(a)When the Aron was hidden, four things were hidden together with it. What were they?
(b)Who hid it, and what caused him to do so?
(c)What do we learnt from the Pasuk in Divrei Hayamim "Vayomer la'Levi'im ... Tenu es Aron Hakodesh ba'Bayis Asher Banah Shlomoh ben David ... "?
(d)Why was Yoshi'ah afraid to let the Aron go into Galus with the people?
(a)When the Aron was hidden - the jar of Man, the bottle of anointing Oil, Aharon's stick (with its blossoms and buds) and the box that the P'lishtim sent back together with it (containing a gift for Hash-m) were hidden with it.
(b)Yoshiyahu Hamelech hid it when he discovered that Yisrael was destined to go into Galus (for fear that the Aron might go into Galus with them).
(c)We learn from the Pasuk in Divrei ha'Yamim "Vayomer la'Leviyim ... Tenu es Aron Hakodesh ba'Bayis Asher Banah Shlomo ... " that Yoshiyahu ordered the Aron ha'Kodesh to be hidden in the labyrinths of the Beis Hamikdash.
(d)Yoshiyahu was afraid to let the Aron go into Galus with the people - either because they may not return it or because its sanctity might be defiled.
(a)The anointing oil was made with spices totaling fifteen hundred Manah. How much olive oil did it comprise?
(b)What objection does Rebbi Yossi raise to Rebbi Yehudah, in whose opinion they prepared the anointing oil by boiling the spices directly in the olive oil?
(c)What was the anointing oil used for?
(d)How was it prepared according to Rebbi Yossi?
(a)The anointing oil was made with spices totaling fifteen hundred Manah - plus one Hin (twelve Lugin) of oil.
(b)Rebbi Yehudah maintains that they prepared the anointing Oil by boiling the spices directly in the olive oil. Rebbi Yosi objected on the grounds that so little oil would inevitably become absorbed in the vast quantity of spices, especially as the fire, the wood and the pot would also absorb some of it. (There was not even sufficient oil to anoint the spices, he argued, let alone to boil them in it!)
(c)The anointing Oil was used to anoint the Mishkan plus all its accessories, the Shulchan and the Menorah plus all their accessories, Aharon and his sons for the seven consecutive days of the Milu'im, all subsequent Kohanim Gedolim and some of the kings of Yehudah.
(d)According to Rebbi Yosi, the spices were placed in a large amount of water, the oil on top, and then they were boiled. In this way, the oil only adopted some of the fragrance of the spices.
(a)Which Kohanim Gedolim were anointed and which Kings?
(b)What do we learn from the Pasuk ...
1. ... "Kum Mashcheihu Ki Zeh Hu" (Melachim)?
2. ... "Shemen Mishchas Kodesh Yihyeh Zeh Li le'Doroseichem" (Ki Sisa)?
(c)From whom do we learn that a king should be anointed by a fountain?
(d)What did the following three kings have in common: Shlomoh, Yo'ash and Yeho'achaz?
(a)All Kohanim Gedolim were anointed when they were initiated, but only a king (of Malchei Beis David) who was not the son of a king.
(b)We learn from the Pasuk ...
1. ... "Kum Mashcheihu Ki Zeh Hu" (Melachim) - that a king needs to be anointed, but not his son
2. ... "Shemen Mishchas Kodesh Yihyeh Zeh Li l'Doroseichem" - that the bottle of anointing oil (containing twelve Lugin - corresponding to the numerical value of "Zeh") would last forever.
(c)We learn that a king should be anointed by a fountain - from Shlomo Hamelech, whom the Navi ordered to be taken down to the River Gichon and anointed there.
(d)Shlomo, Yo'ash and Yeho'achaz - were the only three kings of Yehudah who, despite the fact that they were sons of kings, were anointed with the anointing Oil.
(a)Shaul and Yehu were both kings of the ten tribes. Both were anointed (probably with Afarsemon oil). In what way did their anointing differ from that of the kings of Yehudah, and how did that work to their detriment?
(b)What is the problem with including Yeho'achaz in the list of three kings (in 3d.)?
(c)What is the answer to that?
(a)Because they were not from the kings of Beis David, Shaul and Yehu were both anointed from a (breakable) earthenware jar, unbreakable) horn. Consequently, their kingdom (unlike that of David - who was anointed from an unbreakable horn) did not last.
(b)The problem with including Yeho'achaz in the list of three kings (in 3d.) - is that the Anointing oil had already been hidden by his father.
(c)The answer to that is - that he was not anointed with the anointing oil, but with Afarsemon oil.
(a)What does Rebbi Yudah Antundarya learn from the Pasuk in Vayechi "Lo Yasur Shevet mi'Yehudah"?
(b)Rebbi Chiya bar Ada learns the same from the juxtaposition of the two Pesukim in Shoftim "Lema'n Ya'arich Yamim al Mamlachto Hu u'Vanav Bekerev Yisrael" and "Lo Yihyeh la'Kohanim ha'Levi'im". What is the difference between the two explanations?
(c)The Pasuk in Divrei Hayamim writes "u'B'nei Yoshiyahu ha'Bechor Yochanan, ha'Sheini Yehoyakim, ha'Shelishi Tzidkiyahu, ha'Revi'i Shalum". Who was the oldest of Yoshiyah's sons? Why does the Pasuk write "ha'Bechor Yochanan?
(d)Who is Yochanan better known as?
(a)Rebbi Yudah Antundarya learns from the Pasuk "Lo Yasur Shevet mi'Yehudah" - that no other tribe (even that of Levi) may usurp the kingship from Yehudah (According to the Korban ha'Eidah, the Pasuk teaches us that even if a Kohen Gadol becomes king, he is not anointed with the Shemen ha'Mishchah - even though he is not a Zar regarding its use - [It is not however clear how we learn this from the Pasuk; neither does the Gemara nor the Pasuk appear to be speaking specifically about a Kohen Gadol]).
(b)The first Pasuk precludes anyone from another tribe from becoming king, whereas the second is a Lav that only precludes Kohanim.
(c)The oldest of Yoshiyahu's sons was Yehoyakim. The reason that the Pasuk refers to Yochanan as the Bechor is - because he was the first to be crowned king.
(d)Yochanan is better known as Yeho'achaz.
(a)If Tzidkiyahu and Shalum are one and the same person. how do we account for the phrase "ha'Shelishi Tzidkiyahu, ha'Revi'i Shalum"?
(b)Why was he called by these two names? What was his real name?
(c)His uncle ruled before him (though only for three months). What was his uncle's name?
(a)Tzidkiyahu and Shalum are indeed one and the same person, and the reason that the Pasuk writes "ha'Shelishi Tzidkiyahu, ha'Revi'i Shalum" is - because although he was the third-born of Yoshiyahu, he was the fourth to rule (since his nephew Yehoyachin ruled before him).
(b)His real name was Matanyah. Nevuchadnetzar changed his name to Tzidkiyahu - as if to say 'Hashem will give you the judgment you deserve if you rebel against me'; and he was also called Shalum because Malchus Beis David terminated (temporarily, until the coming of Mashi'ach) in his days.
(c)It was his nephew Yehoyachin (or Yechonyah) who ruled before him for three months (before going into Galus).
(a)Rebbi Yochanan holds like Rebbi Meir, that the holy vessels of the Mishkan were measured by an Amah of six Tefachim. According to Them, what was the length of the Aron (in Tefachim)?
(b)Assuming they placed the four Luchos (including the two broken ones) side by side widthwise across the length of the Aron ...
1. ... how many Tefachim would that leave;
2. ... how much would one have to deduct for the thickness of the walls;
3. ... what did they put in that space?
(c)How wide was the Aron? After deducting the length of the Luchos and of the Sefer Torah, and the thickness of the walls, how much space remained inside it?
(d)Why did the Aron require the extra space in the width?
(a)According to Rebbi Yochanan (who holds like Rebbi Meir, that the holy vessels of the Mishkan were measured by an Amah of six Tefachim) - the Aron was fifteen Tefachim long.
(b)Assuming they placed the four Luchos (including the two broken ones) - each of which was three Tefachim wide - side by side widthwise across the length of the Aron ...
1. ... that would leave three Tefachim empty.
2. Deduct one more Tefach (two times half a Tefach) for the thickness of the walls - leaving two Tefachim empty;
3. In that space they placed the Sefer-Torah, which was two Tefachim wide.
(c)The width of the Aron was nine Tefachim.
(d)The length of the Luchos and of the Sefer Torah was six Tefachim, and the thickness of the walls one Tefach (the same as the thickness of the other two walls). This left two Tefachim empty, room to maneuver the Sefer-Torah into the space between the Luchos and the wall of the Aron (since, without it, it would have been impossible to fit it into the space available.
(a)How long and how wide was the Aron according to Rebbi Yehudah, who holds that the holy vessels of the Mishnan were measured by Amos of five Tefachim, and how thick were the walls?
(b)According to Rebbi Yehudah, there was no room in the Aron for the Sefer-Torah. Besides the fact that the four Luchos took up the entire length of the Aron, what other basic difference was there in the way the Luchos lay in the Aron?
(a)In the opinion of Rebbi Yehudah, who holds that the Amos on the holy vessels comprised five Tefachim - the length of the Aron was twelve and a half Tefachim and its width seven and a half Tefachim, of which the walls took up half a Tefach (one finger-breadth for each wall).
(b)According to him - besides the fact that the four Luchos took up the entire length of the Aron, the one Tefach space across the width (unlike the explanation of Rebbi Meir) was divided into two - half a Tefach on one side of the Luchos, and half a Tefach on the other side.
(a)Rebbi Chanina explains the Pasuk in Terumah "ve'Tzipisa Oso Zahav Tahor mi'Bayis u'mi'Chutz" that they were to construct three Aronos (of gold, wood and gold). How does he interpret the extra word "Teztapenu"?
(b)How does Resh Lakish explain ...
1. ... the Pasuk "ve'Tzipisa Oso mi'Bayis u'mi'Chutz"?
2. ... the extra word "Tetzapenu"?
(c)According to Rebbi Chanina ben Gamliel, five commandments were written on one of the Luchos, and five on the other. What are the other three possibilities, and how does each one derive his opinion from the Pasuk in Va'eschanan "va'Yichtevem al Sh'nei Luchos Avanim"?
(d)According to the latter opinion, they wrote all ten commandments on each of the four sides. Why did they not write all ten commandments on top and underneath, too? Then why not five on top and five underneath?
(a)Rebbi Chanina explains the Pasuk in Terumah "v'Tzipisa Oso Zahav Tahor mi'Bayis u'mi'Chutz" that they were to construct three Aronos (of gold, wood and gold). From the extra "Teztapenu" - he learns that the upper-edge (where the wood could still be seen) also had to be overlaid with gold.
(b)Resh Lakish explains ...
1. ... the Pasuk "v'Tzipisa mi'Bayis u'mi'Chutz" - to mean that the one Aron had to be overlaid with gold.
2. ... the extra word "Tetzapenu" - that each board had to be completely overlaid (and not only those parts that were visible after its construction was complete).
(c)According to Rebbi Chanina ben Gamliel, five commandments were written on one of the Luchos, and five on the other. Others opinions maintain that all ten commandments were written on each Lu'ach (because "va'Yichtevem al Shnei Luchos Avanim" and "mi'Zeh u'mi'Zeh Hem Kesuvim" implies that all ten were written twice on each Lu'ach); twenty (once on the front and once on the back) - because the Pasuk implies that the ten commandments were written on each of the Luchos, and forty (from the extra words "mi'Zeh u'mi'Zeh Hem Kesuvim" - which imply that they were also written on each side (even though they only measured six by three Tefachim - as opposed to the front and the back, which measured six by six).
(d)Even according to the last opinion, the commandments were not written on the top and underneath - because they only measured three by three Tefachim, too small an area to serve the purpose that Hash-m intended. Neither did Hash-m want to write five on top and five underneath, because, according to all but the first opinion, it is disrespectful to write only half the commandments on one area.
(a)What was written between each commandment?
(b)What does that have to do with the Pasuk in Shir Hashirim "Memula'im ba'Tarshish" ke'Yama Rabah (How does Resh Lakish explain the parable to the sea)?
(c)What does Rebbi Yehudah learn from the Pasuk in Vayeilech "Lako'ach es Sefer ha'Torah ha'Zeh ve'Samtem Oso mi'Tzad Aron B'ris Hash-m"?
(d)How does Rebbi Meir counter that from the Pasuk in Terumah "ve'Nasata es ha'Kapores Al ha'Aron Milema'lah, ve'El ha'Aron Titen es ha'Eidus Asher Eten Eilecha"?
(a)Between each commandment was written - all the letters of Torah she'bi'Kesav and the Dikdukim (it is unclear what is meant by this - possibly the thirteen principles of Rebbi Yishmael)
(b)"Memula'im ba'Tarshish" k'Yama Rabah - Just like the ocean is full of numerous types of fish, so too were the Luchos full of the many Derashos which comprise the Torah. Resh Lakish compared this to the waves of the ocean, where, between each large wave, there are many small ones.
(c)According to Rebbi Yehudah, the Pasuk "Lako'ach es Sefer ha'Torah ha'Zeh v'Samtem Oso mi'Tzad Aron Bris Hash-m" - teaches us that they had to attach a ledge to the side of the Aron on to which they placed Moshe's Sefer-Torah.
(d)Rebbi Meir counters that from the Pasuk "v'Nasata es ha'Kapores Al ha'Aron Milema'lah, v'El ha'Aron Titen es ha'Eidus Asher Eten Eilecha" - by virtue of the seemingly inverted order of instructions, this teaches us that, at the end of the forty years in the desert (when the Torah would be completed) they were to place the Sefer-Torah (which is meant by 'ha'Eidus' in this instance) into the Aron.
(a)Hash-m gave Moshe the Torah from a background of fire as black fire engraved on white fire. What is meant by ...
1. ... white fire? (see Tiklin Chadtin)?
2. ... Muchleles me'Eish (see Tiklin Chadtin)?
3. ... Chatzuvah me'Eish (see Tiklin Chadtin)?
(a)Hash-m gave Moshe the Torah in the form of black fire engraved on white fire. What Chazal mean by ...
1. ... white fire - is the secrets of Torah.
2. ... Muchleles me'Esh - is the Halachos.
3. ... Chatzuvah me'Esh - is that it is enveloped with the Souls of Yisrael. Note: The authentic Sefer-Torah is said to contain 600,000 letters, corresponding to the number of Jewish Souls that left Egypt.
(a)We learnt earlier that the Kohanim would prostrate themselves in thirteen locations in the Beis Hamikdash. What was the collective significance of those locations?
(b)If four of these gates were located on the south side and four on the north, where were the other five located?
(a)The Kohanim would prostrate themselves in thirteen locations in the Beis Hamikdash. These were the thirteen gates that opened into the Azarah.
(b)Four of these gates were located on the south side and four on the north - three on the east and the remaining two on the west.
(a)Why was ...
1. ... the first of the southern gates called Sha'ar ha'Elyon?
2. ... the second, Sha'ar ha'Delek?
3. ... the third, Sha'ar ha'Bechoros?
4. ... the fourth, Sha'ar ha'Mayim (two possible reasons)?
(b)Why was ...
1. ... the first of the northern gates called 'Sha'ar Yechonyah'?
2. ... the second, Sha'ar ha'Korban?
3. ... the third, Sha'ar ha'Nashim?
4. ... the fourth, Sha'ar ha'Shir?
(c)One of the three Eastern gates is called Sha'ar Nikanor. What were the three eastern gates called?
(d)Why are the two western gates not named?
1. The first of the southern gates was called Sha'ar ha'Elyon - because it was the highest of the gates on that side (seeing as Har ha'Bayis was situated on a slope).
2. The second gate is called 'Sha'ar ha'Delek' - because it was the gate through which they brought the wood for the Ma'arachah.
3. The third gate is called Sha'ar ha'Bechoros - because through it they used to bring in the Bechoros which were Shechted on the south side.
4. ... the fourth gate was called Sha'ar ha'Mayim - either because that was the gate through which they brought in the bottle of water for the Nisuch ha'Mayim on Sukos, or because it will the exit point of the stream which flow through the Azarah.
1. The first of the northern gates is called 'Sha'ar Yechonyah' - because that was the gate through which Yechonyah went 'voluntarily' into Galus.
2. The second gate is called Sha'ar ha'Korban - because it was through that gate that they brought the Kodshei Kodashim animals, which were Shechted on the north side of the Azarah.
3. The third gate is called Sha'ar ha'Nashim - because that is the gate through which the women used to enter the Azarah either to lean on their Korban or at least to stand by it.
4. The fourth gate is called Sha'ar ha'Shir - because that is the gate through which they used to bring the musical instruments into the Azarah.
(c)The Eastern gate was called Sha'ar Nikanor. The other two gates on that side were merely two little gates which were located besides it (and whose purpose is described in Midos).
(d)The two western gates are not named - because their names are unknown.