Daf Ditty Yoma 31: Ein Eitam

Solomon’s Pools

MISHNA: The High Priest removed the white garments that he was wearing, descended to the ritual bath, and immersed. He ascended and dried himself with a towel. Then they brought him the golden garments of the High Priest, and he dressed in the garments, and he sanctified his hands and his feet. They brought him the sheep for the daily morning offering, which he slaughtered by cutting most of the way through the gullet and the windpipe. And a different priest completed the slaughter on his behalf so that the High Priest could receive the blood in a vessel and proceed with the order of the Yom Kippur service. As soon as the slaughter was completed, the High Priest received the blood in a vessel and sprinkled it on the altar.

He entered the Sanctuary to burn the morning incense and to remove the ashes from the lamps of the candelabrum; and he left the Sanctuary and returned to the courtyard to sacrifice the head and the limbs of the sheep sacrificed for the daily offering and the High Priest’s daily griddle- cake offering, and the wine libation of the daily offering. The Mishna comments: The morning incense was burned between the receiving and sprinkling of the blood and the burning of the limbs; and the afternoon incense was burned between the taking of the limbs up to the altar and the pouring of the libations that accompanied the offering.

With regard to the immersion, if the High Priest was old and found it difficult to immerse in cold water, or if he was delicate [istenis], they would heat hot water for him on Yom Kippur eve and place it into the cold water of the ritual bath in order to temper its chill so the High Priest could immerse without discomfort.

Steinzaltz

JASTROW

Rav Pappa said to them: Both according to the opinion of the Rabbis and according to the opinion of Rabbi Meir, there is one sanctification upon removal of sacred garments, and one sanctification upon donning other sacred garments. And here, it is with regard to this issue that they disagree. It is written:

And Aaron shall come into the tent of meeting, and shall 23 גכ בוּ ָ א הַ א ֲ ֹ ר ן , ֶ א ל - לֶהֹא ,דֵﬠוֹמ טַשָׁפוּ טַשָׁפוּ ,דֵﬠוֹמ לֶהֹא put off the linen garments, which he put on when he went into תֶא - יֵדְגִבּ ,דָבַּה רֶשֲׁא שַׁבָל וֹאֹבְבּ לֶא - .the holy place, and shall leave them there ַה ;שֶׁדֹקּ ,םָחיִנִּהְו .םָשׁ ,םָחיִנִּהְו ;שֶׁדֹקּ

And he shall bathe his flesh in water in a holy place and put 24 דכ ץַחָרְו תֶא - וֹרָשְׂבּ םִיַמַּב םוֹקָמְבּ םוֹקָמְבּ םִיַמַּב וֹרָשְׂבּ -on his other vestments, and come forth, and offer his burnt ,שׁוֹדָק שַׁבָלְו תֶא - ;ויָדָגְבּ ,אָצָיְו הָשָׂﬠְו הָשָׂﬠְו ,אָצָיְו ;ויָדָגְבּ offering and the burnt-offering of the people, and make תֶא - וֹתָלֹע תֶאְ ו - תַלֹע ,םָﬠָה רֶפִּכְ ו ,וֹדֲﬠַבּ ,וֹדֲﬠַבּ רֶפִּכְ ו ,םָﬠָה תַלֹע .atonement for himself and for the people בוּ ﬠְ ַ ד ָ ה .םָ ﬠ ְב Lev 16:23-24

“And he shall remove the linen garments that he put on when he entered the Sanctuary and leave them there. And he shall wash his flesh in water in a sacred place and he shall put on his garment”

Rabbi Meir holds: The Torah juxtaposes removal of garments to donning of garments for the following reason: Just as when donning the garments, he dons the garments and afterward sanctifies his hands and feet, so too, with regard to removal of the garments, he removes the garments and afterward sanctifies his hands and feet.

And the Rabbis hold that the Torah juxtaposes removal of garments to donning of garments for the following reason: Just as when donning the garments, when he is dressed, he sanctifies his hands and feet; so too, for removal of the garments, he sanctifies his hands and feet when he is dressed. Therefore, when he completes the service he sanctifies his hands and feet and only then removes the garments. However, the first time that the High Priest dons the priestly vestments on Yom Kippur he certainly does not require two sanctifications, since at that point he does not remove any other garments.

Summary

The Mishnah states that the Kohen Gadol undressed, went into the mikvah, immersed himself and ascended and dried himself by wrapping himself in a large cloth towel to absorb the water on his body. They brought him the golden garments, he put them on and sanctified his hands and feet. They brought him the tamid offering, he made the required cut and someone else finished it for him. He received the blood and threw it (on the Altar).

He went inside to burn the incense of the morning and to prepare the lamps (of the Menorah), and to offer up the head and the limbs and the chavitin (meal offering) and the wine libations. The morning incense was offered up between the blood and the limbs, and the afternoon (incense) between the limbs and its libations. If the Kohen Gadol was either old or of delicate nature, warm water would be prepared for him and poured into the cold (of the mikvah), to mitigate its coldness.

There is a disagreement as to whether the Kohen Gadol had to wash his hands and feet twice for putting on new priestly garments, or once for taking off his garments and once for putting them on. The Kohen Gadol was required to sanctify his hands and feet by washing them twice for every immersion in the mikveh. There is a disagreement as to the sequence of this sanctification process. According to Rabbi Meir the Kohen Gadol would first get undressed and then sanctify his hands and feet. This is because both the first and second washings are related to donning sacred garments and not connected with taking them off.

According to the Rabbis, the first washing was done before the Kohen Gadol got undressed, because the first washing is connected to the removal of sacred garments. The practical difference between these two opinions is that according to the Rabbis the first tevialah had only one washing and not the usual two.

This was due to the fact that the Kohen Gadol arrived wearing his own nonsacred clothes. Since according to their opinion the first washing was connected to removing the sanctified clothes, it was unnecessary for this immersion. According to Rabbi Meir, however, who assumes both washings relate to getting dressed, even the first tevila required two washings.

10 Kohen Gadol Dries himself off after the Mikveh.

The Mishna states the Kohen Gadol would dry himself after immersing in the mikveh. The question arises: Was this just for his own convenience, or was there a halachic reason behind this practice? The Mishna Lamelech deals with this question. In his opinion, the Kohen Gadol was required to dry off in order to prevent a chatzitzah (separation) between his skin and the priestly garments. He offers as proof to this idea the Gemora which says that wind which lifts the garments off of the kohen’s skin disqualifies the service. If the wind between the garments and the skin is a problem, certainly, the Mishna Lamilech reasons, water will be problematic. Rav Moshe Arik offers a different explanation for this Mishna. He explains that there is a prohibition to wash on Yom Kippur. Even though this prohibition is not applicable to the Kohen Gadol because he is not bathing for his own pleasure, he still has an obligation to limit his washing as much as possible. Therefore, according to Rav Moshe Arik, the Kohen Gadol was obligated to dry himself off.

Rav Eliashiv challenges this explanation. There are times when the halachah allows one to go in water on Yom Kippur, yet we never find that allowance is conditioned on drying off immediately afterwards. If a river is obstructing one’s way to visit his teacher, he is allowed to wade through it. Nowhere is it mentioned one must dry off after going through the river. Therefore, Rav Eliashiv rejects this explanation of the Mishna.

Vestments of white

The Gemora states that they spread a linen sheet between the Kohen Gadol and the people so that the Kohen Gadol would realize that the service of the day is performed with linen vestments. The theme of Yom Kippur is white, which reflects purity and being sin free.

The Gemora further (39b) states that the Bais HaMikdash was called Levanon because it whitened the sins of Israel. The Gemora in Sanhedrin (97a) states that Moshiach will not arrive until the entire kingdom converts to heresy. This is alluded to in the verse that states all of it has turned white, it is pure. Apparently, there are two scenarios where the Jewish People gain atonement. They can either gain atonement through repentance and good deeds, or they can gain atonement when the world is so corrupt that everyone has become heretical.

The Gemora (ibid 97b ) states that according to the opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua, if the Jewish People do not repent, Hashem will appoint a king over them whose decrees will be as harsh as Haman, and the Jewish People will repent, and in this way HaShem will bring them back to the right path. It is certainly better to gain atonement and redemption through voluntary repentance, rather than being persecuted by the gentiles.

Let us make the right choice and repent now, on our own volition, and gain true atonement and redemption.

11 THE REQUIREMENT TO IMMERSE BEFORE ENTERING THE AZARAH

Rav Mordechai Kornfeld writes:1

The Mishnah (30a) requires one to immerse himself in a Mikvah before he enters the Azarah. The Gemara asks whether this Tevilah is also necessary for a person who stands outside the Azarah and extends a long knife into the Azarah and performs Shechitah there. Even the Rabanan in the Mishnah in Midos (cited on 30b) who normally do not require one to immerse before he enters the Azarah might require Tevilah in this case, because when the person performs the Shechitah he does an actual Avodah and is not merely walking into the Azarah. The Gemara leaves this question unanswered.

The Rabanan who do not require one to immerse before he enters the Azarah disagree with the Tana of the Mishnah here (Ben Zoma) who requires one to immerse. However, the Mishnah here says that one must immerse before he enters the Azarah only when he intends "to do Avodah" ("la'Avodah"). Accordingly, the Rabanan who disagree must maintain that Tevilah is not required even when one intends to perform an Avodah inside the Azarah. Why, then, does the Gemara consider the possibility that the Rabanan agree that one must immerse when he intends to perform an Avodah inside the Azarah?

RASHI on the Mishnah (30a, DH la'Avodah) and TOSFOS (30a, DH Ein Adam; 31a, DH Chotzetz) answer that the term "la'Avodah" in the Mishnah is inexact. The Mishnah means that one is required to immerse whenever he plans to enter the Azarah, even when he does not intend to perform an Avodah. Tosfos adds that according to the Mishnah (which expresses the opinion of Ben Zoma), a person who enters the Azarah in order to perform an Avodah is required mid'Oraisa to immerse in a Mikvah. One who enters the Azarah with no intention to perform an Avodah must immerse only mid'Rabanan.

TOSFOS YESHANIM (30a, DH Ein Adam) says in the name of his Rebbi, Rabeinu Yehudah he'Chasid, that one needs Tevilah only when he enters the Azarah in order to perform an Avodah. The word "la'Avodah" in the Mishnah is exact in that respect. However, "la'Avodah" does not mean a full-fledged Avodah, but it refers to any act which must be done in the Mikdash (such as Semichah, or a Metzora's insertion of his fingers into the Azarah for the sake of Haza'ah). The Rabanan in Midos require Tevilah only when one performs an actual Avodah.

The Tosfos Yeshanim (31a, DH Tiba'i) cites the opinion of RABEINU YOSEF who says that even according to the Tana of the Mishnah here, one needs Tevilah only when he enters to do an actual Avodah. (The Avodah, though, does not have to be the type that may be performed only by a Kohen. An Avodah which a Zar may perform, such as Shechitah, also requires Tevilah, as is clear from the Gemara.) The Rabanan in Midos argue and maintain that one needs Tevilah only when he performs an Avodah immediately upon entering the Azarah. (The Tosfos Yeshanim does not consider this explanation satisfactory.)

1 https://www.dafyomi.co.il/yoma/insites/yo-dt-031.htm

12 Steinzaltz (OBM) writes:

The Mishnah (30a) teaches that the kohen gadol immersed in the mikvah five times during the course of the Yom Kippur Temple service. All of these tevilot (immersions) took place in an office called the bet ha-parveh, except for the first one, which took place on top of the water gate, which was near the office of the kohen gadol.

Abayye comments on this that the water source for these mikva’ot, a spring called Ein Eitam, had to be 23 cubits higher than the ground level of the Temple itself, since we know (based on a Mishnah in Masechet Middot 2:3) that the gates in the Temple were 20 amot high, and the mikveh that stood above the water gate needed to be at least three cubits deep in order to hold the correct amount of water. There is a difference of opinion involving Tosafot and the Geonim about the three cubits needed for the mikvah. The Geonim understand that the extra three cubits are needed to accommodate an average person, and generally speaking people are about three cubits tall. According to Tosafot three cubits is the normal height of a person, not counting his head. The logic here is that when a person enters the water, his body mass displaces enough water to cover his head, as well.

The Ein Eitam spring is identified as the third of Solomon’s Pools, which are located about three kilometers south-east of Bet Lechem, not far from the present-day community of Tekoa (where the Yeshivat Hesder under the direction of Rav Steinsaltz is located). From this spring, as well as others in the vicinity, there is a lengthy channel – more than 20 kilometers – that winds between the Judean Mountains and through underground tunnels, carrying water to the Temple Mount. The Ein Eitam spring today stands 760 meters above sea level, which is about 25 meters above the height of the Temple Mount.

With the destruction of the Second Temple, this channel was destroyed, as well. It was later rebuilt and was part of the water system that brought water to Jerusalem for generations.

Rav David Silverberg writes:2

The kohen gadol immersed in a mikveh several times over the course of the Yom Kippur service. Specifically, he was required to immerse before changing from one set of garments into the other. Different parts of the service required different sets of garments, and the kohen gadol would immerse each time he would change. In describing the kohen gadol’s immersion, the Mishnayot in Masekhet Yoma write (in several contexts), “Yarad ve-taval ala ve-nistapag” – “He went down [into the mikveh], immersed, came up, and dried himself.”

The Mishneh Le-melekh (Hilkhot Avodat Yom Ha-kippurim 2:2) notes that it appears from this description that the kohen gadol was required to dry himself after immersing. By including the word “ve-nistapag” in its list of procedures, the Mishna seems to imply that this was an obligatory part of the process. The Mishneh Le-melekh theorizes that drying was necessary to ensure that no dirt or other substance in the mikveh became attached to the kohen gadol’s skin

2 https://www.etzion.org.il/en/salt-parashat-haazinu-20155776

13 during immersion. Halakha requires the kohen to wear his priestly garments directly on the skin, without any obstruction, and even a small foreign object on the body constitutes a chatzitza (obstruction) for the purposes of this halakha (Zevachim 19a). Therefore, the kohen gadol needed to dry his body after immersion to ensure the removal of any substance which might have collected on his skin during immersion. Alternatively, the Mishneh Le-melekh adds, the water itself may constitute a chatzitza obstructing between the kohen gadol’s skin and his garments, and thus it needed to be removed before he could don his garments.

Rav Meir Simcha of Dvinsk, both in his Or Samei’ch commentary to the Mishneh Torah and in his Meshekh Chokhma (15:2), offered a different reason for this requirement. The Torah instructs that the kohanim must wear their garments for the sake of honor and prestige (“le- khavod i-le’tif’aret” – Shemot 28:2). If a kohen gadol would put on his garments when his body was wet, the garments would become damp and appear undignified. For this reason, he needed to dry himself before putting on his garments.

A different, and particularly novel, theory to explain this requirement was suggested by Rav Meir Arik, in his work Tal Torah (Yoma 31b), where he writes that drying was required due to the prohibition of bathing on Yom Kippur. Although the kohen gadol was permitted to immerse on Yom Kippur as required, he was not allowed to remain wet after emerging from the mikveh, and he was thus required to dry himself immediately.

Rav Meir Arik’s theory seemingly yields a fascinating halakhic conclusion that is applicable to each and every one of us – namely, that when hand-washing is permitted on Yom Kippur, such as when awaking in the morning and after using the restroom, one must immediately dry his hands. Since one enjoys the sensation of moisture on the hands, he is obligated by the prohibition of rechitza (washing) to remove the water as quickly as possible. Likewise, if somebody bathed immediately before the onset of Yom Kippur, he must ensure to thoroughly dry himself before Yom Kippur begins.

Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv is cited as rejecting this theory, however, in light of the fact that no such requirement is mentioned in regard to kiddush yadayim va-raglayim – the kohen gadol’s washing of his hands and feet before beginning the service on Yom Kippur. Seemingly, according to Rav Meir Arik’s theory, just as the kohen gadol was required to dry himself after immersing, he would also have to dry his hands and feet after washing them before beginning the service on Yom Kippur. As this requirement is never mentioned, it appears that the kohen gadol needed to dry his body only after immersion.

Rav Asher Weiss, however, noted that there may, indeed, be a distinction between immersion and kidush yadayim ve-raglayim. There is a debate among the Rishonim as to whether bathing on Yom Kippur is forbidden on the level of Torah obligation. Some maintain that bathing is forbidden only by force of Rabbinic enactment, whereas others maintain that bathing one’s entire body is forbidden by the Torah. According to this second view, we can easily understand why the kohen gadol would have to dry himself after immersion, when his entire body was wet, but not after washing his hands and feet, as washing individual body parts is not forbidden by the Torah prohibition of rechitza.

14 Nevertheless, despite refuting this argument against Rav Meir Arik’s theory, Rav Weiss takes the view that Halakha does not require one to dry himself after washing on Yom Kippur, even after washing his entire body. The fact that no sources make mention of such a requirement strongly suggest that Halakha forbids bathing, but does not require removing water that is on one’s body.

We noted the comments of the Mishneh Le-melekh (Hilkhot Avodat Yom Ha-kippurim 2:2) suggesting that the kohen gadol was halakhically required to dry himself after immersing during the Yom Kippur service. When the Mishnayot in Masekhet Yoma mention each of the kohen gadol’s immersions on Yom Kippur, they state, “Yarad ve-taval ala ve-nistapag” – “He went down [into the mikveh], immersed, came up, and dried himself.” The fact that the Mishnayot saw fit to make mention of the kohen gadol drying himself seems to suggest that this was a required part of the procedure. The Mishneh Le-melekh suggests that drying was required because the water droplets on the kohen gadol’s skin, or dirt in the mikveh that accumulated on his skin, would constitute a chatzitza (obstruction) between his body and his priestly garments. As the garments had to be worn directly on the skin without any substance in between, the kohen gadol needed to dry himself after immersion.

Rav Asher Weiss, in a recent essay on this subject, disagrees with this theory, and argues that the Mishnayot should not be understood to mean that the kohen gadol was halakhically required to dry himself. Rav Weiss notes that we find in two other unrelated contexts the Mishna mentioning a kohen drying himself after immersion, and where the explanation must be that this was because people normally dry themselves after immersing, and not because of a halakhic requirement.

First, in Masekhet Para (3:8), this expression is used in reference to the kohen gadol’s immersion before burning the para aduma to prepare the purifying ashes. Even though there was no requirement for him to dry himself after this immersion, the Mishna nevertheless speaks of him drying after immersing because this is what was normally done.

The second instance appears in Masekhet Tamid (26a), where the Mishna speaks of a case of a kohen who experiences a nocturnal emission one night during his term of duty in the Beit Ha- mikdash. The Mishna describes how the kohen would immediately immerse and was then allowed to remain in the Temple courtyard until the next morning. In this context, too, the Mishna uses the expression, “Yarad ve-taval ala ve-nistapag.”

Apparently, this is simply the jargon used in describing the process of immersion, and does not indicate an actual halakhic requirement to immerse.

15 How did the Mount Moriah become designated as the Temple Mount?

Steinzaltz (OBM) writes:3

According to the straightforward reading of Sefer Shmuel (II:Chapter 24), King David was directed to that place by Gad, the prophet, who instructed him to build an altar to God that would end the plague from which the people were suffering. The Gemara on today’s daf offers a much more detailed description of the long-term planning that went into arriving at this decision.

Rava quotes a passage from Shmuel Aleph (19:18-19) where we find Shmuel the prophet sitting with David in Nayot in Ramah. This pasuk is difficult since Nayot and Ramah are two different places, so Rava interprets this homiletically as meaning that they sat together in Ramah and discussed noyo shel olam – the beauty of the world – i.e., the Temple.

It is clear that the Temple was supposed to be among the highest places in Israel, since the commandment to visit the Temple on the pilgrimage holidays states ve-kamta ve-alita – that people must “go up” to the place chosen by God (Devarim 17:8).

In order to determine the place that is considered highest, they studied Sefer Yehoshua (Chapter 15) and found that when the borders of the different tribes were discussed, most of them had their borders described with the words ve’alah – and the border rose up – ve-yarad – the border moved down – and ve-ta’ar – the border was drawn. Regarding the tribe of Binyamin, the word ve-yarad does not appear.

3 https://steinsaltz.org/daf/zevahim54/

Having determined that the Temple Mount would be in the tribe of Binyamin, they considered placing it in Ein Eitam, which is the highest spot – Rashi identifies Ein Eitam as Mei Nafto’ah based on Yehoshua (15:10) – which, according to the Sages, was one of the springs from which water flowed to the Temple. This was rejected because the Sanhedrin was to be situated in the tribe of Yehuda, which was just to the south of Binyamin, but far from Mei Nafto’ah. This led to the decision to establish the Temple on the border between these two tribes (see Devarim 33:12).

17 Rashi points out that the source for placing the Sanhedrin in the tribe of Yehuda stems from his blessing in Sefer Bereshit (49:10), where he is promised to serve the role of meḥokek, or legislator. The placement of the Sanhedrin near the Temple is derived from Sefer Devarim (17:9) where we learn that a complicated problem is to be brought to the kohanim-levi’im and to the judges. Thus the Temple was arranged so that it was situated in the tribe of Binyamin with the area of the Sanhedrin in Yehuda.

Rachel Scheinerman writes:4

The pinnacle of the Yom Kippur service, in which the high priest enters the Holy of Holies, is a private act. When the priest enters that awesomely sacred space to atone on behalf of the whole community, he does so alone.

Other aspects of the Yom Kippur service, however, are public — extremely public. Here’s an excerpt from a mishnah on yesterday’s page:

Five immersions and ten sanctifications the high priest immerses and sanctifies on Yom Kippur. And all in the sacred area (the Temple courtyard), on the roof of the Hall of Parva, except for this first immersion alone. They spread a sheet of fine linen between him and the people and then the high priest immerses and sanctifies his hands and feet.

Then as now there were five Yom Kippur services, and between each the high priest would disrobe and immerse in a mikveh. What is striking about this mishnah is where this immersion takes place: on the roof of the Hall of Parva. Back on Yoma 19a, we learned that this was the room used for salting the consecrated hides that belonged to the priests to prevent them from spoiling. In this case, the use of the room is not as important as its location. Putting the priest on a rooftop positions him up high, so everyone can witness his ablutions. On this most sacred day of the year, just as the people stand with their souls bared before God, the priest literally stands naked before the community. A linen cloth maintains his modesty, but otherwise his immersion is as public as possible. It’s an act of radical transparency.

The mishnah notes that the first immersion does not take place within the Temple courtyard, but just outside the Temple, preparing the priest to enter. This immersion, too, is done publicly and also way up high. As the Gemara explains on today’s daf, the priest takes his first immersion on top of the Water Gate of the Temple.

The gate, of course, was not just a door on a hinge, but a small building through which one would pass to enter the Temple. The Gemara brings another mishnah that gives us the rabbis’ best

4 Myjewishlearning.com

18 reckoning of its size: 20 cubits (or about 30 feet) high, and ten cubits (15 feet) wide. In contemporary terms, about three stories.

A mikveh must be fed by live waters. How did the ancients get flowing water up to the top of a Temple gate? The Gemara explains that the mikveh was fed by the Eitam Spring, which was located a little more than 10 kilometers south of Jerusalem near Solomon’s pools at an elevation of about 23 cubits (about 35 feet) higher than the Temple. An aqueduct, whose archaeological remains were discovered not so long ago, transported this water all the way to the Water Gate in Jerusalem. Having finally made this long journey, the water poured into a small pool on the smooth, marble roof of the gate so that before all the people on whose behalf he performed the ritual, and hidden only by a fine linen sheet, the high priest could shed his garments, immerse himself and emerge ready to ask for God’s atonement.

Etam Spring - Temple Mount Water

Etam Spring, Ain Atan, Ein Etan. Etam (ā·täm) Spring fed the lower aqueduct coming from a spring of Etam near Bethlehem, and Solomon's Pools located at the head of the Urtas Valley, whence it was conveyed to the Temple Court by a subterranean aqueduct, some 10 miles in length. This has gone into ruin long ago, so that no water from the spring now reaches Jerusalem.5

The Lower Aqueduct fed by Etam Spring

According to the Jewish sources Spring Etam was the water source for the Temple, reaching the temple by means of the Lower Aqueduct. This aqueduct brought fresh water to cleanse the temple court of the sacrificial blood each evening, and to fill the laver. It would have been built for this purpose by King Solomon when he built the Temple. Just as it is today when building a house, the owner must have a water source before he even considers building, whether it is digging a well or hooking up to a water system. Some claim this lower aqueduct was built by the Hasmonean in the 2nd century BCE, but the Hasmonean would have merely repaired, or improved, an already existing aqueduct. We can conclude that Solomon would not have relied on cisterns to supply the large amount of water needed, on a daily basis to supply the Temple, especially in an arid country that experienced consecutive years of drought.

Jewish Sources

The Jerusalem Talmud (Yoma' 3 fol 41) says that "a conduit ran from Atan to the Temple."

Abaye, a Jewish sage of the 4th century was quoted as saying; "If these orifices be now opened, the water rushes in from all sides, and the marble floor of the sanctuary is washed clean of the blood of the sacrifices, if it be ever so much, and thus cleansed of itself, and in the easiest manner.

5 http://templemountlocation.com/etamSpring.html

19 There can be, moreover, never a want of water in these artificially constructed tubes, as it is conducted hither from a large natural spring (Etam), which to a certainty can never dry."

"This is the conclusion of Abaye, a Jewish sage of the 4th century, " What comes out is that the Ein Etam is 23 cubits higher than the Azara (Temple court)."

Tosefta Pesachim, Ch. 3, Par. 12, "How is the Azara cleaned? Seal the area and let the water from the aqueduct enter till it becomes clean like milk."

The lower aqueduct, which led into the outer court of the holy temple, also supplied it with the water necessary for filling the laver. Pesachim, 64a. The Sea of Solomon...of 1 Kings 7:44, also received its water from this aqueduct.

Upper Aqueduct

A second aqueduct, named the Upper Aqueduct, was re-built, or built upon by Pontius Pilate, Herod, and the 10th Legion and was of stone pipes (part of a siphon system). Its destination appears to be 'Hezekiah's Pool' in the Upper City and did not enter the Temple Mount.

21 Lower Aqueduct

The Lower Aqueduct bringing water from Etam Spring to the Temple Mount entered the Mount at Wilson's Arch, or bridge, which traversed the Tyropoeon Valley. Within the Mount the aqueduct flowed toward the southeast and appears to have fed an elaborate water channel system in the southwestern section on the Temple Mount. One of these channels had a large man-made cut pool.

The Brazen Laver

The second reason for fresh water on the Temple Court, or Azara(h); was to fill the brazen laver, which was a very large pot or tub on a pedestal, which held a great amount of fresh water. It had faucets around the sides of it, which could be opened for the cleaning of hands and feet for the purpose of purity. It had to be emptied each night and refilled in the morning with fresh water. During the second temple period a new way of filling the laver was devised called the Muchni.

A specially made pool under the Temple court

Ben Katin, one of the High Priests who served during the era of the Second Temple, devised a system for retrieving the water each morning using the mechanism of the Muchni, meaning "machinery". The laver was submerged into a specially made pool under the court and was then hoisted up by the first priest in the morning. The Muchni is also a name for a type of wagon wheel. Wheels installed under the laver may have been needed to roll it from its place; between the altar and the House of God, over to where the underground pool was located beneath the Azarah, for refilling it. The "hoisting up" of this large pot full of many gallons of water by just one priest would have required an elaborate pulley system. The possible location for the Jewish Temple utilizing this particular water system is noted by Norma Robertson "Locating Solomon's Temple".

Water channels on the Temple Mount

Once the water entered the Mount, via the aqueduct from Etam Spring, it continued to flow downhill into smaller water channels. These channels were traced by Charles Warren and depicted on one of his maps of the Temple Mount. At the end of one of these smaller channels is a very large underground pool. With Etam Spring aqueduct being the source of water for the temple then the temple would have been located above this subterranean pool. From one of the other smaller channels, on the map, the water would have flowed onto the Priest's court to cleanse it of the blood.

References

( International Standard Bible Encyclopedia) e'-tam 'eTam; Codex Alexandrinus, Apan, Codex Vaticanus, Aitan): 3). Mention of 'Ain 'Aitan, which is described as the most elevated place in Palestine, occurs in the Talmud (Zebhachim 54b), and in the Jer. Talmud (Yoma' 3 fol 41) it is mentioned that a conduit ran from 'Atan to the Temple.

23 Section of ancient Jerusalem aqueduct uncovered

21-kilometer water pipe was used intermittently for two millennia until electric-powered system installed last century6

Part of a 2,000-year-old aqueduct discovered in the East Jerusalem neighborhood of Umm Tuba. The aqueduct, which was one of Jerusalem's main water sources for two millennia, was replaced a century ago by an electrically-operated water system. (Assaf Peretz, courtesy of the Israel Antiquities Authority)

A section of Jerusalem’s Lower Aqueduct, which brought water to Jerusalem more than two millennia ago, was uncovered in the East Jerusalem neighborhood of Umm Tuba during the construction of a new sewer line, it was announced Thursday.

The ancient aqueduct was discovered during digging last month by the Gihon Water Company, which was laying new pipes to modernize the sewer system in the Umm Tuba and Sur Baher neighborhoods in East Jerusalem.

6 https://www.timesofisrael.com/section-of-ancient-jerusalem-aqueduct-uncovered/

24 The Israel Antiquities Authority excavated the area after the aqueduct was found.Skip Ad

“The Lower Aqueduct to Jerusalem, which the Hasmonean kings constructed more than 2,000 years ago in order to provide water to Jerusalem, operated intermittently until about one hundred years ago,” said Ya’akov Billig, the director of the excavation.

According to Billig, the aqueduct begins at the Ein Eitam spring near Solomon’s Pools south of Bethlehem and stretches 21 kilometers to Jerusalem. “Despite its length, it flows along a very gentle downward slope whereby the water level falls just one meter per kilometer of distance. At first, the water was conveyed inside an open channel, and about 500 years ago, during the Ottoman period, a terra cotta pipe was installed inside the channel in order to better protect the water.”

Billig added that while the aqueduct’s route went through uninhabited areas when it was first built, it now runs through several populated areas, including Umm Tuba, East Talpiot and Abu Tor, due to Jerusalem’s expansion.

Since the ancient aqueduct was one of Jerusalem’s most important water sources, the city’s rulers carefully preserved it until an electrically operated water system replaced it roughly a century ago. Now that its importance is mainly historical, Billig said, the Israel Antiquities Authority is taking steps to preserve parts of the aqueduct, study them and make them accessible to the public.

The sections of the aqueduct in Umm Tuba were covered up once more after the Antiquities Authority’s study, but other sections are accessible to the public in other areas in Jerusalem, such as the water tunnel in Armon Hanatziv and near the Sultan’s Pool.

DANIEL K. EISENBUD writes:7

A section of ancient Jerusalem’s lower aqueduct, which conveyed water throughout the city more than 2,000 years ago, was recently exposed during an excavation in Jerusalem, the Antiquities Authority announced.

The discovery was made near Har Homa during the construction of a sewerage line in the neighborhood by the city’s Gihon Company, the authority said.

According to the excavation’s director, Ya’akov Billig, the lower aqueduct was constructed by Hasmonean kings for mass water distribution in the capital and operated intermittently until about 100 years ago.

“The aqueduct begins at the Ein Eitam spring near Solomon’s Pools south of Bethlehem, and is approximately 21 kilometers long,” Billig said on Thursday.

“Despite its length, it flows along a very gentle downward slope, where the water level falls just one meter per kilometer of distance.

“At first, the water was conveyed inside an open channel, and about 500 years ago during the Ottoman period a terra cotta pipe was installed inside the channel in order to better protect the water.”

7 https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/section-of-expansive-2000-year-old-lower-aqueduct-exposed-in-east-jerusalem-403739

26 Billig noted that the aqueduct’s route was built in open areas in the past, but with the expansion of Jerusalem in the modern era, it now runs through a number of neighborhoods, including Umm Tuba, Sur Baher, East Talpiot and Abu Tor.

“Since this is one of Jerusalem’s principal sources of water, the city’s rulers took care to preserve it for some 2,000 years, until it was replaced about a century ago by a modern electrically operated system,” he explained.

“Due to its historical and archeological importance, the IAA [Israel Antiquities Authority] is taking steps to prevent any damage to the aqueduct, and is working to expose sections of its remains, study them and make them accessible to the general public.” Billig said the Umm Tuba section of the aqueduct has been documented, studied, and covered up again “for the sake of future generations.” Other sections of the long aqueduct have been conserved for the public and additional projects are planned whose themes include the lower aqueduct, he said.

The location of the Temple based on the level of the Aqueduct

Tuvia Sagiv Shekerka writes:8

The Temple required a large amount of water – bathing and ritual immersion, rinsing animal sacrifices and cleaning sacrificial blood. The Priests had two water sources – cisterns (that collected rainwater), and water that came from the hills of Hebron using the Aqueduct. In Jewish literary sources we find three uses for water supplied via the Aqueduct.

According to the Jerusalemite sources (Yoma, 3, 3) during the days of the first Temple the Aqueduct ran from the Ein Eitam spring to Solomon’s Sea. According to the Babylonian sources, in the days of the second Temple, the water was brought from Ein Eitam to the High Priest’s Mikva (ritual bath). According to the Tosefta, a supplement to the Mishna, (Tosefta, Psahim, 3, 12) the Priests used the aqueduct water to wash the Court. It can be understood from the descriptions of Mishna (Shkalim 4, 2) that there was only one aqueduct.

Indeed, there are ruins of an aqueduct leading water from Ein Eitam in Solomon’s pools to the foot of the Jewish quarter. The Aqueduct then continued through Wilsons Arch to the Moriah Court (Haram al Sharif)12.

8 http://www.templemount.org/tuviatemple.pdf

The path of the aqueducts, from the Hebron Mountains to Jerusalem [Source: David Amit (ed), The Aqueducts of Ancient Palestine, Jerusalem 1989, p. 171]

It can be assumed that this is in fact the Aqueduct depicted in the Jewish Literary Sources. Another, higher aqueduct does exist, though it appears to be from a later period. This aqueduct was repaired by soldiers of the Tenth Legion in the 2nd Century, and its ruins were not discovered in Jerusalem13 . The description regarding the waters of Ein Eitam arriving at the Mikva of the High Priest, located above the Water Gate, is based on the Abaye's conclusion, who lived in 4th Century, distant Babylon.

His conclusions are a logical deduction based on hearsay and are not a direct testimony. Even according to Jewish law there is no requirement to use spring water for the bathing of the High Priest. Rainwater was allowed for this purpose and may be collected from colonnade roofs surrounding the Court (as understood from Mishna, Mikvaot, 1, 7). Furthermore, a Babylonian version determines that Abaye's descriptions are of water coming from Shen Otem and have nothing to do with the Ein Eitam Aqueduct.

However, there is no doubt regarding the Tosefta descriptions, that water from the Aqueduct was used to wash the Court. The quantity of blood from sacrifices was severe, and it was necessary to wash the Court even during the Sabbath. Raising buckets from the cisterns by wheel was neither

28 sufficient nor permitted on the Sabbath, so the Priests brought water down from the aqueduct to wash the Court. We can conclude from this that the aqueduct was constructed above the Court. The level of this Aqueduct (+737.5m) defines the highest point of the Temple Floor, its Courts and the Temple Mount (floor level). If we assume that the Holy of Holies was either at the Dome of the Rock or at the Ghost Dome, we realize that the aqueduct is actually below the Courts and the High Priest’s Mikva, and cannot be used to supply water (see Fig. 10)14 . To supply water to these levels, we must locate the Temple floor at a lower site. The only suitable location available is a clear site between the Dome of the Rock and the El Aqsa Mosque (see Fig. 11)15. This correlates with Ishtori Haparchi’s descriptions and the testimony of Hieronymus, as aforementioned.

11 Notice that the central field of pillars, which is wider than the boulevard of pillars to the sides is not typical of a Mosque but of a Roman Basilica. This Basilica was built from North to South, which means that it cannot be a Christian Basilica. 12 David Amit (ed.), Amichai Mazar, The Aqueducts of Ancient Palestine, Jerusalem 1989, p. 177 13See Footnote no’ 12, p. 189 14 Alternative methods to supply water to the Temple Mount – see articles by Dr. Daniel wiel, Tuchumin 12, pp. 497-508; M. Ben- Ari , Tchumin

• Illustration image: ‘Reconstruction of the Temple of Herod Southeast Corner’ (James Tissot, between 1886-1894)

Surprisingly, the Torah never spells out exactly where the Temple is to be built. Rather we are instructed to build the Beit HaMikdash “in the place that God will choose”: “Only to the place that the Eternal your God will choose from all your tribes to set His Name — there you shall seek His dwelling place and go there.” (Deut. 12:5)

29 Where is this place “that God will choose”? What does it mean that we should “seek out His dwelling place”? Chanan Morrison writes:9

The Hidden Location The Sages explained that the Torah is commanding us, under the guidance of a prophet, to discover where the Beit HaMikdash should be built. King David undertook the search for this holy site with the help of the prophet Samuel. Why didn’t the Torah explicitly state the location where to build the Temple? Moses certainly knew that the Akeidah took place on Mount Moriah in Jerusalem, and he knew that Abraham had prophesied that this would be the site of the Beit HaMikdash. 1 Maimonides (Guide to the Perplexed III: 45) suggested that Moses wisely chose not to mention Jerusalem explicitly. Had he done so, the non-Jewish nations would have realized Jerusalem’s paramount importance to the Jewish people and would have fought fiercely to prevent it from falling into Israel’s hands. Even worse, knowledge of Jerusalem’s significance could have led to infighting among the tribes. Each tribe would want the Beit HaMikdash to be located in its territory. The result could have been an ugly conflict, similar to Korach’s rebellion against Aaron’s appointment to the position of High Priest. Maimonides reasoned that this is why the Torah commands that a king be appointed before building the Beit HaMikdash. This way the Temple’s location would be determined by a strong central government, thus avoiding inter-tribal conflict and rivalry.

"Between His Shoulders" In any case, David did not know where the Beit HaMikdash was to be built. According to the Talmud (Zevachim 54b), his initial choice fell on Ein Eitam, a spring located to the south of Jerusalem. Ein Eitam appeared to be an obvious choice since it is the highest point in the entire region. This corresponds to the Torah’s description that “You shall rise and ascend to the place that the Eternal your God will choose” (Deut.17:8). However, David subsequently considered a second verse that alludes to the Temple’s location. At the end of his life, Moses described the place of God’s Divine Presence as “dwelling between his shoulders” (Deut. 33:12). What does this mean? This allegory suggests that the Temple’s location was not meant to be at the highest point, but a little below it, just as the shoulders are below the head. Accordingly, David decided that Jerusalem, located at a lower altitude than Ein Eitam, was the site where the Beit HaMikdash was meant to be built.

9 (Sapphire from the Land of Israel. Adapted from Shemu'ot HaRe’iyah (Beha’alotecha), quoted in Peninei HaRe’iyah, pp. 273- 274,350-351. Shemonah Kevatzim I:745)

30 Doeg, head of the High Court, disagreed with David. He supported the original choice of Ein Eitam as the place to build the Temple. The Sages noted that Doeg’s jealousy of David was due to the latter’s success in discovering the Temple’s true location. The story of David’s search for the site of the Beit HaMikdash is alluded to in one of David’s “Songs of Ascent.” Psalm 132 opens with a plea: “Remember David for all his trouble” (Ps. 132:1). What was this trying labor that David felt was a special merit, a significant life achievement for which he wanted to be remembered? The psalm continues by recounting David’s relentless efforts to locate the place of the Temple. David vowed: “I will not enter the tent of my house, nor will I go up to the bed that was spread for me. I will not give sleep to my eyes, nor rest to my eyelids — until I find God’s place, the dwellings of the Mighty One of Jacob.” (Ps. 132: 3-5)

David and Doeg What was the crux of the dispute between David and Doeg? Doeg reasoned that the most suitable site for the Temple is the highest point in Jerusalem, reflecting his belief that the spiritual greatness of the Temple should only be accessible to the select few, those who are able to truly grasp the purest levels of enlightenment — the kohanim and the spiritual elite. David, on the other hand, understood that the Temple and its holiness need to be the inheritance of the entire people of Israel. The kohanim are not privy to special knowledge; they are merely agents who influence and uplift the people with the Temple’s holiness. The entire nation of Israel is described as a “kingdom of priests” (Ex. 19:6).

The Waters of Ein Eitam Even though Ein Eitam was never sanctified, it still retained a special connection to the Beit HaMikdash, as its springs supplied water for the Beit HaMikdash. The Talmud relates that on Yom Kippur, the High Priest would immerse himself in a mikveh on the roof of the Beit HaParvah chamber in the Temple complex. In order for the water to reach this roof, which was 23 cubits higher than the ground floor of the Temple courtyard, water was diverted from the Ein Eitam springs, which were also located at this altitude. Rav Kook explained that there exists a special connection between Ein Eitam and the High Priest’s purification on Yom Kippur. While the Beit HaMikdash itself needs to be accessible to all, the purification of the High Priest must emanate from the highest possible source. Yom Kippur’s unique purity and power of atonement originate in the loftiest realms, corresponding to the elevated springs of Ein Eitam. 1 After the Akeidah, it says: “Abraham named that place, ‘God will see'; as it is said to this day: ‘On the mountain, God will be seen'” (Gen. 22:14). Rashi explains: “God will choose and see for Himself this place, to cause His Divine Presence to dwell there and for sacrifices to be offered here”

31 "The Temple atop the Mountain"

Rav Avraham Rivlin writes:10

Although the Haftarah of Parshat Tetzaveh opens with a verse heralding the future Temple building, the main part of the Haftarah deals with other things. It first discusses the altar, which is called by Yechezkel "Harel" ("mountain of G-d") or "Ariel" (Yechezkel 43: 15-16), and concludes with "the laws of the altar on the day it is made" (43:18) – the special inaugural sacrifices of the third Temple. (43:18-27) In previous chapters (40-42) Yechezkel prophesized in detail about the Temple itself, and in this week's Haftarah he adds only one other detail: The Temple will be built "atop the mountain." (43:12)

The fact that the Temple is constructed on top of a mountain is undeniable, but it must be noted that in the Torah there is no actual hint to this. The geographical landmark, a mountain, is not mentioned in relation to "The place that Hashem will choose."[1] It does say once, though, "You shall rise up and ascend to the place" (Devarim 17:8), and Chazal learn from this that the Temple is higher than the rest of Eretz Yisrael. (Zevachim 54b) However, there are other places in the Torah that simply state: "Go to the place" (Devarim 14:25; 26:2); "He comes with all the desire of his soul to the place." Neither of these verbs gives any indication that the place mentioned is a mountain. The most frequently mentioned mountain in the Torah, both explicitly by its name and also simply as "the mountain," is Mount Sinai.[2]

The Torah occasionally hints that Hashem's Temple will be built on a mountain: "You will bring them and implant them on the mount of your heritage." (Shemot 15:17) "The tribes will assemble at the mount." (Devarim 33:19) Yitzchak was bound "Upon one of the mountains" (Bereishit 22:2), which Avraham subsequently named, "Hashem Yireh." (Bereishit: 22:14) Chazal reveal to us that this mountain is the site of the Temple:

It is an accepted tradition that the place that David and Shlomo built the altar at Aravnah's threshing floor is the same place that Avraham built the altar and bound Yitzchak upon it. That is the place that Noach built upon when he left the ark, and that is the altar that Cain and Hevel sacrificed upon. On it Adam, the first man, offered a sacrifice when he was created, and from there he was created. Chazal have said that Adam was created from the place of his atonement.[3]

While the Torah is silent on this point, the prophets speak in detail. In tens of verses throughout the Prophets and the Writings, the site of the Temple is noted – on a mountain. The terms, "the Holy Mountain" and "Mount Zion" are fairly common.[4] The terms: "the mountain of the Temple of Hashem", "the Temple Mount," and "the Mountain of Hashem" can also be found, especially in the consoling prophesies about the construction of the Third Temple.

Even given that "mountain" identifies the site of the Temple, the expression, "atop the mountain" – as it appears in our Haftarah, in Yechezkel's prophecy – we find in only one other prophecy. This

10 https://www.kby.org/english/torat-yavneh/view.asp?id=3700

32 term appears in the prophecy on the end of days that appears in Yeshaya (and in slightly varied language in Micha[5]): "The mountain of the Temple of Hashem will be firmly established as the head of the mountains, and it will be exalted above the hills." (Yeshaya 2:2) It must be emphasized that building the Third Temple atop the mountain explicitly contrasts the instructions regarding the First Temple. The Gemara teaches (Zevachim 54b):

"You shall rise up and ascend to the place." This teaches that the Temple is higher than all the rest of Eretz Yisrael. They did not know where this place was, so they brought the book of Yehoshua. Regarding all [the other borders] it says: "The border descended" and "[the border] ascended." Regarding the tribe of Binyamin, it says, "it ascended," but it does not say, "it descended." They said, conclude from this that its location is here. They thought to build it on Ein Eitam, which is highest. They then said: Let us lower it somewhat, as it says, "Between his shoulders he rests."

This implies that the site of the Temple is indeed high, but not at the peak and not atop the mountain, as in Yechezkel's prophecy regarding the third Temple.

The Maharal explains in his Chidushei Aggadot: "Binyamin especially is prepared to accept the glory of the Shechina, and it therefore says, 'Between his shoulders he rests," since the shoulders are designed to accept a burden. The head is not designated for such, only the shoulders, and therefore it is only fitting to build it on something comparable, that accepts, and they are the shoulders." Rashi similarly comments: "'Between his shoulders he rests – The Temple was built in the height of his land, only it was 23 amot lower than Ein Eitam ... since there is nothing more attractive on a bull than his shoulders."

Perhaps it should be added, that the First and Second Temples were not atop the mountain because the Name is not yet complete and neither is the Throne. However, in the future, "Hashem will be king over all the land; on that day Hashem will be one and his Name will be one." (Zechariah 14:9) Then, "in the end of days, the mountain of the Temple of Hashem will be firmly established as the head of the mountains, and it will be exalted above the hills, and all the nations will stream to it" (Yeshaya 2:2), as it says in Yechezkel's prophesy: "This is the teaching regarding the Temple atop the mountain." In the future we will climb not only the mountain's slope, we will also reach the top.

[1] The term appears eight times in the book of Devarim: 12:5; 11:26; 14:25; 16:6; 17:8; 18:6; and 26:2. There are additional mentions of "if the place ... will be far from you" (Devarim 12:21; 14:24 etc.)

[2] In the Torah, the term Mount Sinai appears roughly 15 times, and it is referred to simply as "the mountain" about another 45 times.

[3] Rambam, Hilchot Beit Habechira 2:2. The Kessef Mishneh there notes that the Rambam's source is from Pirkei D'Rabbi Eliezer and other Midrashim.

[4] "Holy mountain" and its variations appear about 30 times, and "Mount Zion" about 20.

33 [5] In Micha it says: "The mountain of the Temple of Hashem will be firmly established as the most prominent of the mountains, and it will be exalted up above the hills." (Micha 4:1)