English translation — ויקהל א

1.

The end of the last chapter of the Laws of the Chosen House,

in which the Rambam explains the laws of guarding the Temple — after he describes

(in law 11)

how the priests every morning

("in the morning before the dawn rises close to it")

inspected

("with two torches of light in their hand")

in the courtyard whether everything there is in order — the Rambam concludes

(in a law — 12 — by itself)

"In this manner they do every night except for Friday nights, when they do not have a light in their hand, but they inspect by the lamps that are lit there from Friday eve."

It is known the question of the commentators<sup>1</sup>

: the law is indeed

(as the Rambam rules in several places<sup>2</sup>)

that "there is no shevut in the Temple,"

and carrying the lamps on Shabbat is indeed only a prohibition of "shevut"<sup>3</sup>

— then why do they change on Friday nights differently,

that "they have no light in their hand except they check by the lamps lit there from before Shabbat"?

The Kesef Mishneh answers,

that "it is different here because it is possible with lamps lit from before Shabbat,"

since there is a possibility to check and thereby avoid the "shevut,"

then they do not permit the shevut.

The answer is however problematic

(as other commentators ask<sup>4</sup>)

: the Rambam rules

(in Laws of the Service of Yom Kippur<sup>5</sup>)

that "if the High Priest was old or sick, they heat iron pans with fire from the evening and cast them into the water the next day to cool it <b>for there is no shevut in the Temple</b>" — although even in this case one could safeguard it in another manner

(so that there should be no shevut),

as the Rambam himself explains "or they mix hot water with the water of the mikveh to cool it"<sup>6</sup>.

Moreover: the Rambam rules<sup>7</sup>

that if the High Priest "sought to doze" — then "young Levites snap before him with their thumb",

although this is a shevut

(as the Rambam rules in Laws of Shabbos<sup>8</sup>),

and it is possible in another manner — there are other means to help the High Priest with his watch.

2.

In simple terms, one can divide:

The principle of "there is no shevut in the Temple" even when possible in another manner,

is only when it is temporary — that is,

a special situation occurs that can be prevented through a shevut,

then there is the permission of shevut in the Temple even when one can do it in another manner; as for example if "the High Priest was old or ill" or if "he sought to doze off".

That is,

the fixed order cannot be connected with a shevut,

but in specific cases one can come to the permission.

In our case, it is indeed about establishing a fixed order for the conduct of the priests every Shabbat and Shabbat,

and therefore, since it is possible in another manner,

one does not <b>establish </b>the conduct of the priests in such a way that one would always need to perform shevut in the Temple.

This reasoning, however, is insufficient,

because we find the permission of shevut in the Temple also in a case that is a fixed order: when the eve of Passover occurs on Shabbat,

the law is<sup>9</sup>

that one flays the hide of the offering upon the poles,

exactly as on a weekday,

even though it is possible in another manner.

And it is a difficulty to say,

that according to the rule that it falls on Shabbat is considered like temporary,

since it is a fixedness only from time to time.

3.

In the above laws at the conclusion of the laws of the Chosen House — there are still several general subtleties:

A)

Why does the Rambam bring this matter — in the laws of guarding the Chosen House?

— The laws until halacha 11,

belong to this chapter,

in them it speaks about guarding the Temple

; but the content of halacha 11 and halacha 12 is seemingly not related to guarding the Temple,

but rather to

(the preparation and introduction to)

the order of the daily service — one had to examine whether everything in the courtyard was proper in order to begin performing the daily service — it belongs in the laws of daily and additional offerings

(and it is indeed there

in brief)?

B)

The last halacha

(12)

is a continuation of the preceding halacha

(and as explained — in this order

(from halacha 11)

they do etc.)

Only one adds,

that on Shabbat it was different — so why did the Rambam separate it into a halacha by itself?

And especially since,

as is known,

the separation of the halachos in the Rambam is precise,

and one learns from it etc.

4.

The explanation in this:

The Rambam explains at the beginning of the chapter,

that guarding of the Temple is not from fear of enemies etc. but because of <b>honor </b>of the Temple,

because "a palace that has guards is not comparable to a palace that has no guards."

From this it is understood,

that the details about which it speaks in this chapter

(chapter 8)

are because of the honor of the Temple.

Based on this one can say,

that also the matter of inspection is because of the honor of the Temple — and for this reason the Rambam included the laws

(11 and 12)

in this chapter:

The inspection was done

(mainly)

not

(only)

as a <b>preparation</b> for the service of the Temple,

but as an <b>honor</b> of the Temple.

And as explained elsewhere¹³

at length,

that the content of the honor through guarding the Temple consists in this,

that the guarding shows that one does not divert one's mind from the Temple,

so too regarding the inspection — by means of that every morning one inspects etc. one adds to the honor of the Temple.

And based on this will be sweetened that the priests the inspectors

(after the inspection)

said to each other "the peace of everything is peace" — and not an expression that is,

seemingly,

more fitting to say that everything is in order and ready for the service of the Temple

(like "everything is in its place"¹⁴,

or "everything is proper" and the like)

— because this is an expression of honor.

5.

According to this, the above question in the last halachah will be answered,

And with an introduction:

In the matter of the miracle of the oil of Chanukah,

that "all the oils in the Temple became impure, etc. they searched and found only one flask of oil that was lying with the seal of the High Priest,

and there was only enough in it to light for one day, a miracle occurred and they lit from it for eight days"¹⁵

— it is known the question¹⁶

There is an opinion¹⁷

that "tumah hutrah betzibbur" — is

(according to this opinion)

why did the Almighty need to make a miracle

(the oil),

couldn't they have lit the candles also with impure oil?

Answer on this the commentators¹⁸

: Although tumah hutrah betzibbur,

but the Almighty wanted to show "chibatan shel Yisrael",

and therefore He made the miracle so that Jews should fulfill the mitzvah of lighting the candles of the menorah in a manner that one need not come to the "heter" of "tumah".

That is: That which "tumah is permitted" is only regarding &lt;b&gt;the service&lt;/b&gt; of Israel; but regarding &lt;b&gt;their belovedness&lt;/b&gt; of Israel,

one must avoid tumah even in a manner when it is "permitted".

Thus one should say in our matter:

If the examination of the priests in the Temple would have been merely a general practice in the Temple,

or even a part of the Temple service,

then the law is that "there is no shevut in the Temple"

(and as the Rambam says¹⁹)

that this is a "permission,"

ab initio;

Since, however, that the examination is connected with the <b>honor</b> of the Temple,

emphasizing the greatness of the honor of the Temple

(and along the lines of what "you do not fear the Temple but the One who commanded regarding its fear"²⁰,

so too regarding the honor of the Temple)

then regarding <b>this</b> it is not fitting that the examination should be ab initio in a manner

That one must come to a heter of "ein shevut bamikdash".

6.

With this it is also understood why the detail in the bedikah — that on Shabbos it was different than on chol — is

(a)

related to the laws of Beis HaBechirah and

(b)

comes in a halachah by itself — since that with this comes an additional greater and stronger emphasis in <b>kvod hamikdash</b>:

They not only generally <b>inspected</b> the Temple every day in order to adorn its honor

(Halacha 11),

but moreover

(Halacha 12)

: the inspection was in a splendid and honorable manner,

for which they

(on Shabbat)

did not use any leniency

(of "there is no shevut in the Temple"),

rather they inspected with candles lit there from before Shabbat.

And for this reason this is the <b>conclusion</b> of chapter 8 of the Laws of the Chosen House

(which discusses,

as stated,

about the <b>honor</b> of the Temple)

because in the halacha is brought the honoring of the Temple in the highest manner — a conduct in splendor from the splendor.

7.

One can also say regarding this — and with an introduction:

Regarding work in the Temple on Shabbat, one finds two opposites: on one side, the service of the daily and additional offerings

(and other communal sacrifices whose time is fixed)

not only overrides Shabbat and is permitted on Shabbat,

rather it is a <b>commandment</b>²¹

; on the other side, however, is the law²²,

that "the building of the Temple does not override

Shabbat",

as we also learn it in the Mechilta at the beginning of our portion²³

from this that Moshe had preceded the command of the prohibition of work on Shabbat to the command of the work of the Mishkan.

And one must say the explanation in this:

After the Sanctuary is already a holy place in completeness,

and it speaks about a detail,

a craft in the Holy Temple,

then they are not considered a profane act,

in holiness is every thing,

not any profane act,

but a matter of holiness,

consequently there is in it no desecration of Shabbat;

When it deals however with building the Sanctuary and the holiness within it,

it has no place that this should be done with an act that has in it an element of desecration of Shabbat.

say regarding the miracle of the oil of Chanukah — that what they then did not

(could)

use the principle of "Tumah Hutrah",

is because then had to be the dedication of the Temple &lt;b&gt;anew&lt;/b&gt;,

and at the making of a &lt;b&gt;new&lt;/b&gt; holiness one does not say Tumah Hutrah etc.].

One can say,

that this is also regarding the prohibitions of Shevut in the Temple:

the sages permitted shevut in the Temple in cases which are

connected with the service in the Temple or work in it; but when it concerns the actual building of the Temple

(including — His honor),

the sages

(which "is a repair akin to Torah law"²⁶)

did not permit any shevut,

the making

(or — adding,

strengthening)

the holiness of the Temple does not need to be done through an act of shevut.

8.

Regarding the reason that the Rambam included the laws of guarding and honoring the Temple in the laws of <b>Choice of the House</b>

(and likewise that Rabbeinu HaKadosh established the laws of guarding the Temple

(also)

in Tractate Middot, whose subject is the <b>measurements of the Temple</b> and not

(only)

there where it discusses the services performed in it)

— was discussed elsewhere²⁷

The commandment of building the Holy Temple is the obligation — not the action of building,

but the result of the action — the passive object,

"that there be",

that there should <b>be</b> a Holy Temple

(as the Rogatchover explains at length²⁸).

According to this, it is understood why guarding the Temple is a part of the laws of the Chosen House,

because also the guarding causes that there should be

("that it should be")

a Holy Temple — a house of honor,

a place fit to be a Chosen House.

According to this it turns out,

that also this

That the kohanim are checking every day in the Temple for the honor of the Temple

(as above),

is not only a preparation and introduction to the service of the day,

but is

(also)

a continuation and part of the <b>building of the Temple</b> — the checking is in the manner of "checking of the house",

the house becomes more honored and beautified.

And based on this it is understood why we do not say here the principle of "there is no shevut in the Temple": since the checking is a part of the <b>building</b> of the Temple,

regarding which the Torah says that it does not override Shabbat,

therefore the Sages instituted

("like a Torah [prohibition]")

that this should not override their prohibition

(shevut).

9.

Based on this, one should connect the conclusion of the laws of the Chosen House with their beginning — that their end is interwoven in their beginning:

At the beginning of the laws of the Chosen House, the Rambam establishes the definition of the commandment of building the Chosen House — “<b>to make</b> a house for G‑d”

(not <b>to build</b>)

— from which one learns²⁸,

that the commandment is

(not the act of building,

but)

the result,

that there should be a “house for G‑d” — with all the details that such a house must have —

And the

(same)

matter is emphasized in the last chapter of Hilchos Beis HaBechirah; for this reason,

as above,

also guarding the Temple is a part of "Beis HaBechirah",

until the conclusion of the matter

(as this emerges in the conclusion of Hilchos Beis HaBechirah),

that because of that which it is a detail in

(a building built from)

"Beis HaBechirah",

it does not override Shabbos,

including — also not any shevus.

Yud.

The explanation of the connection of the beginning of Hilchos Beis HaBechirah and their conclusion — in the inwardness of the matters:

It was spoken several times

that even though with the building of the Mishkan and the First and Second Temples the commandment of "And they shall make Me a Sanctuary" was fulfilled

— it was, however, not in a manner of building the Temple in the utmost perfection; this will come about in the Temple that Your hands, O Lord, have established,

the Third Temple which will be an eternal Temple.

And this is also the reason

(the inner one)

that the last halacha of the laws of the Chosen House discusses the order

(of the inspection of the Temple Courtyard)

in the Temple on the Sabbath day — as a hint,

that the conclusion and "perfection" of the Chosen House is in the Temple that will be

(in the future to come — )

in the day that is entirely Shabbat.

One can indeed mean,

that since the completeness of the Temple will only be in the future to come,

then, heaven forbid, our present service does not occupy a place,

has no importance, heaven forbid —

The Rambam safeguards,

that <b>on the contrary</b> — "on Friday nights <b>they have no light</b> except they check by means of candles that were lit there <b>before the Sabbath</b>":

In the time of "

(a day that is entirely)

Shabbat"

is "in their hand light" — "a lamp is a commandment and Torah is light"³³,

they are "two things about which you say, I have no desire in them"³⁴

; and the brightness that is then there comes specifically from the candles

(commandments)

that one lit "on <b>erev </b>Shabbat" — in the time of exile.

The completeness of the Third Temple³⁵

is that then will be <b>revealed</b> the superiority of the present service — our deeds and our service all the time of the duration of the exile³⁶.

And this gives an encouragement and encouragement in the service of a Jew to set up the spiritual Temple and Tabernacle within himself — "And I will dwell in their midst — within each and every one of Israel"³⁷

What this brings about the building of the Third Holy Temple,

in the true and complete redemption,

speedily in our days, literally.

Shabbos Parshas Devarim 5741)