Resources for Taanis daf 26
Rabbi Yitzchok Gutterman
- The משנה says there was a system of משמרות and מעמדות for the daily קרבנות. There are many issues requiring clarification regarding the nature of the משמרות and מעמדות.
What is the nature and source of the requirement to have משמרות? The משנה tells us the נביאים הראשונים were מתקן twenty four groups of משמרות of כהנים, לווים, and ישראלים. The simple reading of the משנה is that the משמרות are a דין דרבנן. However, see the ריטב"א who explains that there is a חיוב מדאורייתא to have משמרות and the נביאים הראשונים only specified number of groups. The source of the חיוב is the פּסוק in דברים י"ח, ח that says “חלק כחלק יאכילו לבד ממכריו על האבות”. See also the רמב"ם in ספר המצוות מצוה ל"ו who lists the designation of משמרות among the תרי"ג מצוות and uses the same פּסוק as his source. However, see the רמב"ן there in his השגות who disagrees and says it is only a תקון נביאים. Without this תקנה of a specific week of duty, people would never come. He also says not all כהנים were assigned to a specific משמר! One of his proofs is from the גמרא earlier that says some people didn’t know if they were from a בית אב קבוע or a בית אב שאינו קבוע. We see not all בתי אבות were permanent.
Were the כהנים and לווים part of the מעמדות as well? This seems to be a מחלוקת ראשונים. See רש"י in ד"ה קרבן מוסף as well as back on דף ט"ו ד"ה אנשי מעמד who implies all three groups were part of the מעמדות, although on דף ט"ו it sounds like כהנים, לווים, and ישראלים each had their own מעמד. See also the רמב”ם in הלכות כלי המקדש פּרק ו' הל' ד who seems to hold like רש"י (except that he might hold it was all one מעמד and not three). However, see the ריטב"א here who is clear that כהנים and לווים were not included in the מעמדות. This is also the opinion of the ר"ן and מאירי.
Who came to ירושלים to participate in the מעמדות and who davened from their home cities? רש"י in ד"ה על כל משמר says there were permanent מעמדות who lived in ירושלים, and everyone else stayed home in their cities. See the מאירי who says almost the exact opposite—he says everyone from the מעמד who could make it came in to ירושלים, and only the old and frail stayed home in their cities. See also the רמב”ם in הלכות כלי המקדש פּרק ו הל' ב who says there were two groups—the people who lived close to ירושלים went in to ירושלים and the people who lived farther away stayed in their cities and davened there.
- The משנה says there are three times where כהנים are נושא כפּיהם during each תפילה. See the ריטב"א here who says that since the משנה includes נעילה in the list, it must be that נעילה is said only during the day as כהנים can only be נושא כפּיהם during the day. See the רא"ש in the last פּרק of יומא in סימן כ who quotes a ירושלמי as saying explicitly that כהנים cannot do נשיאות כפּים at night as it is similar to all the שירות of a כהן which can only be done by day. It is important to note that we do not have this גירסא in our ירושלמי. See the ראבי"ה סימן תתע"ז who proves that the בבלי disagrees with the ירושלמי. See also the מהרי"ל in הלכות יום הכיפּורים who says that even if נעילה extends into the night the כהנים can still be נושא כפּיהם since there is also עבודה at night—the הקטר חלבים ואיברים.
3. The גמרא says כהנים can be נושא כפּיהם at שחרית and מוסף since כהנים wouldn’t be drunk as they hadn’t yet eaten their סעודה. See the רא"ש here in סימן א who quotes the רבינו חננאל who proves from here that once cannot eat before מוסף. This would seem to be against the practice of many on Rosh Hashana and against the practice of almost all on שמחת תורה. See the ב"ח in סימן רפּ"ו who explains that the רא"ש only means you cannot have a full meal—anything less is permitted. However, see the ט"ז in that’s סימן who limits it to only a טעימה בעלמא which would mean a כביצה of cake.
********************************
Click here to download Shaklya v’Tarya Summary by Rabbi Chaim Smulovitz (in PDF)
Click here to download maarei m’komos by Rabbi Asher Millman (in PDF)
Click here to download Shaklya v’Tarya Summary by Rabbi Yaakov Blumenfeld (in PDF)