Raba says thus: R. Judah rules that
the unintentional is the same as the intentional only in the direction of
stringency, but he did not rule that the intentional is the same as the
unintentional where it is in the direction of leniency.
The story is told of R. Johanan b. Zakkai who preached in
Jerusalem during the festivals. His lectures were so popular that he outgrew
his tiny lecture hall and had to preach outdoors. He did so standing in the
shade of the Temple walls. Now is intention was not to gain benefit from the
Temple (which is not permitted – the Temple service and its accoutrements were
dedicated to G-d.)
But Raba said: The Temple was
different, because it was made for its inside.
Which becomes interesting when we think about the holiness
of the modern Western Wall, which is no more than the retaining wall of the
Temple Mount, not even part of the destroyed Temple itself. But I digress.
But what of workers who come near the Holy of Holies, for
example, to do repairs?
Surely R. Simeon b. Pazzi said in
R. Joshua b. Levi's name on Bar Kappara's authority: Sound, sight, and smell do
not involve trespass?
If one were to taste, for example, part of the sacrifice that
would be a serious trespass. It would be benefiting from a sacred thing. But hearing
the Temple music, seeing the beauty of the Temple, or smelling the spices –
even though one does gain benefit from something sacred does not cause any
reduction and is therefore is not a trespass.
No comments:
Post a Comment