Bava Basra - Daf 99
- Audio Timestamps
0:00 - The 3 Sugyos
2:43 - Review of 3 Sugyos
5:12- Siman
8:03 - 4 Blatt Back Chazarah
15:06 - Pop Quiz (Last 7 blatt)
For access to all Zichru resources including PDFs, and illustrations CLICK HERE
- The ארון and כרובים did not take up physical space
Rebbe Chanina explains that the Beis Hamikdash is described in one passuk as twenty amos high, and elsewhere as thirty amos high, because the first is measuring the space above the כרובים (which were ten amos tall), to compare the two spaces: מה למעלה אין משמש כלום – just as the space above serviced nothing (i.e., was empty), אף למטה אין משמש כלום – so too the ten amos below serviced nothing. This supports Rebbe Levi, who quoted a tradition: מקום ארון וכרובים אינו מן המדה – the space of the Aron and Keruvim is not part of the dimensions of the קדש הקדשים, because they miraculously took up no space. Similarly, a Baraisa states regarding the Aron: יש לו ריוח עשר אמות לכל רוח ורוח – it had ten amos of space on each side. Although the ארון was in the center of the קדש הקדשים, and was two and a half amos wide, one could measure ten full amos from either wall to the Aron! Shmuel said the Keruvim stood miraculously, without taking any space, because the passuk describes each of their four wings as five amos long, and the entire קדש הקדשים was twenty amos wide; where was space for the bodies? However, Amoraim offer six different orientations which would have allowed for the space.
- In which direction did Shlomo’s Keruvim face?
Rebbe Yochanan and Rebbe Elazar disagree about where the Keruvim faced. One said: פניהם איש אל אחיו – their faces were towards each other, and the other says: פניהם לבית – their faces were towards the House, i.e., facing east, towards the קודש. The Gemara objects to the first opinion, because the passuk describes the כרובים as facing “towards the House,” and answers: כאן בזמן שישראל עושין רצונו של מקום – here where it says they faced each other, is at a time when Yisroel is doing Hashem’s will, כאן בזמן שאין ישראל עושין רצונו של מקום – whereas here, where it says they faced forward, is at a time when Yisroel is not doing Hashem’s will. The Gemara objects to the second opinion, because the passuk describes Moshe’s כרובים as facing each other (and Shlomo’s כרובים were presumably fashioned similarly), and answers: דמצדדי אצדודי – [their faces] were turned partially towards each other. Indeed, Onkelos said in a Baraisa that the Keruvim were "מעשה צעצועים" – formed like children, and מצודדים פניהם כתלמיד הנפטר מרבו – and their faces were turned towards each other, like a student taking leave of his teacher.
- Why one cannot repossess his path from the public when he gave them another
The next Mishnah states: מי שהיתה דרך הרבים עוברת לתוך שדהו – if one had a public path crossing his field, נטלה ונתן להם מן הצד – and he took it back and gave them another on the side, מה שנתן נתן – what he gave, he gave (i.e., he cannot take back the new path), ושלו לא הגיעו – and the original path he took as his does not become his; rather, the public has both. The Gemara assumes the exchange was effective (which is why the new path is theirs), but he has no way to prevent people from using the old path. It asks: לינקוט פזרא וליתיב - let him take a staff and sit by the path to strike anyone using it!? Can one not enforce the law himself where he stands to lose?! Three answers explain why the exchange was not effective: (1) גזירה שמא יתן להן דרך עקלתון - It is a decree lest one exchange with a crooked (less convenient) path. (2) בנותן להם דרך עקלתון - The case is where he gave them a crooked path. (3) Any public path moved to the side is “crooked,” because it is closer for some but further for others.
Siman – Cheetah
The cheetah in the cage next to the Kodesh Kedoshim exhibit demonstrating how the aron and keruvim didn’t take up space, broke free and raced past a large model of the Keruvim facing each other, and down a public path the former owner of the field could not repossess when he tried to take it back after giving them another.
