YOMA (Fol. 2) Mishnah: Seven days before the Day of Atonement, the High-priest was removed from his house to the Palhedrin (counsellors') chamber, and another High-priest was appointed to substitute him in case he should meet with such an accident [as would incapacitate him for the service of that day]. R. Juda says: "Another wife was also appointed for him lest his own wife should meanwhile die, whereas it is said (Lev. 17, 11) And he shall make atonement for himself and for his house; his house, alludes to his wife." "If this be so," the sages remarked, "then there will be no end to the matter [the other wife may also die]."
(Fol. 3b) We are taught in a Baraitha: "Take thee, means 'from thine own'; make thee, from thine own. (Ex. 27, 20) That they bring unto thee pure olive oil, means from the congregation." This is the opinion of R. Jashe. R. Jonathan, however, says: "Both, Take thee, and That they bring unto thee, refers to the Congregation. Why, then, does the Torah say Take thee? The Lord expressed the desire that He would welcome the offering from Moses himself more than that from the entire Congregation." Abba Khanan said in the name of R. Elazar: "One verse reads (Deu. 10, 1) And make thyself (Moses) an ark of wood, and another reads (Ex. 25, 10) And they (thy Congregation) shall make an ark of shittim wood. How can both passages be reconciled? The latter refers to the time when Israel performs the will of God; the former, to the time when Israel does not perform the will of God."
(Fol. 4) We are taught (in a Baraitha): Moses ascended in the cloud, was covered by the cloud, and was sanctified in the cloud, in order that he should receive the Torah for Israel in a state of sanctification, as it is said (Ex. 24, 16) And the glory of the Lord abode upon Mount Sinai. This occurred on the day after the ten commandments were given, which was the first of the following forty days. This is the opinion of R. Jose, the Galilean. R. Akiba, however, says: And the glory of the Lord abode upon Mount Sinai, occurred on the first day (Ib. b) of the month [Sivan]; The cloud covered the mountain [not Moses]; And He called unto Moses, occurred on the seventh day [of Sivan]: And although Moses and all Israel were standing there, it intends to do honor to Moses [by mentioning specifically his name]." R. Nathan says: "The provisions and precautions [in the] entire verse above were made that he might be cleansed of all the food and drink in his bowels, so that he be pure as the ministering angels." R. Mathiah b. Kheresh, however, says: "The [precautions in the] entire verse [regarding his seclusion] were made for the purpose of impressing him with the feeling that the Torah should be received with awe, fear, shivering, trembling and agitation, as it is said (Ps. 2, 11), Serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice with trembling." What is meant by Rejoice with trembling? R. Adda b. Mathna said in the name of Rab: "Where there is rejoicing, there should be trembling." In what respect do R. Jose, the Galilean, and R. Achiba differ? They differ exactly as do the Tanaim of the following Baraitha, where we are taught: "On the sixth day of Sivan the Torah was given to Israel"; R. Jose, however, says: "On the seventh." According to him who says that the Torah was given on the sixth day, [it appears that] the Torah was given on the sixth and Moses ascended on the seventh; as it is written (Ex. 24, 16) And he called unto Moses on the seventh day; but according to him who says on the seventh, [it appears that] the Torah was given on the seventh day and Moses ascended on the seventh. R. Jose, the Galilean, agrees with the Tana, who maintains that the Torah was given unto Israel on the sixth of the month; and therefore, he says, The glory of the Lord abode upon Mount Sinai, came after the day on which the commandments had been given. The clouds covered Moses six days, and on the seventh he called him from amidst the clouds to receive the entire Torah. But R. Akiba agrees with the opinion of R. Jose, that the Torah was given unto Israel on the seventh day of the month. According to R. Akiba, the tradition is clearly, comprehended that the tablets were broken on the seventeenth day of Tammuz; as there remain twenty-four days of Sivan and sixteen of Tammuz, to make a total of forty days during which Moses remained on the mount. He descended the seventeenth of Tammuz when he broke the tablets. But as to R. Jose, the Galilean, who claims that the six days were spent in seclusion, add to them the forty days which Moses spent on the mount, and it will appear that the tablets were not broken until the twenty-third of Tammuz! R. Jose, the Galilean, would explain that the six days of seclusion were included in the forty days spent by Moses on the mount.
(Lev. 1, 1) And the Lord called unto Moses, and spoke unto him. Why was it necessary to call first, and then to speak? The Torah teaches proper conduct; that one should not impart anything to another before telling him that he wishes to speak to him. This is in support of R. Chanina, for R. Chanina said that one should not impart anything to another before telling him that he wishes to speak to him. (Ib.) Saying; R. Menasseh, the great, said: "Whence do we infer that when one person imparts information to another, the person informed has no right to disclose it to any one without permission? From the text (Ib.) And He spoke unto him from the tabernacle of the congregation (Lomar), saying."
(Fol. 8) Rabba b. b. Ghana, in the name of R. Jochanan, said: "What is the meaning of the passage (Pr. 10, 27) The fear of the Lord increases man's days, but the years of the wicked will be shortened? The fear of the Lord increases the days, alludes to the first Temple, during whose existence of four hundred and ten years there were only eighteen High-priests. And the years of the wicked will be shortened, alludes to the second Temple, which existed four hundred and twenty years, but more than three hundred High-priests succeeded each other during that period. Deduct the forty years during which Simeon the Righteous ministered, and eighty years of Jochanan, the High-priest's, ministry, and ten years of Ishmael b. Favi, and according to others, also the eleven years of R. Eliezer b. Charsum, and computing, you will see that subsequently not even one High priest completed his year. R. Jochanan b. Turtha said: "Why did all of this happen? Because they were appointed to the priesthood through bribery [and not because of their merits], for R. Assi said: 'A Tarkabful of denarim did Martha b. Boethus bring to king Jannai, until she succeeded in making him appoint Joshua b. Gamla [her husband], as the High-priest.'" R. Jochanan b. Turtha said further: "Why was Shiloh destroyed? Because two sins were committed there: adultery and the disgraceful treatment of sacrifices; as it is written (I Sam. 2, 33) Now Eli was very old, and heard that his sons were in the habit of doing unto all Israel, etc.; and although Samuel b. Nachmemi, in the name of R. Jochanan, said: "Whoever says that the children of Eli sinned, errs, because (Ib. b) they only prolonged the confinement bird sacrizces; nevertheless since Scripture censures them in this way [by charging them with sin], we understand that adultery prevailed. Mistreatment of sacrifices, as it is written (Ib. ib., 15) before the fat was … And if the man said unto him: 'Let the fat … for the men despised the offering of the Lord."
Why was the first Temple destroyed? Because there were three [evil] conditions: Idolatry, adultery and bloodshed. Idolatry, as it is written (Is. 28, 20) For the bed shall be too short for a man to stretch himself out on it; and the covering too narrow to wrap himself in. What is meant by The bed shall be too short to stretch himself out on it? R. Samuel b. Nachmeini, in the name of R. Jonathan, said: "This couch is too narrow for two lovers [God and the idol] to stretch themselves on." And the covering too narrow to wrap himself in, R. Samuel said in the name of R. Jonathan When R. Jochanan came to this verse, he would cry, saying: "The One, concerning whom it is written (Ps. 33, 7) He gathereth together like heaps the waters of the sea, yet should have too little space [because of an idol]!" [The Temple was destroyed because of] adultery, as it is written (Is. 3, 16) For as much as the daughters of Zion are fraudulent and walk with stretched forth necks casting about their eyes, walking and mincing as they go, and making a tinkling with their feet, etc. [The Temple was destroyed because of] bloodshed, as it is written (II Kings 21, 16) Moreover Menasseh shed very much innocent blood, till he had filled Jerusalem from one end to another, etc. "Although they are all wicked, yet because they put their trust in the Holy One, praised be He!" refers to the people of the first Temple, as it is written (Mican 3, 11) Her chiefs judge for bribes, her priests teach for reward, and her prophets divine for money, and yet they will lean upon the Lord, and say. Is not the Lord among us? Evil cannot come over us. For this, the Holy One, praised be He! brought on them three retributions, for the three sins of which they are guilty, as it is said (Ib. ib., 14) Therefore for your sake shall Zion be ploughed up as a field, and Jerusalem shall become ruinous heaps, and the mount of the house, forest-covered high places.
And in the first Temple, you say there was no gratuitous hatred? Behold! It is written (Ez. 21, 17) … brought together for the sword are they with my people; therefore strike [your hand] upon thy thigh. And R. Elazar said: "This alludes to those people who ate and drank together, but who would pierce one another with the swords of their tongues." [Hence gratuitous hatred prevailed also in the first Temple.] This [hatred] refers only to the princes of Israel, as it is said (Ib.) Cry aloud and wail, O son of man, for it cometh against my people, etc. And we were taught about this one might think. Cry aloud and wail, refers to the entire nation, therefore it is said. It comes against all princes of Israel, brought together for the sword are they with my people; therefore strike [your hand] upon thy thigh. R. Jochanan and R. Elazar both said: "The sins of the prophet of the first Temple were public (they did not hide them), therefore the end [of their captivity] has likewise been revealed [through prophecy]; but the sins of the people of the second Temple were not public, therefore the end [of their captivity], was also not revealed."
R. Jochanan said again: "The nail of those who lived during the time of the first Temple was preferable to the belly (entire body) of those who lived during the time of the second Temple." "On the contrary," remarked Resh Lakish to him, "the latter were better off, for although they were subject to a foreign government, nevertheless they studied and observed the Law." "The proof is in the Temple itself," rejoined R. Jochanan, "the first of which was restored, while the second one was not." R. Elazar was asked: "Who were greater, the people of the first Temple or those of the second?" He replied: "Take the Temple for proof." According to others, he s aid to them: "Your evidence indicates the [second] Temple [which was rebuilt]."
Resh Lakish was bathing himself in the Jordan, when Rabba b. b. Ghana came to him and shook hands with him. "God detests you Babylonians," said Resh Lakish to him, for it is written (Song. 8, 9) If she be a wall, we will build upon her a palace of silver; and if she be a door, we will enclose her with boards of cedar. This means: If you were all strong as a wall, and went with Ezra, you would have been like silver, which can never rot; but since you did not, you were like an Erez (a cedar) which is subject to decay. What kind of cedar is it over which decay has power? Ulla said: Sasmagur [a sawing worm to which a cedar is subject to decay]. And why do we liken the period of the second Temple into a Sasmagur? R. Abba said, this refers to a Bath Kol, as we are taught in the following Baraitha: With the death of the last prophets, Hagi, Zecharia and Malachi, the prophetic spirit was withdrawn from Israel, but they partook of [acted under] the holy inspiration (Bath Kol). (Is it possible that Resh Lakish spoke with Rabba b. b. Chana? If Resh Lakish would not speak with R. Elazar, who was the principal man in Palestine, because it was a rule that to whomsoever Resh Lakish spoke in the street, any business could be entrusted without witnesses, should Resh Lakish, then, have spoken with Rabba b. b. Chana [an inferior man]? R. Papa said: "Substitute another person. Either it was Resh Lakish and Ze'ri, or Rabba b. b. Ghana and R. Elazar.") When Resh Lakish came to R. Jochanan and related to him how he had explained the passage, R. Jochanan said to him: "This is not the reason [explanation]. If all had come with Ezra, even then the Shechina would not have abided in the second Temple, since it is written (Gen. 9, 27) May God enlarge the boundaries of Japheth, and may He dwell in the tents of Shem (Fol. 10); signifying, that although God enlarges the boundaries of Japheth, his Shechina can only dwell in the tents of Shem. And how is it known that the Persians are descendants of Japheth? Because it is written (Gen. 10, 2) The sons of Japheth: Gomer and Magog and Madai and Jaban and Tubal and Meshekh and Thirass; and R. Joseph has been taught that Thirass is Persia.
R. Joshua b. Levi, in the name of Rabbi, said: "A time will come, when those who have destroyed the second Temple will fall into the hands of the Persians, as it is said (Jer. 49, 20) Therefore hear the counsel of the Lord, that He hath resolved against Edom; and his purposes, that He hath devised against the inhabitants of Theman. Surely the least of the flocks shall drag them away; surely He will devastate their habitation." Raba b. Ulla, however, raised the following objection: "How do we know that the least of the flocks refers to Persia? Shall we assume that it is based upon the passage (Dan. 8, 20) The ram that thou hast seen, him with the two horns, signifies the kings of Media and Persia? Why not say that it refers to Greece, concerning whom it is written (Ib. lb., 21) And the rough he-goat is the king of Greece." When R. Abba came to Palestine, he told the objection of Raba b. Ulla to one of the Rabbis there, whereupon the latter remarked: "Only one who cannot explain the meaning of the verses could dare bring forth such an objection in opposition to Rabbi." What is meant by The least of the flock? The youngest of the brothers (that is, Thirass); as R. Joseph has said, Thirass is Persia.
But, as for the second Temple, of which we are sure that they did study the Torah, adhered to religious duties, and loving kindness, — why was it destroyed? Because gratuitous hatred prevailed among them. From this we can infer that gratuitous hatred is equivalent to all the three sins together: Idolatry, adultery and bloodshed.
Rabba b. b. Chana, in the name of R. Jochanan, quoting R. Juda b. Ilai, said: "A time will come when the Romans will fall into the hands of Persia. We can infer this through the rule of a fortiori; if the Chaldeans fell into the hands of the Persians, because they destroyed the first Temple, which was built only by the children of Shem, how much more should it apply to the second Temple, built by the Persians themselves, that the destroyers should fall into the hands of the Persians!" Rab, however, said: "On the contrary, a time will come when Persia will fall into the hands of the Romans." Whereupon R. Cahana and R. Assi said (in surprise) to Rab: "The builders [of the Temple] should fall under the dominion of those who have destroyed it?" "Yea," answered he, "such is the decree of the king." Others say that he replied: "The Persians are also guilty of having destroyed a place of worship." We have also a Baraitha to the same effect: A time will come when Persia will fall into the hands of the Romans, first because the former destroyed a place of worship, and secondly, because such is the decree of the king: that the builders [of the Temple] should fall under the dominion of those who have destroyed it, for R. Juda, in the name of Rab, said: "Messiah, the son of David, will not arrive until Rome shall have had dominion over the entire world nine months, as it is said( Micah 5, 2) Therefore He will give them up until the time that she who travaileth hath brought forth; then shall the remnant of his brethren return with the children of Israel."
(Fol. 11) R. Juda said: "It once happened that an inquisitor caught one Artibun in the act of examining Mezuzath in the upper market of Sepphoris and fined him a thousand Zuzim." Has not R. Elazar said: "Those going on a religious mission will not meet with evil?" In cases where danger is certain, it is different, as it is written (I Sam. 16, 2) And Samuel said: How shall I go? If Saul should hear it, he would kill me; and the Lord said," etc.
(Fol. 18) MISHNAH: Senior members of the Beth Din were assigned to read before him [the High-priest] concerning the ceremonials of the Day [of Atonement]. and they would say to him, My lord, High-priest, say it aloud, perhaps thou hast forgotten, or hast not studied this. On the morning preceding the Day of Atonement, he was placed at the eastern gate, where bulls, rams and sheep passed before him so that he should be able to distinguish them and become experienced for the service. During all the seven days he was free to eat and to drink, but on the eve of the Day of Atonement, at dusk, he was not permitted to eat much, because much eating induces drowsiness.
GEMARA: It is quite right that they should say to him, "Perhaps thou hast forgotten." "But that they should say to him: "Perhaps thou hast not studied," how can an ignorant man be made a High-priest? Have we not learned in a Baraitha: (Lev. 21, 10) And the priest that is highest of his brethren; i.e., he must be highest among his brethren in personal beauty, in physical strength, in wealth and in wisdom. Others say: "Whence do we know that if he is not rich, his brethren, the priests, must make him rich? Read the text, That is highest of his brethren; i.e., his brethren must contribute to make him highest." [Hence he ought to be a great scholar?] "This is not difficult to explain," replied R. Joseph, "for the latter case refers to the time of the first Temple, and the former case refers to the time of the second Temple"; as R. Assis said: "A Tarkabful of dinarim did Martha, the daughter of Baituth, give to king Jannai, until she succeeded in obtaining the appointment of Joshua b. Gamla [her husband] as High-priest."
"And bulls, rams and sheep passed before him." We are taught in a Baraitha: The he-goats were also passed before him. But why does not our Tana mention it? Because [according to the Mishnah], the he-goats were only for the atonement of sin; [they were therefore not passed before him lest]" he feel discouraged. If so, then why were, the bullocks passed since they also were for [the atonement of] sins and he might feel discouraged? Because the bulls were to atone for his sins, as well as for the sins of his brethren, the priests. He would not feel discouraged since, had they sinned, he would have been told of it, and he would have induced them to repent. But the he-goats were to atone for the sins of all Israel, so he could not know who had sinned. "This," said Rabina, "is what people say, 'If thy. sister's son has been appointed a constable, look out that thou pass not before him in the street,' [for he knows thy affairs well and may blackmail thee]."
(Ib. b) MISHNAH: The senior members of the Beth Din left him attended by the senior members of the priesthood, who took him up to the house of Abtinas, where he was made to swear; then he took farewell, and went away. They said to him: "My lord, High-priest, we are delegates of the Beth Din (court), and thou art both our delegate and the delegate of the Beth Din; that thou shalt not alter one thing about which we have spoken to thee." He took farewell weeping, and they parted, weeping. If he was a scholar himself, he lectured: otherwise, the scholars read to him. If he was practised in reading, he read; if not, they read to him. From which book did they read to him? From Job, Ezra and Chronicles. Zechariah b. Kabutal said: "Many times did I read to him from Daniel."
(Fol. 19b) He wept, and they wept. He wept because he was suspected of being a Sadducee, and they wept because Resh Lakish said: "He who suspects an innocent man will receive odily punishment." And why did they go to such an extent? Because it was feared lest he prepare the incense on the censer outside of the Holy of Holies, and then enter with the censer, as did the Sadducees. Our Rabbis were taught: That it happened with one Sadducee, who prepared [the incense] outside, and entered the Holy of Holies with it, that when he came out, he was rejoicing greatly. When his father met him, he said to him: "My son, though we are Sadducees, yet we must fear the Pharisees." Whereupon he replied: "All my years I was anxious to fulfill the verse (Lev. 16, 2) For in the cloud will I appear upon the Kaporeth, and I said to myself, 'When will the day come in which I might do it?' And to-day, when I have had the opportunity, should I not have done it?" It was said that it did not take long before he died, and lay amidst rubbish, and worms crept out of his nostrils. And according to others, he was smitten right there, while leaving the Temple.
MISHNAH: If he began to slumber, the junior priests snapped with their fingers Tz'reda, addressing him: "My Lord, High-priest, rise and cool thyself once on the [marble] floor." And they entertained him [to keep him awake] until the proper time for slaughtering the daily offering.
We are taught in a Baraitha: "They did not entertain him with music of a violin or harp, but with their mouths, and they read to him from Ps. 127, 1, Unless the Lord do build the house, in vain labor they that build it. The respectable men of Jerusalem forbore to sleep the whole night, so that the High-priest might hear their echoing noise and would not fall asleep."
We are taught in a Baraitha: Abba Saul said: "Also in the border towns [of Jerusalem] they did it [forbore to sleep] in reminiscence of Temple usages, but it turned out to be a cause of sin." Abaye, and according to others, R. Nachman b. Isaac, said: "The remarks of Abba Saul refer to the Nehardeans." Elijah [once] said to R. Juda, the brother of R. Sala, the pious: "You ask why Messiah does not come? Today, although it is the Day of Atonement, nevertheless many adulterous acts have been committed in the city of Nehardea." "And what," asked R. Juda, "doth the Holy One, praised be He! say to that?" "He saith (Gen. 8, 7) Sin lieth at the door." Fol. 20) "And what says Satan to this?" in quired R. Juda again. "On the Day of Atonement he has no right to accuse." Whence do we know this? As Rami b. Chama said: "Hasatan by Gimatria is three hundred and sixty-four, therefore only on that number of days has he permission to accuse; but on the Day of Atonement (i.e., on the three hundred and sixty-fifth), he may not accuse."
(Ib. b) We are taught in a Baraitha, in accordance with the opinion of Rab: "What was the message of Gabini, the herald? 'Rise, priest, to your service; Levites, to your chanting; and Israel, to your standing.' And his voice was heard at a distance of three parsaoth. It once happened that King Agrippa, being on the road, heard Gabini's voice at the distance of three parsaoth. When he returned home, he sent him many gifts." Nevertheless, the voice of the High-priest surpassed in strength that of Gabini, the herald. Because, the master said, once it happened that the High-priest said, I pray Thee, O Lord, and his voice was heard at Jericho; and Rabba b. b. Chana, in the name of R. Jochanan, said that between Jericho and Jerusalem the distance is ten parsaoth, and this, despite the fact that on the Day of Atonement, the High-priest was weak from fasting, and that it was during the daytime [that he recited the prayers], whereas the herald used to make announcements only at night [when a voice is more audible]. For R. Levi said: "Why is not a human being's voice audible by day as well as by night?" Because the spherical sun sweeps through the sky as a carpenter saws cedars, and the sun motes are called La. In reference to this, Nebuchadnezzar said (Dan. 4, 32) And all the inhabitants of the earth are regulated as naught (K'la.)." Our Rabbis were taught: "Were it not for the noise caused by the globular sun, the voice of the multitude of Rome would have been heard; and were it not for the voice of the multitude of Rome, the noise caused by the globular sun would have been heard." Our Rabbis were taught: "Three voices can be heard from one end of the world to the other: The sound emitted from the spherical sun; the hum and din of the city of Rome, and the voice of anguish uttered by the soul when it quits the body (Fol. 21 ) ." Others add, the voice of a woman in confinement; still others, the voice of the Angel Ridia." The Rabbis prayed that the voice of the soul when departing from the body should be spared [of this torture], and they succeeded in having it suspended.
R. Juda, in the name of Samuel, said: "When Israel went up to Jerusalem to attend the festivals, they had to stand in the Temple closely crowded together; yet when they were prostrated, there was a wide space between each of them. They extended, prostrated, eleven cubits behind the Kapareth." We have also a Baraitha to the same effect; when Israel went, etc., and this was one of the ten miracles that occurred in the Temple, for we are taught in a Mishnah: Ten miracles were wrought in the Temple: No premature birth was ever caused by the odor of the holy flesh; the holy flesh never became putrid; no fly was ever seen in the slaughter-houses; no accident causing uncleanliness ever befell the High-priest on the Day of Atonement; no defect was ever found in either the Omer, or the two wave-loaves, or in the show bread; though the people stood closely pressed together, they found ample space to prostrate themselves; no serpent or scorpion ever injured a person in Jerusalem; nor did any man ever say to his fellow, The place is too straight for me to lodge over night in Jerusalem. How is it that the Mishnah began with the account of the Temple and finished with things that happened in Jerusalem? There are two other miracles which happened in the Temple, as we are taught in a Baraitha: The rain never quenched the fire of the wood-pile on the altar, and the column of smoke [that arose therefrom] could not be diverted from its course even by the strongest winds of the world.
(Ib. b) R. Oshia said: "At the time when Solomon built the Temple, he planted there all kinds of golden fruit trees, and they bore fruit at proper times; and whenever the wind blew on them, they fell down ripe, as it is said (Ps. 72, 16) Its fruits shall shake like the trees of Lebanon. And when the heathens had entered the Temple, the fruit-trees became withered, as it is said (Nahum 1, 4) The flowers of Lebanon wither. In the future the Holy One, praised be He! will restore them, as it is said (Is. 35, 2) It shall blossom abundantly and rejoice; yea, with joy and singing, the glory of Lebanon shall be given unto it.
The Master said above: "The smoke arose from the wood-pile on the altar." Was then any smoke on the altar? Behold we have been taught in a Baraitha: "Five things have been said concerning the fire on the altar: It had the form of a lion, it was clear as the sun, it was palpable, it consumed moist things as it did dry ones and never emitted any smoke." The smoke was that of fire kindled by men, as we are taught in a Baraitha: (Lev. 1, 7) And the sons of Aaron the priest shall put fire upon the altar, i.e., although the fire descended from heaven, it was meritorious to bring fire from outside the sanctuary also. "It had the form of a lion." Behold, we are taught in a Baraitha, R. Chanina, the Segan (Chief) of the priests, said: "I have seen it, and it had the form of a dog." No difficulty is presented; during the time of the first Temple it was like a lion, during the second, like a dog. Was there then any fire in the second Temple? Has not R. Samuel b. Inia said in the name of R. Acha: "What is the meaning of the passage (Hag. 1, 8) Go up to the mountain, and bring wood, and build the house; that I may take pleasure in it, and be glorified; it is written V'ekabed (and I shall be glorified) although we read it V'ekabdah. Why is the letter Hay missing? This is to suggest that five [the numerical value of Hay] things were missing in the second Temple. They are: The ark, the Kaporeth, the Cherubim, the divine fire, the Shechina, the Holy Spirit, and the Urim and Tumim. [Hence we see there was no heavenly fire in the second Temple at all.] I will tell thee: It was there, only it did not assist in consuming.
Our Rabbis were taught: "There are six kinds of fire: Fire that eats but does not drink; that drinks but does not eat; that eats and drinks; that burns up moist things as well as dry; fire that counteracts other fire; fire that supersedes fire; to wit, that eats but does not drink, refers to a common fire; that drinks but does not eat, refers to a fever; that eats and drinks, refers to that of Elijah; as it is written (I Kings 18, 38) And licked up the water that was in the trench; that burns up moist things as well as dry, refers to fire on the altar; fire that counteracts other fire, refers to Gabriel; fire that supersedes fire, refers unto the Shechina, for the Mastetr said God. stretched out His finger among the angels and consumed them."
And the column of smoke that arose on the altar could not be diverted from its course even by the strongest winds of the world. Is that true? Did not R. Isaac b. Abdimi say: "At the expiration of the Feast of the Tabernacles all looked on the smoke rising from the burning mass in the Temple; when it was inclined to the north, the poor rejoiced, and the wealthy felt down-hearted, for it showed there would be too much rain, and the fruit would rot [thus avoiding speculation]; but when it was inclined to the south, the poor felt down-hearted, while the rich rejoiced, for this was a sign there would be little rain, and the fruit would remain well-preserved [to speculate with]. When it was bent eastward, all rejoiced, and westward, all felt down-hearted [hence we see that the smoke was swayed by the wind]. It was bent in a straight line, but it did not scatter.
The master said above that when it was bent eastward, all felt happy; but [when bent] westward, all felt sorry. And I raised a contradiction from the following Baraitha: "The easterly wind [blowing towards the west], is always good; the westerly, [blowing towards the east] is always harmful; the northern wind is good for wheat, after a third of the crop had already grown up; but it is harmful for olives when they are still in their blossom; the southern wind is good for olives, but harmful for wheat;' and R. Joseph, — according to others. Mar Zutra, — said: "You may make these identifications by the following: the table [in the Temple, which signifies richness], was in the north; and the candelabra [signifying wisdom] was in the south.' Both the north and the south winds are good for something; one is good for one plantation, the other is good for a different plantation." [Hence the nature of the winds is different from the above statement]. This is not difficult to explain; the latter refers to Babylon [which is low-land, and hence the eastern wind dries it]; but the former refers to Palestine [which is hilly land, and therefore it needs a western wind].