabbat, with the change of mishmarot coming before the offering of the daily afternoon offering, and both mishmarot sharing the showbread. [Maimonides Laws of Daily Offerings and Additional Offerings 4:9]

            Taking into account the fact that the Hebrew calendar is lunar, any given mishmar would work on average two weeks per year in a non-leap year. Yehuda Kiehl, in Da’at Mikra First Chronicles, notes that the division into twenty-four mishmarot established a suitable internal arrangement of Shabbatot among the mishmarot, guaranteeing that no mishmar can ever have a fixed Shabbat of the year, and throughout the course of years, each mishmar will work in every month.

            Each mishmar was headed by a Kohen responsible for its proper functioning, and he divided the mishmar into clans (batei av) with each clan working one day per week. [Maimonides Laws of Temple Vessels 4:11]

            There were two exceptions to the rule, in which all clans of the mishmar worked together:

1) The verse tells us that at the dedication of the First Temple, “all the Kohanim who were present had consecrated themselves regardless of their tour of duty.” [II Chronicles 5:11] Malbim explains that all Kohanim participated in the dedication, despite the fact that the division into mishmarot had already been established. Radak presents a common sense explanation: “So many sacrifices were offered and so many people participated in the dedication that it was necessary for all Kohanim to work.” Indeed, at the Temple’s dedication “King Solomon offered a sacrifice of 22,000 cattle and 120,000 sheep!” [I Chronicles 7:5] Offering this massive number of sacrifices required the participation of every Kohen.

2) During the three pilgrimage festivals “All (Kohanim) worked equally.” [Maimonides Laws of Daily Offerings and Additional Offerings 10:12].

            As well any Kohen had the right to perform the service for his own sacrifices, even during another mishmar’s week. [Laws of Temple Vessels 4:7]

            We may add that every Shabbat the outgoing mishmar blessed the incoming one with the unique blessing “May He Who causes His name to rest in this house cause love, brotherhood, peace, and friendship to rest among you.” [Laws of Daily Offerings and Additional Offerings 6:4]

            The ability of the Kohanim to represent the nation of Israel before God in the holy service depends directly on their unity and that of the nation.

 

Calamity and Consolation

                The prophets, our Sages, the Halacha and Jewish tradition all speak in the same language and express the concept that the destruction of Jerusalem carries with it the promise of consolation and the rebuilding of the Holy City.

                The “Three Haftarot of Catastrophe,” are read during the three week period of mourning the destruction of the two Temples; two are from the Book of Jeremiah and the third, read the Shabbat which precedes Tisha b’Av, is from Isaiah. There is no greater prophet of the Divine anger and impending destruction of Jerusalem than Jeremiah, who witnessed Jerusalem’s destruction by the army of Babylonia. Yet, even before Jeremiah received his first prophecy, in God’s appointment of him, Jeremiah is told by God that his mission is not merely to “Uproot and tear down, to destroy and demolish,” but as well “To build and to plant.” [1:10] At the very beginning of his prophetic career, prior to Jeremiah’s first practical steps as a prophet, God makes it clear to him that he will not be only the prophet of the impending calamity, but also a prophet of consolation. Indeed, the Book of Jeremiah contains four consecutive chapters [30-33] which consist of prophecies of consolation.

                Jeremiah, who blatantly prophesied the destruction of the First Temple, by relating God’s words “And I will do to the house upon which My name is called, upon which you rely, and to the place that I gave you and your forefathers, as I did to Shiloh,” [7:14] also conveyed the Divine tidings “So said the Lord: ‘Behold I am returning the captivity of the tents of Jacob, and his dwellings I will pity, and the city shall be built on its mound and the palace (Targum Yonatan and Rashi understand this to refer to the Temple) on its proper site shall be established.’” [30:18] Beyond this, Jeremiah prophesied that Jerusalem will be built up eternally: “It shall never again be uprooted or torn down forever.” [31:39]

                Isaiah, who prophesied “And the daughter of Zion shall be left like a hut in a vineyard, like a lodge in a cucumber field, like a besieged city …” [1:8], is also the prophet of consolation. Indeed, the “Seven Haftarot of Consolation,” read from the Shabbat following Tisha b’Av until Rosh haShana, are all taken from the Book of Isaiah.

                Perhaps the prophecy which most overtly expresses the concept that consolation is inherent in the destruction is that of Zachariah.  While Zachariah lived at the time of the building of the Second Temple and was not a prophet of calamity, he was privileged to deliver the word of God to the Nation of Israel:

So said the Lord of Hosts: “The fast of the fourth (month), the fast of the fifth (month), the fast of the seventh (month), and the fast of the tenth (month) will become times of joy, gladness, and cheerful festivals for the house of Judah.” Therefore, love truth and peace. [8:19]

That is, the four fast days associated with the destruction of Jerusalem will become days of rejoicing. Zachariah conveys God’s explicit promise that the destruction carries with it the promise of rebuilding Jerusalem and the Temple.

                Concerning our Sages’ comments on the matter, it would seem appropriate to quotes their statement that “Whoever mourns Jerusalem will merit and see her joy, and whoever does not mourn Jerusalem will not see her joy.” [Babylonian Talmud, Ta’anit 30b] However, there is nothing novel in this statement of the Sages, who merely stress the simple meaning of Isaiah’s prophecy [66:10] “Rejoice with Jerusalem and be glad with her, all who love her; rejoice for joy with her, all who mourn her.” 

                Rather, it is likely that our Sages’ strongest expression of the connection between calamity and consolation is the story of Rabbi Akiva and his colleagues, related at the conclusion of Tractate Makkot:

(Rabban Gamliel, Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya, Rabbi Yehoshua and Rabbi Akiva) were ascending to Jerusalem together, as they came to Mount Scopus they tore their garments (as a sign of mourning the destruction of the Holy City), as they reached the Temple Mount, they  saw a fox emerging from the Holy of Holies. They began to cry, while Rabbi Akiva smiled. They said they to him, why are you smiling? He said to them: “Why are you crying?” They responded, “A place of which it is said ‘And the common man that comes near shall be put to death’ [Numbers 1:51, i.e, the Holy of Holies may be entered only by the High Priest as part of the Yom Kippur service] has now become the haunt of foxes, how can we not cry?” Rabbi Akiva replied to them: “Therefore smile; for it is written, ‘And I will take to Me faithful witnesses to record, Uriah the priest and Zechariah the Son of Jeberechiah.’ [Isaiah 8:2] What is the connection between Uriah the priest and Zechariah? Uriah lived during the times of the First Temple, while Zechariah lived during the times of the Second Temple; but Scripture linked the prophecy of Zechariah with that of prophecy of Uriah.  In the prophecy (in the days) of Uriah it is written, ‘Therefore, because of you, Zion shall be plowed as a field, etc.’ [Micah 3:12] In Zechariah it is written, ‘So said the Lord of Hosts: Old men and women shall yet sit in the streets of Jerusalem, each man with his staff in his hand because of old age.’ [Zachariah 8:9] So long as Uriah's prophecy had not been fulfilled, I had misgivings lest Zechariah's prophecy might not be fulfilled; now that Uriah's prophecy has been fulfilled, it is a certainty that Zechariah's prophecy also is to find its fulfillment.”

                Rabbi Akiva, one of the greatest sages of the Mishna, the “armor bearer of ben Koziva the king (Bar Kochva),” [Maimonides Laws of Kings 11:3] in elucidating the verse in a manner contrary to its simple meaning, saw it as an expression of the consolation inherent in the calamity of the destruction of Jerusalem.

                The Halacha expresses the connection between consolation and calamity in the determination that taḥanun, the penitential prayer, is not recited on Tisha b’Av. [Shulḥan Aruch, Oraḥ Ḥayyim 559:4]

                Jewish tradition expresses the concept by referring to the month of Av as “Menaḥem Av” (the comforting Av). [Ta’amei haMinhagim 632-3]                                                                       
                In his insightful commentary on Jeremiah 1:10, Malbim provides the rationale for the fact that the promise of redemption and rebuilding is to be found within the destruction: God does not destroy for the sake of destruction, rather in order to rebuild (in an improved manner). Thus, the destruction necessarily carries the guarantee of consolation through rebuilding Jerusalem.
                Indeed, it is true that the destruction necessarily heralds consolation, as “Whoever mourns Jerusalem will merit and see her joy,” however, we may not simply passively await the day of consolation. Our Sages noted the apparent contradiction in God’s declaration concerning the coming of Messiah: “In its time I will hasten it,” [Isaiah 60:22] and commented “If Israel is worthy, I will hasten it, if not he will come in his time.” [Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 98a] We have the power to hasten our final redemption. Without question, the means for hastening the redemption is rectifying the reason for the Temple’s destruction, as Rabbi Kook phrased it:

Given that we were destroyed and the entire world destroyed with us due to unfounded hatred, we shall be rebuilt and the world rebuilt with us through unbounded love.

            It is in our hands.

Casablanca and Bethlehem

            Rick Blaine (played by Humphrey Bogart) is the hero of the film Casablanca, generally considered one of the greatest Hollywood films ever made. While Rick is a character who in his own words is “no good at being noble,” in the end, he loves the heroine (Ilsa Lund, played by Ingrid Bergman) so much that he lets her go.1

            As described in the Book of Ruth, Naomi has a very deep love for her daughter-in-law Ruth. When Naomi decided to return to Bethlehem, after more than a decade in Moab, she pleaded with Ruth to remain in her homeland of Moab. Despite Naomi’s love for Ruth, she perceived (incorrectly, as it turns out) that Ruth’s welfare would be best served by staying in Moab, rather than accompanying Naomi to Bethlehem. Like Rick, Naomi loved Ruth enough to let her go.

            This comparison is far from a trivial matter. Our Sages teach:

Any love which is dependent on something (tangible) - when the thing ceases, the love also ceases. But a love which is not dependent on anything will never cease.  Avot 5:19

Malbim [commentary on Genesis 29:20] comments that love which is dependent on something tangible is not truly love, but egoism.

            The truest indication that love is independent of tangible considerations is the willingness to part from the loved one because it is in the loved one’s best interest.

            I suspect there are not many who can achieve the level of Rick and Naomi.

           

---

1.This is Gloria’s insight into the message of the film. These comments are dedicated to Gloria’s memory.

From Aleph to Tav (A to Z)

If (im) you follow My statutes and observe My commandments and perform them, I will give your rains in their time, the Land will yield its produce, and the tree of the field will give forth its fruit.                                                Leviticus 26:3-4

            Parashat Beḥukotai, the parasha of the rebuke (tochaḥa) commences with the blessings Israel will receive when the nation observes God’s mitzvot. The blessings presented prior to the tochaḥa end with verse 13:

I am the Lord, your God, Who took you out of the land of Egypt from being slaves to them; and I broke the pegs of your yoke and led you upright (komemiyut).

            Midrash Eicha Rabba notes that the blessings commence with the first letter of the Hebrew alphabet, aleph, and conclude with the final letter, tav, commenting:

(God said) “I shall bless them from aleph to tav, as is written ‘If (im) you follow My statutes …’ through ‘komemiyut’ (the final letter of which is tav.)”

That is, the blessings are all-encompassing. “from a to z.”

            Toledot Yitzḥak (Rabbi Yitzḥak Karo [1458 – 1518], uncle of Rabbi Yosef Karo, author of the Shulḥan Aruch]) suggests the practical implication of the comment of Eicha Rabba:

In the blessing, He began with aleph and concluded them with tav to indicate that Israel will be blessed only when it fulfills Torah from aleph to tav.

The, realization of God’s blessings, which are from aleph to tav, is dependent upon strict observance of God’s Torah, from aleph to tav.

            Based upon Eicha Rabba’s comment, we may note that since the tochaḥa itself is not from aleph to tav, it is limited. Indeed, the concluding verses of the tochaḥa are:

But despite all this, while they are in the land of their enemies, I will not despise them nor will I reject them to annihilate them, thereby breaking My covenant that is with them, for I am the Lord their God. I will remember for them the covenant [made with] the ancestors, whom I took out from the land of Egypt before the eyes of the nations, to be a God to them. I am the Lord. [44-45]

 

Draft Age

From twenty years old and upwards, all who are fit to go out to the army in Israel, you shall count them by their legions, you and Aaron.                                                  Numbers 1:3

            Kli Yakar suggests a fascinating reason for the Torah setting draft age at twenty years old. “After all, at times, there are valorous fighters who are younger than twenty.” And indeed, draft age for the I.D.F. is eighteen. “God does not desire the valor of men.” (Based upon Psalms 147:10) Rather, for Israel, military service is based upon the warrior’s merits and his righteousness. Our Sages taught that prior to age twenty, the Heavenly Court does not mete out punishments. [Jerusalem Talmud, Bikurim 2:1] Therefore, one who reaches the age of twenty is “more stringent in his behavior,” knowing that he will have to give an accounting in the Heavenly Court. This being the case, it is reasonable to assume that a twenty year old has accrued more merits than those who are younger, “who, presumably is less stringent in his behavior, and therefore has fewer virtues to overcome his liabilities.” It is these additional merits of the twenty year old which will protect him in war.

Ruth and Rahab

            Rabbi Tanḥuma commences his elucidation of the Book of Ruth with a comparison of Ruth and Rahab the prostitute:

Rabbi Tanḥuma commenced, "I was sought by those who did not ask; I was found by those who did not seek Me” [Isaiah 65:1] – “I was sought by those who did not ask” refers to Rahab the prostitute; “I was found by those who did not seek Me” refers to Ruth the Moabite.                         Midrash Rut Zuta 1:1

            Apparently, Rabbi Tanḥuma detached the first verse of the penultimate chapter of Isaiah from its simple meaning (p’shat), which is a rebuke of Israel for ignoring the prophets whom God sent to the nation, as Metzudat David writes:

Have I not made Myself available for you to seek Me in times of distress, but to no avail, for it was to a nation which did not ask to seek Me.

            Rabbi Tanḥuma’s comment clearly relates to our Sages’ tradition that Rahab converted to Judaism and married none other than Joshua, [Babylonian Talmud, Megila 14b] and on the simplest level, the common denominator between the two women of the Bible is the fact that they were both converts. However, Rabbi Tanḥuma’s comment carries much deeper levels of significance.

            In my opinion, the true and essential common denominator between the two converts to Judaism is hessed (kindness.)

            Rabbi Zeira (late third - early fourth centuries C.E.) expresses his opinion that the reason the Book of Ruth was written and canonized is “to teach the reward of those who do kindness.” [Yalkut Shimoni, Rut 601] Indeed, Ruth’s primary quality is hessed, as both Naomi [1:8] and Boaz [3:10] comment to her.

            Rahab too did hessed with the spies who came to her home, as she herself said: “And now, swear to me by the Lord, since I have showed you kindness (hessed), that you will also show kindness (hessed) to my father's house, and give me a true token.” [Joshua 2:12]

            Ḥessed is the direct link between the story of Rahab and that of Ruth. The word hessed appears three times in three consecutive verses, twice uttered by Rahab and the third time in the spies’ response to her:

And the men answered her, “Our life for yours, if you will not tell this our discussion. And it shall be, when the Lord gives us the Land, that we will deal with you with kindness (hessed) and truth.” [Ibid. v. 14]

Significantly, the word hessed also appears in the Book of Ruth three times.

            By virtue of her hessed, Ruth is privileged to be the “mother of monarchy” [Rut Zuta 1:1], while Rahab was privileged to be the ancestress of eight kohanim and prophets. [Midrash Sifrei, Beha’alothcha 78]. Thus, the two converts, Ruth and Rahab, were partners in establishing the three institutions crucial for the Nation of Israel: monarchy, priesthood and prophecy.

            There is an additional level of commonality between Ruth and Rahab. The Book of Ruth opens with the declaration “And it was in the days of the judges.” The unique aspect of the days of the judges was the fact that “In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did whatever he wanted.” [Judges 17:6;21:25] In that period Israel was in a state of anarchy, which included failure to do hessed. Our Sages taught that Elimelech was the leader of his generation and the “caretaker of the generation” [Babylonian Talmud, Bava Batra 91a] and that he was sufficiently wealthy that he could provide food for the “entire country” for a decade. Yet, instead of doing hessed with his neighbors and members of his tribe, Elimelech ran away to the fields of Moab. In contrast, the person who does true hessed is Ruth herself. It is Ruth who performs hessed, while a leader of the Hebrew nation, who has the ability to do hessed thinks only of himself and his family and abandons Israel. Thus, the Book of Ruth can be seen as pointing an accusing finger: it is not the “caretaker of the generation,” who is expected to do hessed who actually does so, but the daughter of a nation which was ungrateful to the father of the Israelites [Midrash Aggada, Deuteronomy 25:3] who practices hessed. Indeed, “in those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what he wanted.”

            The story of Rahab as well, can be seen as pointing an accusing finger at Israel. Alshikh, in his comments on the verse from Isaiah quoted by Rabbi Tanḥuma, writes:

The intention of the verse is to reprimand Israel, saying “Look and understand how I have made Myself accessible to those who call on Me; to Rahab and Ruth, who came to find shelter under My wings I granted more than what they requested, and if you (Israel) call on Me, (you will be granted) double.”

            The two converts were able to achieve closeness to God, while the Nation of Israel failed to understand that if they but call on God, He will answer them.

            Likely, the major lesson of the comparison between Ruth and Rahab is the great power of repentance (and entering under the wings of the Shechina) to rectify even the greatest evils. Through her hessed, Ruth became the mother of monarchy, and as such the ancestress of Messiah, thereby rectifying the sin of her primal ancestors, Lot and his older daughter [Genesis 19:30ff.]. Our Sages’ tradition is that Rahab’s career as a prostitute lasted forty years, from the time Israel left Egypt until Joshua’s spies arrived at her home, and when she repented, asking God to forgive her [Babylonian Talmud, Zevaḥim 115b] God brought her near to Him [Sifrei, ibid.]

            Indeed, Rabbi Tanḥuma’s comparison of Ruth and Rahab teaches truly significant lessons.

The Temple Orchestra

 

From the age of thirty years and upward until the age of fifty years, who are fit to perform the service for the service and the work of carrying, in the Tent of Meeting.                                            Numbers 4:47

“The service of the service” – this refers to the music with cymbals and harps, which is service for another service (the sacrifices). Rashi, based upon the Babylonian Talmud, Arachin 11a

            haK’tav v’haKabala adds an enlightening comment:

Just as performing the mitzva is service of God, so too, rejoicing in the mitzva is considered service. As the verse states “Because you did not serve the Lord, your God, with joy and with gladness of heart.” [Deuteronomy 28:47] Indeed, rejoicing is the perfection of (Divine) service; therefore the songs which the Levites sang were to arouse rejoicing in the mitzva of offering sacrifices, that it be performed joyously, and they are aptly called “The service of the service.”

            One who reads the street signs of the Jewish Quarter will be treated to an excursion through our traditional sources. The names of the majority of the alleyways of the Quarter were chosen to reflect the glorious past of Jerusalem, and in particular, the peak of its glory, the period when the Temple stood within the Holy City.

            Levites had two major jobs in the Temple, to provide musical accompaniment when the public sacrifices were offered and to guard the Temple and lock its gates. Thus writes Maimonides in his Book of the Mitzvot [positive mitzva 23]:

The Levites exclusively were commanded to perform specified tasks in the Temple, such as locking the gates and singing when the public sacrifices were offered. This is what is written “The Levites shall perform the service of the Tent of Meeting” [Numbers 18:23].

            In the Laws of the Temple Vessels [3:2], Maimonides writes:

Their (the Levites’) service was to guard the Temple. Among them there were gate-keepers, who would open the gates of the Temple and close its doors, and there were singers who would accompany the sacrifices with song each day.

            There are parallel alleyways in the Jewish Quarter named for the jobs of the Levites; “Meshorarim” (the musicians) and “Shoarim” (the gatekeepers).

            Based upon Rashi’s comment, we will focus on the alleys of the Jewish Quarter which are connected to the Levites’ musical activities.

            The Sages of the Talmud differed in their opinions on two fundamental questions:

1. Is the essence of “song” vocal or instrumental? – on this matter Maimonides [Laws of the Temple Vessels 3:3] determined that the halacha is that vocal music is the essential form of the Levites’ function.

2. Does the lack of musical accompaniment invalidate the sacrifices? – surprisingly, Maimonides offers no halachic decision on this point; however, Aruch haShulḥan heAtid [Laws of the Temple Vessels 20:7] notes the opinion of the rabbis is that lack of song does not invalidate the sacrifices, and comments that since the general rule is that the halacha follows the majority opinion, seemingly, the halachic decision is that lack of song does not invalidate the sacrifices.

            Even though the essence of “song” is vocal, nonetheless, the Levites’ songs were accompanied by an “orchestra,” composed of no fewer than one dozen instruments” a minimum of nine kinorot (“lyre” in modern Hebrew “violin”), with no maximum number; at least two and no more than three nevelim (“harp” in most translations and in modern Hebrew)` a single set of metziltayim (“cymbals” in translation and in modern Hebrew). [Babylonian Talmud, Arachin 10a]

            Each of these instruments has given its name to an alleyway of the Jewish Quarter.

            “Kinor” is the musical instrument mentioned most frequently in the Bible (forty-two times), and the verses provide us with an unusual amount of information concerning it, including the name of its “inventor,” Yuval, a member of the eighth generation of mankind, who is described as “the father of all those who handle the kinor and ugav (“organ”). [Genesis 4:21] We are also informed of a kinor virtuoso, who was the first music therapist in history, David of Bethlehem. [I Samuel 16:17-23] The verses even tell us of the “Stradivarius” of kinorot (and nevelim), which King Solomon made for his musicians out of almog wood imported along with gold from Ofir. [I Kings 10:11-12]

            Nevel, along with kinor, is presumed to be a stringed instrument; though based upon the fact that the Biblical word can also mean a water-skin, some suggest that it was a wind instrument made of leather, making it akin to bagpipes.  The ancient historian Josephus defined both kinor and nevel as string instruments, and stated the following differences between them: nevel had thicker strings, hence a deeper sound; it was played by hand, while kinor was played with a pick; nevel was twelve-stringed, kinor ten-stringed.

            The majority of times that nevel is mentioned in the Bible (eighteen of twenty-seven), it is mentioned in connection with kinor. For this reason, the two instruments not only gave their names to alleyways of the Jewish Quarter, but in effect, “Nevel Street” is the continuation of “Kinor Street.”

            The percussion section of the Temple orchestra, metziltayim, also has an alley named for it. Metzudat Zion [I Chronicles 13:8] defines metzilayim as “Two copper instruments which were struck together to produce a loud sound,” indeed, what we now calls cymbals.

            Aruch haShulḥan heAtid [Laws of the Temple Vessels 20:12] adds an explanation of the composition of the Temple orchestra: “the prime skill of playing music is with kinor, nevel and metziltayim.” Further, the decision that there is no limit to the number of kinorot, while the maximum number of nevelim is six reflects the fact that “the greater the number of kinorot, the more beautiful the music is, while more than six nevelim would interfere with the balance of the music.” The restriction of the percussion section to a single set of cymbals also reflects a musicological consideration, the need to maintain the proper balance.

            Perhaps those whose ears are sharp and attentive will be able to hear the echoes of the music of the Levites while walking through the alleyways of the Jewish Quarter.

            May it be God’s will that we be privileged to hear the songs and music of the Levites with the rebuilding of the Temple, speedily in our days. Amen