(a)What does the Tana say about someone who sets out alone on a journey before the cock crows? What did he mean?
(b)According to Rebbi Yashiyah, it is only safe to set out after the second time it crows. What do others say?
(c)What size rooster are we talking about?
(a)The Tana says about someone who sets out alone on a journey before the cock crows is taking his life into his own hands - because of the risk of being attacked by demons (and we have learned in Berachos that demons will not generally attack two people).
(b)According to Rebbi Yashiyah, it is only safe to set out after the second time it crows - others say, only after the third time.
(c)This applies to a medium-size rooster.
(a)Rav Yehudah quotes Rav, who says that when Yisrael went to Yerushalayim for Yom-Tov, 'Omdin Tzefufin u'Mishtachavim Revachim, v'Nimshachin ... '. What is the meaning of ...
1. ... 'Omdin Tzefufin'?
2. ... 'Mishtachavin Revachin'? What was the purpose of this miracle?
(b)They were so short of space that they found themselves standing in an area which was rarely used. Where was that?
(c)How many other regular miracles took place in the Beis-Hamikdash?
1. ... 'Omdin Tzefufin' - means that they stood so packed together that they were lifted off the ground (giving the impression that they were floating - ['Tzaf' also means to float]).
2. ... 'Mishtachavin Revachim' - that when they bowed down, they all had plenty of room to prostrate themselves on the ground, with even a space of four Amos between one person and the next, so that the one would not overhear the confession of his friend.
(b)They were so short of space that they filled up the eleven Amos allotted for the non-Kohanim to stand on all sides of the Azarah - even on the West, the area behind the Kodesh Kodshim.
(c)Nine other regular miracles took place in the Beis Hamikdash.
(a)Which personal miracle occurred in connection with the Kohen Gadol himself?
(b)No woman ever miscarried on account of the strong smell of the roasting meat (from which she may have wanted to partake but could not), nor did the meat of Kodshim ever go bad. What was the third miracle that took place in connection with Kodshim meat - in the Beis ha'Mitbachayim?
(c)Which three types of loaves never became Pasul? What would be the problem if they did? Why could they not simply be re-placed?
(d)Which two miracles occurred regularly in Yerushalayim, one factual, the other, verbal?
(a)It never happened that the Kohen Gadol saw Keri on Yom Kipur.
(b)No woman ever miscarried on account of the strong smell of the roasting meat (from which she may have wanted to partake but could not), the meat of Kodshim never went bad, nor was a fly ever seen in the slaughter-house.
(c)No Pesul ever occurred with regard to the Omer, the Shtei ha'Lechem or the Lechem ha'Panim. This was necessary - because they only cut the minimum that was needed for the Omer the night before; similarly, the Shtei ha'Lechem had to be baked before Yom-Tov, and the same applied to the baking of the Lechem ha'Panim. Consequently, none of them could be re-placed should they become Pasul.
(d)No snake or scorpion ever harmed anyone in Yerushalayim, nor did anyone in Yerushalayim ever complain that they were short of space or food.
(a)Seeing as the last two concern Yerushalayim, and not the Beis Hamikdash, we re-place them with another two, both of which concern the elements. What are they?
(b)The broken pieces of earthenware, the plumage and the crop of the bird Olah, and the ashes from the Mizbe'ach ha'Zahav and from the Menorah would all disappear where they were. How many miracles did this comprise?
(c)What was the significance of the broken pieces of earthenware, and why was this miracle necessary?
(d)If we reckon the miracle of the three types of loaves as one, as well as the miracles of the elements and the miracle of the things that disappeared, we will still be one short of the ten miracles listed by Chazal. We make up for the deficiency by adding a miracle that occurred with the Lechem ha'Panim. What was it?
(a)Seeing as the last two concerned Yerushalayim, and not the Beis Hamikdash, we re-place them with another two: the rain never extinguished the fire on the Mizbe'ach (in spite of the fact that the Mizbe'ach was in the open Chatzer; and the wind never disturbed the smoke that went up straight from the Mizbe'ach.
(b)The broken pieces of earthenware would disappear wherever they were in the Azarah, and the plumage and the crop of the Olas ha'Of and the ashes from the Mizbe'ach ha'Zahav and the Menorah would all disappear from the same spot on the east side of the Mizbe'ach.
(c)The broken pieces of earthenware comprised the broken pots in which the Kohanim cooked the Kodshei Kodashim, which had to be eaten in the Azarah. The following morning, whatever remained became Nosar and had to be burned, and whatever was absorbed in the earthenware pots in which they had been cooked became Nosar too, and had to be broken. If not for the miracle, the entire floor of the Azarah would have been full of broken pieces of earthenware (which could not be removed from there).
(d)The missing miracle is that of the Lechem ha'Panim, which were placed on the Table (on Shabbos) hot (more than a day after they were baked), and were removed still (literally) steaming hot, on the following Shabbos.
(a)Two other miracles that occurred were that both the Aron and the bodies of the Keruvim, took up no space at all. What reason does the Gemara initially give for the Tana not including them in the list of miracles, that creates a problem regarding the inclusion of the miracle of the Lechem ha'Panim remaining warm?
(b)Why in fact, is the miracle of the hot loaves considered a miracle that occurred outside?
(a)The Gemara initially gives the reason for the Tana not including the Aron and the bodies of the Keruvim in the list of miracles - because they were miracles that took place from the Kodesh and within (where people were not permitted to walk, and which were therefore not publicly known), whereas the ten miracles listed by the Tana were specifically miracles that occurred outside the Kodesh. However, this creates a problem with the miracle of the loaves remaining hot, since this too, took place inside the Kodesh.
(b)In fact, the miracle of the hot loaves considered a miracle that occurred outside - because on Yom-Tov, the Kohanim would pick up the Table and show it to the Olei Regalim, to show them the loaves - still steaming-hot!
(a)What does the Pasuk in Emor "al ha'Shulchan ha'Tahor" imply?
(b)What is the problem with this? Why do we not contend with the fact that the table was overlaid with gold?
(c)How do we answer this Kashya?
(a)The Pasuk "al ha'Shulchan ha'Tahor" implies that it is subject to Tum'ah.
(b)The problem with this is that the Table, being a wooden vessel that is made to remain in its place, should not be subject to Tum'ah. The fact that it was overlaid with gold would make no difference, since the Torah specifically calls it 'wooden'.
(c)We answer this Kashya by pointing out that the table was not in fact, made to remain in its place - because, as we just explained, the Kohanim would pick it up to show the people the miracle.
(a)Which other miracle is hinted in the Pasuk in Tehilim "Yir'ash ka'Levanon Piryo"?
(b)When did it cease to function?
(c)Will it recur in the time of the third Beis Hamikdash?
(d)Why is this miracle not included among the ten miracles listed above? Which other miracle listed there does not belong there for the same reason?
(a)Another miracle hinted in the Pasuk in Tehilim "Yir'ash ka'Levanon Piryo" - is that of the golden fruit-trees that Shlomo Hamelech planted in the Beis-Hamikdash, whose fruit subsequently grew (it is not clear whether the fruit was gold or real fruit), to be detached by the wind.
(b)When the gentiles (the Babylonians) entered the Beis-Hamikdash, the trees dried up.
(c)The miracle of the trees will recur in the time of the third Beis Hamikdash, as the Navi Yeshayah predicted.
(d)This miracle is not included among the ten miracles listed above -because it was ongoing (whereas all of the ten were miracles that recurred, but were not constant). This also explains why they did not include the miracles of the Aron and the Keruvim in the list.
(a)The Heavenly fire that consumed the Korbanos had five supernatural qualities: it crouched like a lion, was clear like the sun and was tangible. What were the other two?
(b)Then how can the Tana list the fact that the wind did not disturb the smoke of the Ma'arachah among the miracles of the Beis Hamikdash?
(c)What do we learn from the Pasuk in Vayikra "v'Nasnu Bnei Aharon ha'Kohen Esh al ha'Mizbe'ach"?
(a)The Heavenly fire that consumed the Korbanos had five supernatural qualities: it crouched like a lion, was clear like the sun and was tangible. It also consumed liquids and solids alike, and did not produce any smoke.
(b)The smoke that remained undisturbed by the wind was not smoke caused by the Heavenly fire, but smoke that was caused by the fire that the Kohanim lit.
(c)We learn from the Pasuk "v'Nasnu Bnei Aharon ha'Kohen Esh al ha'Mizbe'ach" - that even though they knew that a Heavenly fire would devour the Korbanos, they were nevertheless obligated to light their own fire on the Mizbe'ach.
(a)We said that the fire on the Mizbe'ach crouched like a lion. Then how do we account for the fact that Rebbi Chanina Sgan ha'Kohanim saw it crouching like a dog?
(b)Why did the Navi Chagai omit a 'Hey' from "v'Ertzeh Bam v'Ikaveida*h*"?
(c)If the Aron, the lid and the Keruvim are counted as one of the five things that were missing in the second Beis Hamikdash, what besides the fire, were the other three?
(d)If there was no Divine fire in the second Beis Hamikdash, then how can Rebbi Chanina Sgan ha'Kohanim have seen it crouching like a dog?
(a)We said that the fire on the Mizbe'ach crouched like a lion - that was in the time of the first Beis Hamikdash; in the time of the second, it crouched like a dog (see Chidushei Agados Maharsha).
(b)Chagai ha'Navi omitted a 'Hey' from "v'Ertzeh Bam v'Ikaveida*h*" - to hint to the five things that would be missing from the second Beis-Hamikdash.
(c)If the Aron, the lid and the Keruvim are counted as one, the other three missing items (besides the Divine fire), were the Shechinah, Ru'ach ha'Kodesh and the Urim v'Tumim (see Tosfos DH 've'Urim v'Tumim').
(d)When the Tana said that there was no Divine fire in the second Beis-Hamikdash, he did not mean that it was it was absent, but that it was not effective.
(a)There are six types of fire: our fire eats but does not drink. Which type of fire ...
1. ... drinks but does not eat?
2. ... ate and drank?
3. ... consumed liquids and solids alike?
(b)The fire of the angel Gavriel can move fire from one place to another. On what occasion did this occur?
(c)And when did the fire of Hash-m consume fire?
(a)The fire ...
1. ... of a sick person drinks but does not eat.
2. ... of Eliyahu ha'Navi eats and drinks.
3. ... of the Ma'arachah consumed liquids and solids alike.
(b)The fire of the angel Gavriel pushed away fire when he descended to cool down the fire of the furnace into which Chananya, Mishael and Azaryah had been thrown. He cooled down the furnace, but at the same time, he pushed the fire to the outside, to heat up the area surrounding the furnace, in order to burn the people who had thrown them in.
(c)The fire of Hash-m consumed fire, when Hash-m stretched out His finger (of fire) to devour the angels who queried Him for creating man.
(a)On the night following the last day of Sukos, says Rav Yitzchak bar Avdimi, everyone would look at the smoke of the Ma'arachah. If it was blowing towards the north, the poor would be happy and the rich sad. Why was that?
(b)And why would the rich be happy and the poor sad, if it was blowing towards the south?
(c)If the smoke blew eastwards everybody was happy and if it blew westwards, they were sad. Why?
(d)Then how do we explain the statement that no wind on earth could interfere with the pillar of smoke that rose from the Mizbe'ach?
(a)On the night following the first day of Sukos, says Rav Yitzchak bar Avdimi (immediately after the Divine ruling on that year's rains had been issued), everyone would look at the smoke of the Ma'arachah. If it was blowing towards the north, the poor would be happy and the rich sad - because, even though the south-wind brings plenty of rain, it is a particularly dry wind, wih the result that it tends to dry the crops, forcing the rich land-owners to sell quickly (making the crops available at cheap prices).
(b)And if it was blowing towards the south, then the rich would be happy and the poor sad - because, although the north-wind does not produce much rain, it is nevertheless a wet wind (enabling the wealthy land-owners to horde the crops and sell them later at high prices).
(c)If the smoke blew eastwards everybody was happy - because the west-wind blows moderately, causing sufficient crops to grow, and the land-owners to sell reasonably quickly and at acceptable prices. And if it blew westwards, they were all sad - because the east-wind is very dry, causing drought when it blows.
(d)When Chazal said that no wind on earth could interfere with the pillar of smoke that rose from the Mizbe'ach, they did not necessarily mean that the pillar of smoke rose vertically from the Mizbe'ach, but that it went as straight as a stick - in whichever direction it traveled.
(a)How do we reconcile the previous statement of Rav Yitzchak bar Avdimi (that the west wind is good for everyone and the east wind, bad) with the Beraisa, which says the opposite?
(b)The north wind is good for wheat that is one third grown, but bad for budding olives; the south wind is quite the opposite. By what sign can one easily remember this?
(a)Rav Yitzchak bar Avdimi, who said that the west wind is good for everyone and the east wind, bad, was speaking about Eretz Yisrael, which is basically a dry country, which depends on its annual rain-fall for its crops - whereas the Beraisa, which says the opposite, refers to Bavel, which is a naturally wet country, where wet and dry winds will have exactly the reverse effect.
(b)The sign by which to remember that the north wind is good for wheat that is one third grown, but bad for budding olives, and the south wind is the opposite - is that the north-wind is reminiscent of the Mizbe'ach, which was placed on the north of the Azarah (and on which they placed the Lechem ha'Panim, which were made from wheat), whereas the south-wind reminds one of the Menorah, which was placed on the south-side (and in which they burned olive oil).
HADRAN ALACH PEREK SHIV'AS YAMIM