Sunday, July 30, 2006

Daf Yomi - Yoma 54 - Impure thoughts in the Beis Hamikdosh

The Gemora states that the keruvim embraced each other like a זכר ונקבה. The Sheorim Metzuyanim B'halacha brings down from the Minchas Elozar and others that in the Beis Hamikdosh, they were not concerned about הרהור - impure thoughts.

My assumption is that Reb Yochanan ben Zakkai instituted a balcony to separate the men and women because of intermingling and not because of thought.

8 comments:

ben said...

The Satmar Rav has a teshuvah where he disagrees with Reb Moshe Feinstein zt"l regarding the need for a mechitzah and he elaborates on thhat Gemara in Sukkah that you quoted. Seems from Divrei Yoel that there clearly was a problem of hirhur.

David said...

There is apparently "two dinim" in a mechitzah: 1) to prevent "kalus rosh", ie, frivolity; and 2) impure thoughts. That is why a mechitzah alone is insufficent, according to R' Moshe, but rather a mechitzah of at least 5 feet is required. Were frivolity alone the only reason, merely sitting seprately would suffice.

At least, that's how I understood it.

Sam said...

the long Tosafos reviews the rules of tzelem or dmus--obviously, if Shlomo could carve 3-dimensional keruvim into the walls, the rules are not like, l'havdil, Muslims who allow no images at all. But can engraved (beneath the surface) & raised images be used in other decor? And were these additionbal keruvim there for any purpose other than decoration? Seems unlikely, considering the significaqnce of the aron's keruvim & their positioning. And how did Shlomo's keruvim look? Facing, embracing, etc? This might have implications for hirhur vs. kalus rosh--after all, these were the keruvim that he public saw (according to one opinion).

Avromi said...

In response to your question as to how did the keruvim of Shlomo look...

The Ritva answers that the Gemora in Bava Basra is referring to the keruvim that Moshe made (those that were on the ארון) and shlomos's keruvim that were standing next to the Aron and our Gemora is discussing the keruvim that were drawn on the wall and these keruvim never changed their positions - they were always embracing. Rashi seems to indicate like this pshat for he says that the goyim peeled them off the walls and then brought them outside.

Avromi said...

In response to your question regarding the purpose of those keruvim here is this taken from

http://www.dafyomi.co.il/yoma/insites/yo-dt-054.htm

The SI'ACH YITZCHAK points out that the Nochrim could not have taken out the Keruvim on the Kapores, because the Gemara earlier (52b) says that Yoshiyahu hid the Kapores along with the Keruvim years before the Churban. The Si'ach Yitzchak says that the Nochrim must have taken out other Keruvim. However, how does he know that the Keruvim that they took out were not the Keruvim of Shlomo ha'Melech?

According to Rav Landy's explanation, the Gemara (54a) explicitly states that the Keruvim of Shlomo ha'Melech were not present in the second Beis ha'Mikdash. Why is the Gemara so certain that the Keruvim of Shlomo ha'Melech were not present in the second Beis ha'Mikdash? The answer is that the Keruvim of Shlomo ha'Melech were made only to serve the Aron, and thus they were considered part of the Aron. When Yoshiyahu hid the Aron, he also hid Shlomo's Keruvim with it, just as he hid all the other contents of the Kodesh ha'Kodashim (52b). The only Keruvim left for the enemies to display at the time of the Churban were the ones drawn on the walls.

Perhaps this is the intention of the Gemara earlier when it says that in the second Beis ha'Mikdash there were "no Aron, Kapores, and Keruvim." It lists Kapores and Keruvim separately because the "Kapores" refers to the actual Kapores and the Keruvim on top of it, while the "Keruvim" refer to those of Shlomo ha'Melech.

Aton said...

Perhaps since the Ezras Nashim only had the Kedushah of Har HaBayis/Machaneh Leviyah it lacked what the Kodesh HaKodashim and the Azarah had (Gilui Shechinah in form of Nissim, staging of the Avodah) to prevent Hirhur?

Avromi said...

I was thinking like that, but i figured that the minchos elozar was saying that it will prevent hirhur from seeing the keruvim in that manner and the people observing would be in the azarah.

Aton said...

I mean, I wonder if the point is that when looking at something in the Kodesh Kodoshim or Heichal, regardless of where one is, his thoughts are dominated by nothing but Eimas HaKodesh (we find Mikdash inspiring or controlling thoughts, e.g. Yonah getting Ru'ach HaKodesh at Simchas Beis HaSho'evah, Gemara in Sukkah about it...) -- whereas looking women in the Ezras Nashim, which has the lesser Kedushas Har HaBayis, may not be sufficiently protective?

shkoyach