HALACHAH 2: PROSTRATIONS AND THE GATES OF THE MIKDASH
The locations of the 13 prostrations listed in the previous Mishnah.
These were in appreciation of the 13 gates.
The locations and names of the (named) gates, and the sources of those names.
THE NUMBER OF GATES
Our Mishnah follows the opinion that there were 13 gates.
The Rabanan hold that there were seven.
Question: Where were the 13 prostrations according to Rabanan?
Answer: To honor the 13 [closed] breaches in the Soreg.
The Greeks made these breaches.
The Hasmoneans closed them.
THE FUTURE WATERS FLOWING FROM THE MIKDASH
From the Pasuk in Zecharyah (14:8) we learn the increasing strength of that water.
It originates as a trickle in the Kodshei Kodoshim.
It will increment to a rushing river.
The Pesukim in Yechezkel (47:1-5) give another description of the waters flowing from the Mikdash.
The Pasuk indicates the flow at each thousand-Amah distance.
The Pasuk in Yeshaya (25:11) defines "Sachu" as "Shayit" (boating).
Alternately Sachu refers to waters which are spoken about (Sichah).
The Pasuk the Zecharyah (13:1) speaks of the water which will go out for the house of Dovid and the residents of Yerushalayim for Chatas (Parah Adumah) and Nidah (Mikveh).
Question: Could not the rest of the people use these waters?
Answer #1: The waters from Beis Dovid until the residences of Yerushalayim will be Kosher for Nidah and Chatas; from there out only for Nidah.
Answer #2: For that first distance they are Kosher for everything; from there out they do not gather.
The Pasuk in Yechezkel (47:8) speaks of these waters.
They will join the water bodies of Israel.
Mutzaim means the waters went out twice (during the generations of Enosh and the Palagah, to different distances, as the opinions indicate).
The last opinion is derived from the Pasuk in Iyov (38:11) "Ad Poh Savoh v'Lo Sosif u'Fo Yashis b'Geon Galechah."
Poh refers to Ako.
u'Fo refers to Yafo.
Question: Why do the waters need to meet the Sea of Teveryah and the Sea of Sibuchah (sweet-water bodies).
Answer: The waters add to their fish, and to the species of fish in them (as indicated by the incident of R. Shimon b. Gamliel).
Question: The Pasuk (Yechezkel 47:11) indicates the waters will become sweet, while Pasuk 8 indicates they will not!?
Answer: The latter is a place name.
The words "la'Chadashav Yivaker" in Pasuk 12 speak of the ripening of the fruit.
As we know it, grain ripens in six months, while fruit trees produce their fruit in 12 months.
In the future the grain will ripen in a month; fruit in two.
Based on Yoel (2:23) the grain in 15 days; the fruit in a month.
Question: But la'Chadashav is in the plural?!
Answer: The plural refers to every month.
The words "v'Aleyhu li'Serufah" speak of the leaves of the fruit trees growing from the springs of the Mikdash.
One will suck the leaves for his nourishment.
Its medicinal value is to release the "mouth."
There are four opinions regarding which "mouth" is being released.
THE DESTRUCTION OF THE MIKDASH
When Nevuchadnezar came to depose Yehoyachin...
Yehoyachin offered back the keys of the Mikdash...
He threw them and they did not come back down.
Alternately, a sort of hand took them.
When the officers of Yehudah saw, they fell from their roofs (Yeshayah 22:1).
HALACHAH 3: THIRTEEN SHULCHANOS
They are listed with their materials and their locations.
The steps of the Lechem are followed from table to table.
LECHEM ON SILVER OR MARBLE
Question: The Beraisa says that the Lechem was on silver, while our Mishnah says marble!?
Answer: Our Mishnah holds they were not of silver since it generates heat (causing spoilage to the Lechem).
Question: But the warm freshness of the bread all week was miraculous!?
Answer: We do not discuss (rely on) the miracles.
The Beraisa holds silver, and not marble because the latter introduces cold (and the Lechem needed to be warm).
Question: But the miracle...
Answer: We do not discuss the miracles.
IN THE ABSENCE OF NEW LECHEM
Question: If there was no new Lechem, would we leave the Lechem of the present week on the Shulchanos for the next?
Answer: The Pasuk teaches that the Lechem must always be there (even post date).
THE SHULCHANOS FITTING INTO THE MIKDASH OF SHLOMO
Shlomo made 10 Shulchanos (Divrei ha'Yamim II 4:8), five on one side; five on the other.
Question: If their lengths were to the width of the Heichal, they would be in the North and South (and not only in the North, where the Shulchan must be)?!
Answer: They were not in a row, rather five to the right of Moshe's Shulchan and five to the left.
Only the Shulchan of Moshe was set with Lechem (based on Melachim I 7:48).
(R. Yosi) They were all set [alternately] (based on Divrei ha'Yamim II 4:19).
The Beraisa teaches a dispute regarding their positions.
If they were East to West then they are all (properly) in the North.
But if they were North to South...?!