sign in sign up
<<
Home , Bava Kamma, Beitza, Eduyot (Talmud), Gittin, Kodashim, Parah

Daf Ditty 78: Pesach today (?)

Three girls in were detained by the Israeli Police (2018).

The girls are activists of the “Return to the Mount” (Chozrim Lahar) movement. Why were they detained? They had posted Arabic signs in the Muslim Quarter calling upon Muslims to leave the area until Friday night, in order to allow to bring the Korban Pesach.

This is the fourth time that activists of the movement will come to the on Erev Pesach with goats that they plan to bring as the Korban Pesach. There is also an organization called that actively is trying to bring back the Korban Pesach.

It is, of course, very controversial and the issues lie at the heart of one of the most fascinating halachic debates in the past two centuries.

1

The previous was concerned with the offering of the paschal lamb when the people who were to slaughter it and/or eat it were in a state of ritual impurity. Our present mishnah is concerned with a paschal lamb which itself becomes ritually impure.

Such a lamb may not be eaten. (However, we learned incidentally in our study of 5:3 that the blood that gushed from the lamb's throat at the moment of slaughter was collected in a bowl by an attendant priest and passed down the line so that it could be sprinkled on the altar).

Our mishnah states that if the carcass became ritually defiled, even if the internal organs that were to be burned on the altar were intact and usable the animal was an invalid sacrifice, it could not be served at the Seder and the blood should not be sprinkled.

If the situation is reversed and it is only the internal organs that had become ritually defiled the meat may be served at the Seder and the animal's blood must be sprinkled on the altar.

2

MISHNA: If the meat of the Paschal lamb became ritually impure, and the fat remains pure and may be burned on the altar, one may not sprinkle the blood. On the other hand, if the fat became impure and the meat remains pure, one may sprinkle the blood because the meat remains fit to be eaten. This is the with regard to a Paschal lamb, whose primary purpose is to be eaten by those who have registered for it. However, with regard to other offerings it is

3 not so. Rather, although the meat has become impure and the fat remains pure, one may sprinkle the blood, because part of the offering still remains valid.

GEMARA: Rav Giddel said that Rav said: If one sprinkled the blood despite the fact that the meat was ritually impure, it was nonetheless accepted; one is not obligated to observe the second Pesaḥ. The asks: Don’t we require that the Paschal lamb be eaten, which could not occur in this case? The Gemara answers: Failure to engage in eating the offering does not preclude it from being accepted.

The Gemara asks: Isn’t it written:

and if the household be too little for a lamb, then shall he 4 ד םִאְו - טַﬠְמִי ,תִיַבַּה תוֹיְהִמ הֶשִּׂמ -- and his neighbor next unto his house take one according to ְו חַקָל אוּה וֹנֵכְשׁוּ בֹרָקַּה לֶא - ,וֹתיֵבּ ,וֹתיֵבּ the number of the souls; according to every man's eating ye תַסְכִמְבּ :תֹשָׁפְנ שׁיִא יִפְל ,וֹלְכָא וּסֹּכָתּ וּסֹּכָתּ ,וֹלְכָא יִפְל שׁיִא .shall make your count for the lamb לַﬠ - .הֶשַּׂה Ex 12:4

“And if the household be too little for a lamb, then he and his neighbor who is close to his house shall take one according to the number of the souls; according to every man’s eating you shall make your count for the lamb”

This indicates that the requires one to eat the Paschal lamb. The Gemara responds: This verse is stated as a mitzva only. It should be fulfilled, but it does not preclude acceptance of the offering.

4 The Gemara asks: And was it not stated to preclude acceptance of the offering if it cannot be eaten? Wasn’t it taught in a : “According to the number of the souls”; this teaches that the Paschal lamb is slaughtered only for those who have registered for it and have thereby included themselves in advance in the number of the souls? I might have thought that if one slaughtered it for those who have not registered for it, he is merely like one who violates a שׁיִא יִפְל ,וֹלְכָא וּסֹּכָתּ :mitzva, but the offering is still valid after the fact. Therefore, the verse states “According to every man’s eating you shall make your count”; the verse repeated that the Paschal lamb is eaten only by those registered in order to underscore that failure to register precludes the offering from being valid.

And those who are able to eat the offering, as opposed to the sick or elderly who are unable to eat it, are juxtaposed in the verse to those who registered. Therefore, just as a Paschal lamb is disqualified if it is slaughtered for those who did not register for it, it is disqualified if it cannot be eaten. This poses a difficulty for the opinion of Rav.

The Gemara answers: Rather, Rav said his statement in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Natan, who said that failure to engage in eating the Paschal lamb does not preclude one from fulfilling one’s obligation to bring the offering, as the eating is a separate mitzva.

Steinzaltz

The Gemara records a further discussion: Who is the tanna that taught this Baraita? As the Sages taught: If one slaughtered the Paschal lamb in ritual purity, and after that the owners

5 became ritually impure, the blood should be sprinkled in purity and the meat should not be eaten in impurity. In accordance with whose opinion is this baraita?

Rabbi Eliezer said: This halakha is subject to dispute, and it is taught in this baraita in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Natan, who holds that eating is not essential, and not in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis. And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The baraita can be understood even if you say that it is in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis. With what are we dealing here?

With a situation in which the majority of the public is ritually impure, in which case everyone agrees that they perform the ritual of the Paschal lamb even in a state of impurity.

Summary

MISHNAH: The Mishnah differentiates between the Korban Pesach and other korbanos in a case where part of the korban became tamei.

Where the meat of the Korban Pesach became tamei

R’ Gidal in the name of Rav ruled: If the meat of a korban was tamei and the blood of the offering was thrown on the mizbe’ach the korban is accepted.

Rav’s position is challenged and the Gemara explains that Rav, in his ruling, follows the position of R’ Nosson who said that eating the Korban Pesach is not essential.

THE MEAT OF A KORBAN PESACH THAT BECAME "TAMEI"

The Mishnah teaches that the Korban Pesach may be offered only if its meat may be eaten. If the meat became Tamei, then the Korban may not be offered, because the purpose of offering the Korban Pesach is to eat it.

When any other type of Korban becomes Tamei, the Korban may be offered as long as even one k'Zayis of meat or fat is still Tahor.

6 How much of the meat of the Korban Pesach must remain Tahor in order to permit the Korban to be offered?

RASHI (62a, DH v'Iba'is Eima) says that at least one k'Zayis of meat must remain Tahor in order for the Korban to be offered.

Tosefta (Pesachim 6:2) says that enough meat must remain so that there is a k'Zayis for each participant in the Korban.

Rashi clearly argues with the opinion of the . What is the basis for his argument?

Perhaps the opinions of Rashi and the Tosefta depend upon the argument between the Tana'im here. Our Daf suggests that according to Rebbi Nasan, the entire Jewish people may bring one Korban Pesach on behalf of everyone. It is still considered fit to eat, even though each person will receive far less than a k'Zayis of meat. It is considered fit for each person to eat because all of the others potentially could withdraw themselves from the Korban, leaving their portions of the meat to those who remain the owners of the Korban.

According to that reasoning, whenever there remains a k'Zayis of Tahor meat of the Korban Pesach, everyone could withdraw except for one person, leaving him the k'Zayis to eat, and thus making the Korban Pesach fit to be eaten. This is the source for Rashi's opinion. The Tosefta does not agree with the Gemara's reasoning that since the others could withdraw it is considered fit to eat now, and therefore it requires that there be an actual k'Zayis for each participant.

RAV YECHEZKEL ABRAMSKY zt'l (in CHAZON YECHEZKEL) suggests a remarkable source for the Tosefta from the wording of the Mishnah here.

The Mishnah states that if the meat becomes Tamei and the fat (Chelev) does not, the Korban Pesach is Pasul because it cannot be eaten. However, if the fat becomes Tamei and the meat does not, the Korban is not Pasul because it may be eaten.

There is an interesting variation in the syntax of the Mishnah in the second case. In the first case, the Mishnah says, "If meat becomes Tamei and Chelev remains," the Korban is Pasul. In the second case, the Mishnah says, "If the Chelev becomes Tamei and the meat remains," the Korban is valid. The Mishnah adds the letter "Heh," the definite article "the," when it discusses the case in which the Chelev, and not the meat, becomes Tamei.

"Basar" ("meat"), without the prefix "Heh," refers to meat of any amount. Similarly, "Chelev" without the prefix "Heh" refers to Chelev of any amount. In contrast, "ha'Basar" ("the meat"), means all of the meat, and "ha'Chelev" means all of the Chelev.

This difference in syntax indicates that the first case of the Mishnah refers to a situation in which so many people are included in the Korban Pesach that when all of the meat is divided equally, there is exactly a k'Zayis of meat for each person, and no more. In such a case, if any amount, even a tiny amount, of the meat becomes Tamei, then the Korban Pesach becomes Pasul because each person now receives less than a k'Zayis.

7

In contrast, the second case of the Mishnah teaches that even if all of the Chelev becomes Tamei, as long as all of the meat remains Tahor, the Korban Pesach remains valid, because there is still a k'Zayis for each person, as the Tosefta stipulates.

It is a well-known Halochoh that if the majority of the people are Tomei Meis (defiled as a result of contact with the dead), everyone, whether they are ritually clean or unclean, offers the Korban Pesach on the 14th of Nissan, and no one defers it to . If only a minority of the people are Tomei Meis, then those who are ritually clean observe the 14th of Nissan and the others observe the 14th of

"And They Shall Eat of the Meat on that Night"1

• Harav Baruch Gigi writes:2

The sacrifices offered in the Temple include individual offerings and communal offerings. The communal offerings consist primarily of the daily offerings and the additional offerings brought on special days, while the individual offerings include sin-offerings, guilt-offerings, burnt- offerings, and peace-offerings.

What type of offering is the Pesach offering? The Pesach offering is clearly an individual offering, as every member of Israel must bring it from his own money. To be more precise, the Pesach offering is a joint offering, which is halakhically identical to an individual offering, as it is brought in the framework of a chabura, a group of people consisting of a family or several families that gather together for a shared eating of the offering. But if, indeed, the Pesach offering is an individual offering, why does it override , and why is it offered even in a state of ritual impurity? These laws are usually reserved for communal offerings, and not individual offerings!

The Blood of the Pesach Offering and the Blood of Circumcision

There are only two positive commandments the transgression of which carries liability for the punishment of karet (excision): the Pesach offering and circumcision. We find in the (Pesikta De-Rabbi Kahana 7:4) that it was by virtue of these two mitzvot that the people of Israel left Egypt:

"Because of Your righteous judgments" (Ps. 119:164) – Because of the judgments that You brought upon the Egyptians in Egypt, and because of the righteousness that You performed with

1 https://www.etzion.org.il/en/and-they-shall-eat-meat-night 2 Translated by David Strauss

8 our forefathers in Egypt. For they only had two mitzvot to their credit by virtue of which they were redeemed – the blood of the Pesach offering and the blood of circumcision. This is what is said: "And when I passed by you, and saw you wallowing in your blood, I said to you: In your blood, live; yea, I said to you: In your blood, live" (Yechezkel16:6). "In your blood" [damayikh – a plural form] – the blood of the Pesach offering and the blood of circumcision.

The mitzva of circumcision was given to Avraham and his descendants as a sign of the deep covenant that God entered into with every member of Israel: "And I will establish My covenant between Me and you and your seed after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God to you and to your seed after you" (Gen 17:7). One who does not enter into this covenant is liable to karet: "And the uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he has broken My covenant" (Gen17:14). One's connection to the people of Israel, God's people, and his belonging to it begins with his imprinting the seal of his master on his flesh (see Seforno, Gen 17:11).

The mitzva of bringing the Pesach offering was given to the people of Israel on the eve of their exodus from Egypt, and from then it became the sign of the covenant between God and His people for all generations. At that very moment when God was smiting Pharaoh with the plague of the firstborn, God asked of His firstborn son – the people of Israel – to enter into a covenant with Him as a collective, by placing the blood of the Pesach offering on the lintel and the two side-posts. As is the case with circumcision, one who does not enter into the covenant of the Pesach offering is liable for karet: "But the man that is clean, and is not on a journey, and forbears to keep the , that soul shall be cut off from his people, because he brought not the offering of the Lord in its appointed season…" (Num. 9:13). The Torah even introduced the possibility of Pesach Sheni, the second Passover – an additional chance for one who is on a far-off journey on the fourteenth of Nissan and cannot bring the Pesach offering in its appointed time – in order to allow him to enter into the covenant along with his brothers.

The blood of circumcision and the blood of the Pesach offering are connected to one another, for with regard to the Pesach offering it is stated: "But no uncircumcised person shall eat thereof"(Ex 12:48). A person may not enter the collective covenant – the covenant of the Pesach offering – unless that was preceded by the individual covenant – the covenant of circumcision. As we saw in the midrash on the words, "In your blood, live," emphasize that these two mitzvot are the foundation of the covenant. The blood of circumcision is the common denominator of all the people of Israel; the blood of the Pesach offering unifies the entire people, and through the bringing of the offering the individuals transform into a collective. Therefore, the Torah assigned this offering – despite the fact that it is an individual offering – some of the characteristics of a communal offering, obligating that it be brought even on Shabbat and even in a state of ritual impurity.

Since the Pesach offering transforms individuals into a collective, it is brought in a family framework: "A lamb, according to their fathers' houses, a lamb for a household" (Ex 12:3). The family is the community in miniature; it is the path that leads from the individual to the collective. With the bringing of the Pesach offering, the entire house of Israel turns into one large family – the people of God. As Chazal expounded: "'And the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel

9 shall slaughter it at dusk' (Ex 12:6) – this teaches that all of Israel can fulfill their obligation with one Pesach offering" (Pesachim 78b).

The Pesach Offering Brought in Egypt: The House as an Altar

Was the Pesach offering brought in Egypt actually a sacrificial offering? The answer to this question is not simple, for in contrast to all other offerings, the Pesach offering in Egypt was not offered on an altar. In truth, however, many of the laws governing that Pesach offering are clearly taken from the laws of sacrifices: The Pesach offering is a "lamb without blemish, a male of the first year… from the sheep, or from the goats" (Ex 12:5), and the Torah even commands that one may not leave over from it until the morning (Ex 12:10).

It would appear that the Pesach offering brought in Egypt was a sacrificial offering with unique characteristics, the most striking of which is the fact that it is slaughtered at the entrance to one's house rather than brought to the altar. Chazal determined that the house of each individual in Egypt turned at that time into an altar: "R. Yosef taught: There were three altars there – on the lintel and on the two side-posts" (Pesachim 96a). The house is the altar, and the two side-posts and the lintel are like the horns of the altar upon which the blood must be placed.[1]

The side-posts of the house, upon which the blood of the Pesach offering was placed, became consecrated for later generations through the mitzva of mezuza. The truth is that these two mitzvot– the Pesach offering brought in Egypt and the mezuza – are connected through the protection they provide for the house. The blood that was placed on the side-posts protected the house from the Destroyer that smote the firstborns of Egypt, and the mezuza is similarly a sign that God protects the house. As Chazal said: "A person sleeps in his house, and the Holy One, blessed be He, protects him from the outside" (Devarim Rabba, Parashat Va'etchanan). A person who affixes mezuzah to the entrance of his house turns the house into a Temple and the gates of his house into an altar, and thus his house is protected. This might be the essence of the Pesach offering – an offering of a covenant, by way of which man and God dwell in the same house, like the lover and his beloved who live together in their bridal home.

The Pesach Offering Brought in Later Generations: The Eating as Sacrifice

The mitzva of the Pesach offering in later generations is not fulfilled in each person's house, but rather in the Temple. There they would slaughter the Pesach offering, put of its blood on the altar, and burn on the altar those parts that are due it. What is the nature of the Pesach offering in later generations?

All of the offerings brought in the Temple require the placing of blood on the horns of the altar. In the case of sin-offerings, there must be four applications of blood on the four corners of the altar. In the case of most of the other offerings, there must be two applications on two of the altar's corners. The Pesach offering is unusual (along with the firstborn and the tithe-offering) in that it does not require the application of blood on the horns of the altar; it suffices that there be one application at the base of the altar. Thus, writes the Rambam (Hilkhot Korban Pesach 1:6): "The blood of the Pesach offering should be poured out on the base of the altar." Unlike the rest of the

10 sacrifices, the blood of the Pesach offering does not touch the horns of the altar, nor does it encompass the altar. Rather, it is merely poured out against it so that it reaches it.

The four main services relating to every sacrifice are connected to the blood: slaughtering the animal, receiving its blood in a receptacle, bringing the blood to the altar, and sprinkling the blood on it. The difference between the Pesach offering and other sacrifices teaches that as opposed to the other sacrifices, the essence of the Pesach offering is not the service of its blood.

It would appear that the Pesach offering brought in later generations was also intended to be a family sacrifice, one that is offered at the entrance of each person's house. However, after the Torah was given and the law was introduced prohibiting the bringing of sacrifices in any place except for the place chosen by God, it was no longer possible to bring the Pesach offering anywhere else but to Mount Moriya. Therefore, even the Pesach offering is brought to the Temple – but its blood is poured in a merely symbolic manner against the altar. After the blood is poured on the base of the altar and after those parts of the offering that may not be eaten are offered on the altar, the members of the party associated with the Pesach offering take the offering home and eat it there. Thus, rules the Rambam (Hilkhot Korban Pesach 1:6):

After the blood was poured, its belly should be opened up, the fats and organs to be offered on the altar removed. The fats of each Pesach offering should be offered on the pyre individually. The owner of the sacrifice should take his Pesach offering with its hide to his home in . There he roasts it and eats it in the evening.

As a substitute for the service of the blood, the essence of the Pesach offering is the service of the meat that is performed in each person's house in the company of his family and friends. For this reason, the Torah established the special mitzva to eat of the Pesach offering: "And they shall eat the flesh in that night" (Ex 12:8).[2] The Pesach offering is also the only individual offering regarding which one must recite the at the time it is slaughtered and when it is eaten, and if it was slaughtered for the sake of people who were not assigned to it, it is disqualified. The focus of the Pesach offering is on the eating, and the essence of its preparation is on the skewer of the family that gathered to eat it together. In this way, the connection of the Pesach offering to a household framework that marked the offering when it was brought in Egypt is preserved even in later generations.

Eating at God’s Table

From a simple halakhic perspective, the Pesach offering belongs to the peace-offering set of sacrifices, the offerings of lesser sanctity. Like a peace-offering, the Pesach offering is eaten by its owners, in contrast to a burnt-offering, which is entirely for God. However, there are significant similarities between the Pesach offering and the burnt-offering: Both are brought exclusively from males, and both are offered "its head with its legs and with the inwards thereof" (Ex 12:9).

It is therefore possible that the Pesach offering is in fact a burnt-offering, but of a special kind. Instead of the offering being eaten by the altar, it is eaten by its owners. If the house is the Temple and if the skewer upon which the meat is roasted is the altar, then like a burnt-offering, the flesh of the Pesach-offering is eaten in its entirety on the altar. Regarding all the other sacrifices, the

11 person may eat only those parts of the offering that are not burnt on the altar, and even the priests eat only those parts that are not burnt there. In the case of the Pesach offering, however, each person is invited to eat of the flesh of the offering itself. The Pesach meal is the meal of a covenant, and the two parties to the covenant – God and man – share this meal, as it were. In the case of a Pesach offering, every person is invited to eat with God at His table.

On the night of Passover in Egypt, God appeared in order to smite the firstborns of Egypt and to save His firstborn son and take him out of Egypt. On the night of Passover in later generations, every member of Israel merits achieving great intimacy with God and eating at His table. The Pesach offering is eaten only at night, as it may be eaten only at the time when the lover and His beloved meet – when God appears to take the children of Israel as His people.

We can now once again compare the covenant of circumcision to the covenant of the Pesach offering. The covenant of circumcision, as we noted, is the seal of the master on his servants. The covenant of the Pesach offering is the covenant between a father and his children. After God redeemed us from Egypt and chose us from among all the nations, we are His children, and we are therefore invited on the night of Passover to enter His palace and eat from His table.

NOTES

[1] In the case of ordinary sacrifices, the altar is the site where the blood is sprinkled and the site where the portions that are not eaten are burned. The gemara in Pesachim (96a) records R. 's question: "Where did they burn the portions that had to be burned of the Pesach offering in Egypt?" The disagree about how to understand the passage. Rabbeinu Chananel explains that all parts of the Pesach offering were eaten, and there was therefore no need to put any portions on an altar. The Meiri proposes that there was an altar there – the skewer upon which they roasted the portions that had to be burned. [2] Eating the other offerings is also a mitzva, one that is even counted among the 613 Torah commandments. But there is a special mitzva to eat the Pesach offering, over and beyond the general mitzva to eat of hallowed offerings (see the Rambam's Sefer ha-Mitzvot, positive commandments 55-56, 89).

The Seder without the Korban Pesach

Rabbi Dov Linzer writes:3

The seder is one of the most powerful religious experiences of the year, attracting a large percentage of unaffiliated and secular Jews: 70% of American Jews and 80% of secular Israeli

3 https://library.yctorah.org/2012/04/the-seder-without-the-korban-pesach/

12 Jews say they will attend a seder this year. Even for religious and observant Jews, the seder is a profound event, a night that, certainly as children but even for adults, we eagerly anticipate and whose memory we cherish. Given the power of the evening, it is worth noting that we are missing a central part of the seder – the Pesach sacrifice. The korban Pesach is the one that the

Torah explicitly commands, many times and in great detail, to be done this evening. One would imagine that its absence would seriously undercut the meaning and impact of the seder, but instead this absence is barely noticed. How did this occur?

How did the seder stop being about the korban Pesach?

Let us first look at the period immediately after the destruction of the Temple. Here was a time when the people still vividly remembered the Pesach sacrifice on the seder night, and its absence would have created a gaping hole in the seder. What was done to fill this hole?

An inspection of the Tannaitic sources reveals that there were those who actually continued to bring a pseudo-Pesach on this night. They would slaughter a lamb, roast it whole, and eat it on the

13 seder night (Mishna 2:7). Some people, it seems, would even refer to it as a pesach

(Tosefta Beitza 2:15)! While many Sages objected, Rabban Gamliel, who lived 30-50 years after the destruction, approved of this practice. According to one source, it would appear that he adopted this practice personally, and would roast a sheep and called it a pesach.4

Considering this practice of Rabban Gamliel, a new – and shocking – meaning emerges from the statement: “Rabban Gamliel used to say, whoever does not say these three things on Pesach has not fulfilled his obligation: Pesach, Matzah, and Marror” (Mishna Pesachim 10:5). While in our

Haggadah the text is “The pesach that our forefathers used to eat – what did it symbolize?”, the text in the mishna does not place the pesach in the past, but rather in the present: “This pesach that we eat – what does it symbolize?” Perhaps this was the text that was said only when there was a

Temple. But perhaps this was also the text that Rabban Gamliel said himself, when he ate his roasted sheep which he called a pesach!

4 Mishna Pesachim 7:2, and Reshash, ad. loc.

14 We of course have moved away from such a practice, and many of us have the practice not to eat any roasted meat on the seder night so that it should not look like we are eating the korban Pesach.5

There are those, however, who go out of their way to eat roasted meat, to continue this practice of commemorating the korban Pesach in the spirit of Rabban Gamliel.

This, then, was one response to the loss of the korban – to try to create a substitute, to try to continue the practice as it had been, only now with a pseudo-Pesach rather than the real thing.

However, another response was possible, and this was the response of Rabban Yochanan ben

Zakkai. Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai was the leader of the Jewish People both before and after the Temple was destroyed. After the destruction of the Temple, we read that he promulgated many practices in memory of the Temple (Mishna Rosh HaShana, 4:1and 4:3). Most of these revolved around the yomim tovim – the taking of the lulav all seven days, the blowing of the on

Shabbat in the presence of a beit din – practices that had in the past only been done in the Temple.

5 Shulkhan Arukh, Orah Hayyim, 476:1-2

15 It is thus striking that what is noticeably absent is a similar practice to commemorate the destruction on the seder night, when the loss of the Temple is most obvious.

Why did Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai ignore the seder night?

The answer is that Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai was not trying – through these practices – to make us remember the Temple and mourn its loss. He was rather helping us transition away from a Temple-based . Remember that it was he who struck a deal with Vespasian Caesar, as

Vespasian was about to destroy the Temple, to preserve Yavneh and its sages ( 56b). Rabban

Yochanan ben Zakkai had the foresight to realize that the future of the Jewish People, what would keep Judaism alive, was no longer the Temple, but rather Torah. Yavneh would replace the

Temple; Yavneh would be the new center of our religious life.

Thus, Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai’s post-Temple practices, far from directing our focus backwards, towards the Temple, focused our attention forward, to a Torah-centric Judaism. The blowing of the shofar in a beit din shows that the Temple is not needed – the shofar can be blown

16 on Shabbat without it. Taking the lulav for seven days without a Temple demonstrates the same thing – we can do these practices with or without the Temple. And that is why there could be no special practice on the seder night. To make a practice to replace the pesach would only focus our attention backwards, would only focus us on its absence, on what we are missing. This perhaps was the response of other Sages, but it was not the response of Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai.6

So, if we are to move on, what do we focus on if not the korban Pesach? The answer is obvious: Torah. What is the central mitzvah of the seder night, other than the eating of matzah? It is the telling of the story of . But it is not just a simple telling. If it were, we would just read the verses from Ex that tell the story in a full and detailed manner. Our is not just a telling; it is an act of talmud Torah – it is the analysis of Torah verses through the medium of Torah she’beal peh.

Consider, we begin the with a mishna – the mitzvah to talk about the Exodus in the evenings. We then move on with “Barukh HaMakom”, a passage that Rav Soloveitchik has

6 see https://library.yctorah.org/files/2016/07/rabbi_dov_linzer_milin_havivin_volume_2.pdf

17 explained as a type of mini-birkat haTorah: “Blessed is the One who has given Torah to his nation

Israel.” We then go on to talk about the four children, quoting the relevant verses. But this explanation – that these verses are referring to different types of children, not to different circumstances that evoked the questions – is not the simple sense of the verse, but rather how the

Rabbis have understood these verses. Next up is the classic rabbinic teaching, “Perhaps this mitzvah should begin on ” – an inspection of the verses with rabbinic hermeneutics to prove that there is a mitzvah of maggid tonight. This entire introduction is replete with talmud

Torah and Torah she’beal peh.

Then comes maggid itself. Magid, as mentioned, is not just telling. The Mishna describes it as

“One interprets, doresh, from Arami oved Avi, until he completes the entire portion.” (Mishna Pesachim 10:4). What we engage in is classic Rabbinic interpretation, taking one section of the verse, giving a drasha one it, and then moving on to the next section of the verse.

The mitzvah of the night is to tell the story through the process of talmud Torah. And not just any

Torah learning, but specifically Rabbinic interpretation, Torah she’beal Peh.

18 How did the seder stop being about the korban Pesach?

The same why our religious life stopped being about the Temple. Through the leadership of

Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai, talmud Torah has now become the center of our religious life.

Yavneh was the successor to the Temple. Yavneh replaced the Temple, and the mitzvah of maggid, of telling the story through Rabbinic talmud Torah replaced the korban Pesach. And it is through the vibrancy of talmud Torah, of engagement, discussion, and reflection, that our Judaism remains alive and vibrant till today!

Is it possible to sacrifice “Korban-Pesach” in our generation?

Rabbi Aviya Rozen writes:7

Introduction

The form of Pesach in the past was absolutely different than the form of Pesach today. The focus of Pesach in the past was the Korban-Pesach. Today it is Leil-Haseder.

The punishment about avoidance of Korban-Pesach is “Karet” (somebody that his soul shall be cut off from among his people and he hasn’t any part in the world to come). This punishment is given to the most severe transgressions, such as eating on . However, we find only two instances of the punishment of Karet applying to the avoidance of a Mitzvat-Aseh (positive commandment). Leil-Haseder is not an alternative to Korban-Pesach and doesn’t exempt us from the punishment of “Karet”.

7 https://torahmitzion.org/learn/possible-sacrifice-korban-pesach-generation/

19 According to few opinions there is option to sacrifice “Korban Pesach”in our generation. The goal of this article is to examine if it is possible.

The Concept of “Mitzvat Korban-Pesach”

The Torah commands us about Korban Pesach with very particular details.8 The concept of this Mitzvah is very simple: all Israel have to gather to one place, to eat together a Korban that symbolizes our “nation-creation”.

Korban Pesach demonstrates that the real God is our God, and the connection of all of us to this event and this message expresses the significance of our nation. 9

The main details of the Mitzvah according to the simple understanding are to eat a complete sheep with family and friends. Everybody has to be involved with the Korban Pesach and we need to organize groups to do it together. We need to prepare it as roasted meat and not to leave any piece of it until the morning, neither must we break any of its bones. Furthermore, there is a second chance to keep this Mitzvah (on the 14th of Iyar).

The second chance is for those who were unable to offer it at its set time in a state of ritual purity (as we are obligated to do so).

In addition, there is the punishment of Karet for one who fails to eat the Korban Pesach.

The message here is very clear. The ritual of Korban-Pesach used to create a unity amongst Am- Israel. We have some examples of this:

• The first time that Israel celebrated Pesach was on the second year after Yetziat-Mitzrayim. The commandment clearly states that all Am-Israel must take part in this Mitzvah. (Num. 9 1-13)

• When arrived to Israel, he organized the offering of the Korban-Pesach. The goal was the unity of all Israel. (Joshua 1:1-12). • The king Josiah decided to purify the country and to destroy all idolatry. The first thing that he did after this purification was to celebrate Pesach. The prophet tells us that: “Surely there was not celebrated such a Passover from the days of the judges that judged Israel”. The goal of this celebration was to create a new atmosphere. (I Kings 23) • After a long time that it had been impossible to visit the Beit Hamikdash, the king decided to change the situation and he called upon all Israel to celebrate the Pesach in Jerusalem. It seems, that the ritual of Pesach was used to engender unity and the prophet describes it so: “And there was great joy in Jerusalem; for since the time of Solomon the son of David king of Israel there had been nothing like this in Jerusalem.” (II Chronicles 30) • In the beginning of the second Beit-Mikdash, wanted that Jerusalem would be the centre for all Am-Israel. How did he achieve this? By offering the Korban Pesach for all

8 Ex 12,3-12, Num. 9,1-13 and Devarim 16 9 Sefer Hachinuch,Mitzvah 380 and RambanDevarim 12 ,5

20 the Diaspora. As it is described in Sefer Ezra: “and they killed the Passover lamb for all the returned exiles, and for their brothers the priests, and for themselves” (Ezra 6:19-22).

The conclusion is that if we want to come back and to be a nation of unity that connects to the significance of Am-Israel then we have to sacrifice the Korban Pesach, even in our generation, without the Beit-Mikdash.

The question remains however: is it possible to do this today according to the Halacha?

In order to answer this, there are several questions that we need to clarify about the Korban-Pesach today:

The place:

Is it possible to sacrifice the Korban-Pesach without the Beit Hamikdash? Must the Korban-Pesach be sacrificed on Har-Habayit, near the Beit Hamikdash? Is it possible to sacrifice the Korban-Pesach in other places, even in another country? The Altar: Is the Altar necessary to sacrifice Korban-Pesach? Is it possible to build Altar today?

Purity:

Is it possible to sacrifice the Korban-Pesach when all of us are ritually impure? Kohanim: Is it necessary to sacrifice the Korban-Pesach just by the Kohanim? And how certain are we of the ancestry of our kohanim?

The place of Korban-Pesach

The first option -the only place to sacrifice is Har Habayit Basically, we need to make the Korban-Pesach in the Azara (the yard of Beit-Hamikdash on Har- Habayit) because it is holy ( kalim). We learn this from the Pasuk:

Thou mayest not sacrifice the passover-offering within 5 ה ֹל א ,לַכוּת זִל בְּ חֹ ַ תֶא - ,חַסָפַּה דַחַאְבּ דַחַאְבּ ,חַסָפַּה ;any of thy gates, which the LORD thy God giveth thee ,יֶרָﬠְשׁ רֶשֲׁא - הָוהְי יֶהֱא ןֵתֹנ .ָל ןֵתֹנ יֶהֱא הָוהְי

but at the place which the LORD thy God shall choose to 6 ו יִכּ םִא - לֶא - םוֹקָמַּה רֶשֲׁא - רַחְבִי הָוהְי הָוהְי רַחְבִי cause His name to dwell in, there thou shalt sacrifice the ,יֶהֱא ןֵכַּשְׁל וֹמְשׁ -- םָשׁ זִתּ חַבְּ תֶא - passover-offering at even, at the going down of the sun, at ַה ,חַסֶפּ :בֶרָﬠָבּ אוֹבְכּ ,שֶׁמֶשַּׁה דֵﬠוֹמ דֵﬠוֹמ ,שֶׁמֶשַּׁה אוֹבְכּ .the season that thou camest forth out of Egypt ְתאֵצ .םִיָרְצִמִּמ ְתאֵצ Deut 16:5-6

“You may not sacrifice the Passover inside any of your gates, which the Lord your God gives you; But at the place which the Lord your God shall choose to place his name in, there you shall sacrifice the Passover at the evening, at the going down of the sun, in the season when you came out of Egypt.”

21

But today the situation different because that we haven’t the Beit-Hamikdash. There are some opinions that the holiness was nullified with the destruction of the Beit-Mikdash. But the Rambam10 says that the Halacha is that the holiness of Har-Habit that was established then continues to exist. Therefore -it is impossible to sacrifice in other places. Having set the scene, the only question is:

Is it possible to sacrifice the Korban Pesach on Har-Habayit, today, without the Beit Mikdash?

The answer is very clear -yes. (according the Halacha and ignoring the political situation)

The Mishna ( 8,6) says:

“R Joshua said: I have heard that sacrifices may be offered even though there are no Beit- Mikdash, and that the most holy sacrifice may be eaten even though there is no Beit-Mikdash, and lesser sacrifices may be eaten even though there are no walls [of Jerusalem] …”.

The Rambam (Beit Habchira 6,16) says that this is the Halacha, and we are obligated to do it, even today.

In summary- according to the Rambam it is permissible just on Har-Habayit although there are problems to go up there.

The Ra’avad and the Kesef-Mishneh both state that the holiness of Har-Habayit was nullified, therefore, there is no reason to do it on Har-Habayit. But equally there is no problem to come on to Har-Habayit and to sacrifice it there.

The second option -we can sacrifice it in every place

Chonyo was a Jewish man that built a temple in Egypt after the destruction of our Beit Hamikdash and he sacrificed there all the sacrifices. R’Yitzchak says (Gemara Megila 10a) that it is possible to sacrifice in any place because the holiness of Har-Habayit was lost after the destruction.

In the Gemara ( 107 b) there is debate about the prohibition of sacrificing outside the Beit-Hamikdash today. Reish-Lakish permits it and R’Yohanan forbids it.

The Rambam says11 that the Halacha is that we are permitted to sacrifice on Har Habayit alone as its holiness was not lost.

The Hatam-Sofer12 says according to this Rambam not only is it possible to sacrifice the Korban Pesach but that we must, however only on Har-Habit.

10 Beit Habchira 6,14 11 Maaseh Ha-korbanot 19 ,15 12 Shahasr-korbanot and kapara chapter 1 part b

22

Perhaps due to political constraints it is impossible, but this doesn’t free us from the punishment of Karet.

The Altar

Most of the objectors thought that it is impossible to sacrifice Korban-Pesach today because we haven’t a Kosher Altar, and there no option to build the altar until that Mashiach will come. In the end of 19 century the speaking about return to Israel crossed the “Jewish street”.

Of course, that was a big debate about the option to build altar and Mikdash.

In an article Eiger wrote about it in a magazine named “Halevanon” (year 5623) and Rabbi David Fridman wrote about it (in “Zion and Jerusalem” and “Shehelat David”). Both said that it is impossible to sacrifice Korban-Pesach because the Tosfot13 and the Rambam (Beit Habechira 2,1-2) proved that the Halachic of “the permission to sacrifice without Beit-Mikdash” is just if there is an altar.

The Rabbi Kook (Mishpat chapter 91) wrote that the altar is an obligation and not just optional Mitzvah.

The question now is if is it possible to build altar?

The Gemara (Chulin 18a) set that the main thing of the altar building is that the stones will be straight without any small notch. Tosafot14 proved that there is probation to use with any metal to build the altar.

The Rambam (Beit Habechira 2,17) added the Halachic that the altar needs square corners exactly. Rabbi David Fridman and the Rabbi Shelomo Sakal15 objected to sacrifice Korban-Pesach because we haven’t the ability to build an altar. But is just technical problem. Today, by the modern technology, there no problem to build altar with square corners exactly (maybe more than the past). In addition -we can use with laser rays instead of metal tools.

The “Tumah” (impurity)

We have a special commandment to sacrifice Korban-Pesach on the time, as it written “In the fourteenth day of this month, at evening you shall keep it in its appointed season; according to all its rites, and according to all its ceremonies, shall you keep it.” Num. 9:3

But on another hand, we have prohibition to eat Korban-Pesach in impurity situation. The Gemara (Pesachim 71a) learned from it that we have to be a pure for Korban-Pesach if the option is

13 Masehet Sucah 41a D”a “deshtakadlo” 14 Succah 49a D”a “shecol mizbehach” 15 Beit ShelomoYore-Deha part b chapter 125

23 available. Therefore, if all Israel is impure then we adjourn the probation to eat Korban-Pesach in such an impure situation, and we can still sacrifice Korban-Pesach despite all Israel being impure.

In the Gemara ( 6b) there is debate about the question if the impurity will be canceled or just adjourned in situation that all Israel is impure, but everybody agrees that we can still sacrifice the Korban-Pesach being impure..

The Rambam (Hilchot Beit Hamikdash 4, 15-16) cites this as Halachah:

“The impurity is adjourned if all Israel impure.”

In addition, -the Rambam writes that if there are no Kohanim or there are no a pure Israelites, then the Korban will be sacrificed by a simple Israelite even if he impure.16

The Hatam-Sofer (Yore Deah 236) and the Rav Kalisher (in his book “D’rishat Zion”124) wrote that according to these traditions, the impurity is adjourned in our generation.

The Kohanim in our generation

In the beginning of the twenty-century was a great debate about the Halachic of the Kohanim today.

Rabbi Akiva Eiger wrote (in letter to Rabbi Kalisher) that we can’t trust about the relation of the Kohanim today because there was a big genetic admixture in Am-Israel.

The source for this Halachic is the Rama17 who stated: we do not to give presents to Kohanim because we don’t know how is a real Kohen.

Most of the Rabbis in those time agreed with him,18 although the Mishna (Edoyot 8,7) said the Mashiach will not make clear who is real Kohen, noted we have to trust our Kohanim. The Rambam also stated said we have to trust our Kohanim.19

The Rabbi Kalisher (“Derishat Zion”) suggested it is enough to know that this family during four generations for a chazaka of priestly family. The Chazon-Ish added, that there no problem to with performing the Korban-Pesach except we can’t trust our Kohanim’s lineage.20

There are other problems with the cloths of the Kohanim etc, but most of the Rabbis think that is not an impediment to sacrificing the Korban Pesach.

16 Rambam Beit Habechira 7,23 17 Shulchan Aruch , Orach-Chaim 457,2 18 The Rivash chapter 34, “Yam Shel Shlomo” Baba Kama chapter 35 ,”Beit Efraim”, Orach-Chaim, chapter 6 19 Isorey Bi’ah 20,1 20 Even Ha’ezer, Hilchot Periya O’reviya chapter 2,7

24 Testimonies for immolation of after the Hurban

1.The Gemara (Pesachim 87b) told us about Raban Gamliel that commanded his slave to roast the Korban Pesach. it was about hundred years after the Hurban.

2. Costantinus Caesar commanded not to sacrifice Korban-Pesach. We can learn that the Jewish people were sacrificing at that time, (sixth century).

3. Rabenu Chananel performed the Korban-Pesach on Har-Habit in 5017 (748 years ago).21

What our Rabbi’s say:

Rabbi Zvi Hirsh Kalisher says clearly, we can sacrifice Korban Peasach today. He suggested to the Baron Rothschild to build an altar (in year 5596). In year 5597 he had a big debate with Rabbi Akiva Eiger about it. In year 5622 he published the book “Derishat Zion” with all his arguments about it.22

Rabbi Kook and Rabbi Akiva Eiger objected to his arguments and they say that it impossible to build altar today and that we can’t to sacrifice in an impure status. Most of the Rabbi’s now think that we have to wait that Mashiach comes.

21 according to R’Ishtori A’parchi, in “Kaftor V’perach” ch 6 22 For a good summary see “All the document of the Maharit”z Chayut” p 844-849

25 Rabbi Yirmiyohu Kaganoff writes 23

In the year 5017 (1257), several hundred Baalei Tosafos, led by Rav Yechiel of , headed for Eretz Yisroel. A younger contemporary, Rav Ashtori HaParchi, the author of Kaftor VaFerech, records a fascinating story (Vol. 1, page 101 in the 5757 edition). The Kaftor VaFerech had gone to Yerushalayim to have his sefer reviewed by a talmid chacham named Rav Baruch. Rav Baruch told the Kaftor VaFerech that Rav Yechiel had planned to offer korbanos upon arriving in Yerushalayim. Kaftor VaFerech records that at the time he was preoccupied readying his sefer for publication and did not think about the halachic issues involved, but after the pressures of his publishing deadline passed, he realized that there were practical halachic problems with Rav Yechiel’s plan, as we will discuss shortly.

It seems that Rav Yechiel’s plan to offer korbanos failed, presumably because Yerushalayim was under Crusader rule at the time. His community of Baalei Tosafos settled in Acco, as we know from a report of the Ramban about ten years later. The Ramban reports that he spent that year with the community of the Baalei Tosafos in Acco and delivered to them a drasha that was recorded for posterity.24

Let us fast forward to the early nineteenth century. Rav Tzvi Hersh Kalisher, the rav of Thorn, , who had studied as a youth in the yeshivos headed by Rabbi Akiva Eiger and the Nesivos HaMishpat (Rav Yaakov of Lisa), published a sefer advocating bringing korbanos in the location where the Beis HaMikdash once stood in Yerushalayim. Rav Kalisher considered it not only permissible to offer korbanos before the Beis HaMikdash is rebuilt, but even obligatory.

As one can well imagine, his sefer created a huge furor. Rav Kalisher corresponded extensively with his own rabbonim, Rabbi Akiva Eiger and the Nesivos, and other well-known luminaries of his era including the Chasam Sofer and the Aruch LaNer. All of them opposed Rav Kalisher’s opinion, although not necessarily for the same reasons.

We can categorize the opposition to Rav Kalisher’s proposal under three headings:

1. There was almost universal disagreement with his opinion that there is a requirement to offer korbanos before the reconstruction of the Beis HaMikdash.

2. Some rabbonim, notably Rav Yaakov Ettlinger, the author of the Aruch LaNer, prohibited offering korbanos before the reconstruction of the Beis HaMikdash even if we could resolve all the other halachic issues involved (Shu"t Binyan Tzion #1). However, it should be noted that this question did not bother either Rav Yechiel of Paris or Rav Ashtori HaParchi.

23 https://www.yeshiva.co/midrash/33453 24 See Kisvei HaRamban, Vol. 1 pg. 211.

26

Furthermore, Rabbi Akiva Eiger asked his son-in-law, the Chasam Sofer, to request permission from the ruler of Yerushalayim to allow the offering of korbanos. Presumably, Rabbi Akiva Eiger felt that his son-in-law, who had a close connection to the Austro-Hungarian royal family, might be able to use their influence to gain access to the Ottoman Empire who ruled over Yerushalayim at the time. The Chasam Sofer responded with great respect to his father-in-law, but pointed out that the Beis HaMikdash area is unfortunately covered by a mosque that is sacred to its Moslem rulers who will not permit any non-Moslem to enter.25 Thus, we see that both Rabbi Akiva Eiger and the Chasam Sofer agreed with Rav Kalisher that we are permitted to bring korbanos before the reconstruction of the Beis HaMikdash.

3. Numerous halachic hurdles need to be overcome in order to offer korbanos. The discussion of these issues constitutes the lion’s share of the debate.

Rav Kalisher responded to the correspondence, eventually producing a sefer "Derishas Tzion" (published many years after the demise of Rabbi Akiva Eiger, the Chasam Sofer, and the Nesivos) and subsequent essays where he presented and clarified his position. At least three full-length books and numerous essays and responsa were published opposing Rav Kalisher’s thesis.

Before quoting this discussion, we need to clarify several points. First, can we indeed offer korbanos without the existence of the Beis HaMikdash?

MAY ONE BRING KORBANOS WITHOUT THE BEIS HAMIKDASH?

The Mishnah (Eduyos 8:6) quotes Rabbi Yehoshua as saying, "I heard that we can offer korbanos even though there is no Beis HaMikdash." The Gemara (Zevachim 62a) tells us a story that provides us with some background about this statement. "Three prophets returned with the Jews from Bavel (prior to the building of the second Beis HaMikdash), Chaggai, Zecharyah and Malachi, each bringing with him a halachic tradition that would be necessary for the implementation of korbanos. One of them testified about the maximum size of the mizbeiach, one testified about the location of the mizbeiach, and the third testified that we may offer korbanos even when there is no Beis HaMikdash." Based on these testimonies, the Jews returning to Eretz Yisroel began offering korbanos before the Beis HaMikdash was rebuilt.

Obviously, Rav Kalisher and Rav Ettlinger interpret this Gemara differently. According to Rav Kalisher and those who agreed with him, the prophet testified that we may offer korbanos at any time, even if there is no Beis HaMikdash. Rav Ettlinger, however, understands the Gemara to mean that one may offer korbanos once the construction of the Beis HaMikdash has begun, even though it is still incomplete. But in the view of Rav Ettlinger, after the destruction of the Beis HaMikdash

25 Shu’t Chasam Sofer, Yoreh Deah #236

27 we may not offer korbanos until Eliyahu announces the building of the third Beis HaMikdash.

An earlier , Rav Yaakov Emden, clearly agreed with Rav Kalisher in this dispute. Rav Emden, often referred to as "The Yaavetz," contends that Jews offered korbanos, at least occasionally, even after the second Beis HaMikdash was destroyed, which would be forbidden according to Rav Ettlinger’s position.26 This is based on an anecdote cited by a mishnah (Pesachim 74a) that Rabban Gamliel instructed his slave, Tevi, to roast the Korban Pesach for him.27

Rav Emden assumes that the Rabban Gamliel who owned a slave named Tevi was the later one. He thus concludes that Rabban Gamliel of Yavneh offered korbanos after the destruction of the Beis HaMikdash. Although the Yaavetz brings no proof that the Rabban Gamliel in the above- quoted mishnah is Rabban Gamliel of Yavneh, he may have based his assumption on a different Gemara ( 74b), which records a conversation between Rabbi Yehoshua and Rabban Gamliel concerning Tevi. Since Rabbi Yehoshua was a contemporary of Rabban Gamliel of Yavneh, this would imply that the later Rabban Gamliel indeed offered the Korban Pesach after the destruction of the Beis HaMikdash.

However, this does not solve the numerous halachic issues that need to be resolved in order to allow the offering of korbanos. Although Rav Kalisher responded to these issues, the other gedolim considered his replies insufficient.

KORBANOS ON THE MOUNTAIN

The Brisker Rav, Rav Velvel Soloveichek, raised a different objection to Rav Kalisher’s proposal. Basing himself on several pesukim and halachic sources, he contended that the Beis HaMikdash site only has kedusha when it is a high mountain. Since the Romans razed the present site and it is no longer the prominent height it once was, it is not kosher for offering korbanos until the mountain is raised again to its former glory.28 Thus, according to this approach, one of Moshiach’s jobs will be to raise the mountain to its former height. Presumably, Rav Kalisher felt that although the mountain should and will be raised, korbanos may be offered before that time.

MAY A TAMEI PERSON ENTER THE BEIS HAMIKDASH?

Virtually all opinions agree that it is a Torah prohibition to offer korbanos anywhere in the world except for the designated place in the Beis HaMikdash called the mizbeiach. This creates a halachic

26 She’aylas Yaavetz #89 27 There were two Tanna’im named Rabban Gamliel, a grandfather and a grandson. The earlier Rabban Gamliel, referred to as "Rabban Gamliel the Elder," lived at the time of the second Beis HaMikdash, whereas his grandson, "Rabban Gamliel of Yavneh," was the head of the Yeshivah in Yavneh and was renowned after the destruction of the Beis HaMikdash. Thus, if we can determine which Rabban Gamliel is the protagonist of the mishnah’s story, we may be able to determine whether Jews offered korbanos after the Churban. This would verify Rav Kalisher’s opinion. 28 quoted in Moadim U’Zemanim Volume 5, pg. 222

28 problem, because it is a severe Torah prohibition to enter the Beis HaMikdash grounds while tamei, and virtually everyone today has become tamei meis through contact with a corpse. (Someone who was ever in the same room or under the same roof as a corpse also becomes tamei meis.) Although other forms of tumah can be removed by immersion in a at the appropriate time, tumas meis can be removed only by sprinkling ashes of the adumah (the ). Since the ashes of the previously prepared paros adumos are lost, we cannot purify ourselves from tumas meis. Thus, we would be prohibited from bringing most korbanos because every kohen is presumed to be tamei meis.

However, although we have no available tahor Cohanim, this would not preclude our offering Korban Pesach or certain other public korbanos (korbanos tzibur).

WHY IS KORBAN PESACH DIFFERENT FROM MOST OTHER KORBANOS?

Most korbanos cannot be brought when either the owner of the korban or the kohen offering the korban is tamei. However, the Torah decrees that korbanos that are offered on a specific day must be brought even when every kohen is tamei. Thus, the Korban Pesach, the daily korban , and the special mussaf korbanos that are brought on Shabbos, Yom Tov and Rosh Chodesh may be offered by a kohen who is tamei meis if necessary.

Other korbanos, however, may not be offered by a tamei kohen even if this results in them not being brought at all. Thus, since there is no tahor kohen available today, we would assume that Rav Yechiel only planned to offer one of the above korbanos (Shu"t Chasam Sofer, Yoreh Deah #236).

LOCATION OF THE MIZBEIACH

As mentioned above, the debate over Rav Kalisher’s proposal concerned other halachic issues that must be resolved before we may offer korbanos. The Kaftor VaFerech raised two of these issues over five hundred years before Rav Kalisher. How could Rav Yechiel offer korbanos when we do not know the exact location of the mizbeiach? As the Rambam writes, "The location of the mizbeiach is extremely exact and it may never be moved from its location…. We have an established tradition that the place where David and Shlomo built the mizbeiach is the same place where Avraham built the mizbeiach and bound Yitzchak. This is the same place where Noach built a mizbeiach when he left the Ark and where Kayin and Hevel built their mizbeiach. It is the same place where Adam offered the first korban, and it is the place where he (Adam) was created.

"The dimensions and shape of the mizbeiach are very exact. The mizbeiach constructed when the Jews returned from the first exile was built according to the dimensions of the mizbeiach that will be built in the future. One may not add or detract from its size," (Hilchos Beis HaBechirah 2:1-3).

29 As noted above, prior to building the second Beis HaMikdash, the prophets Chaggai, Zecharyah and Malachi testified regarding three halachos about the mizbeiach that were necessary to reinstitute the korbanos, one of which was the exact location the mizbeiach and. If so, how can we offer korbanos without knowing the location of the mizbeiach?

Rav Kalisher offered an answer to this question, contending that the prophets’ testimonies were necessary only after the destruction of the first Beis HaMikdash, because the Babylonians razed it to its very foundations. However, Rav Kalisher contended that sufficient remnants exist of the second Beis HaMikdash to determine the mizbeiach’s precise location, thus eliminating the need for prophecy or testimony to establish its location.

Rav Kalisher’s correspondents were dissatisfied with this response, maintaining that the calculations based on the Beis HaMikdash remnants could not be sufficiently precise to determine the mizbeiach’s exact location. Thus, they felt that we must await the arrival of Eliyahu HaNavi to ascertain the mizbeiach’s correct place.

YICHUS OF COHANIM

Do we have "real" Cohanim today? Only a kohen who can prove the purity of his lineage may serve in the Beis HaMikdash (see Rambam, Hilchos Issurei Biah 20:2). The Gemara calls such Cohanim "Cohanim meyuchasim." Cohanim who cannot prove their lineage, but who have such a family tradition, are called "cohanei chazakah," Cohanim because of traditional practice. Although they may observe other mitzvos of Cohanim, they may not serve in the Beis HaMikdash.

An early source for the distinction between Cohanim who can prove their lineage and those who cannot is the story found in Tanach about the sons of Barzilai the Kohen. When these Cohanim came to bring korbanos in the second Beis HaMikdash, Nechemia rebuffed them because of concerns about their ancestry (Ezra 2:61-63; Neh 7:63-65). The Gemara states that although Nechemia permitted them to eat terumah and to duchen, he prohibited them from eating korbanos or serving in the Beis HaMikdash (Kesubos 24b). Similarly, today’s Cohanim who cannot prove their kehunah status should be unable to serve in the Beis HaMikdash. This would eliminate the possibility of offering korbanos today.

However, Rav Kalisher permits cohanei chazakah to offer korbanos. He contends that only in the generation of Ezra and Nechemia, when there was a serious problem of intermarriage (see Ezra, Chapter 9), did they restrict service in the Beis HaMikdash to Cohanim meyuchasim. However, in subsequent generations, any kohen with a mesorah may serve in the Beis HaMikdash.

30

Chasam Sofer (Shu"t Yoreh Deah #236) also permits cohanei chazakah to offer korbanos, but for a different reason, contending that although using a kohen meyuchas is preferred, a non-meyuchas kohen may serve in the Beis HaMikdash when no kohen meyuchas is available.

Other poskim dispute this, maintaining that a kohen who is not meyuchas may not serve in the Beis HaMikdash (Kaftor VaFerech).

The question then becomes - If only a kohen who can prove his kehunah may offer korbanos, and there are no surviving Cohanim who can prove their kehunah, how will we ever again be able to bring korbanos?

The answer is that Moshiach will use his Ruach HaKodesh to determine who is indeed a kosher kohen that may serve in the Beis HaMikdash (Rambam, Hilchos Melachim 12:3). This approach preempts Rav Kalisher’s proposal completely.

VESTMENTS OF THE KOHEN

Before korbanos are reintroduced, gedolei poskim will have to decide several other matters, including the definitive determination of several materials necessary for the kohen’s vestments.

The Torah describes the garments worn to serve in the Beis HaMikdash as follows: "Aharon and his sons shall put on their belt and their hat, and they (the garments) shall be for them as kehunah as a statute forever," (Ex 29:9). The Gemara deduces, "When their clothes are on them, their kehunah is on them. When their clothes are not on them, their kehunah is not on them," (Zevachim 17b). This means that korbanos are valid only if the kohen offering them wears the appropriate garments.

One of the vestments worn by the Cohanim is the avneit, the belt. Although the Torah never describes the avneit worn by the regular kohen, the halachic conclusion is that his avneit includes threads made of techeiles, argaman, and tola’as shani (Gemara Yoma 6a). There is uncertainty about the identification of each of these items. For example, the Rambam and the Ravad dispute the color of argaman (Hilchos Klei HaMikdash 8:13). The identity of techeiles is also unknown. Most poskim conclude that Hashem hid the source of techeiles, a fish known as chilazon, and that it will only be revealed at the time of Moshiach. Thus, even if we rule that our Cohanim are kosher for performing the service, they cannot serve without valid garments!

It should be noted that several great poskim, including the Radziner , the Maharsham, Rav Herzog and Rav Yechiel Michel Tukochinski, contended that we could research the correct identity of the techeiles.

31

Rav Kalisher himself contended that the garments of the kohen do not require chilazon as the dye source, only the color of techeiles. In his opinion, chilazon dye is only necessary for tzitzis. (He based this approach on the wording of the Rambam in Hilchos Tzitzis 2:1-2.) Therefore, in Rabbi Kalisher’s opinion, one may dye the threads of the avneit the correct color and perform the service. However, other poskim did not accept this interpretation but require the specific dye source of chilazon blood to dye the vestments (Likutei Halachos, Zevachim Chapter 13 pg. 67a).

Rav Kalisher did not discuss the dispute between the Rambam and the Ravad about the color of the argaman. Apparently, he felt that we could determine the answer and dye the avneit threads appropriately.

ADDITIONAL ISSUES

The poskim raised several other issues concerning Rav Kalisher’s proposal. One problem raised is that Klal Yisroel must purchase all public korbanos from the funds of the machatzis hashekel, which would require arranging the collection of these funds before the publically owned korbanos could be offered. However, this question would not preclude offering Korban Pesach, which is a privately owned korban.

Rav Kalisher’s disputants raised several other questions, more than can be presented here. As we know, the gedolei haposkim rejected Rav Kalisher’s plan to reintroduce korbanos before the rebuilding of the Beis HaMikdash.

However, we have much to learn from Rav Kalisher’s intense desire to offer korbanos. Do we live with a burning desire to see the Beis HaMikdash rebuilt speedily in our days?

Even if, chas veshalom, we are still not able to offer Korban Pesach this year, we should still devote Erev Pesach to studying the halachos of that korban.

32