ויקרא

וכלי חרש אשר תבושל בו ישבר. כלומר במקום קדוש, כשם שהכבוס הוא המקום קדוש.

חרס אשר תבושל בו ישבר, “and an earthenware vessel which it has been cooked in must be broken.” This means that the boiling of the meat must also take place in the sacred precincts, just as the washing had to take place in sacred precincts.

ואם בכלי נחשת בשלה ומורק ושוטף במים. נמשך גם כן אל מקום קדוש הנזכר תחלה, כי הכל היה במקום קדוש, הכבוס והשבירה והשטיפה. פירש רש"י ז"ל ישבר לפי שהבליעה הנבלעת שם נעשה נותר. ומורק לשון תמרוקי הנשים. ומורק ושוטף לפלוט את בליעתו, אבל כלי חרש למדך הכתוב כאן שאינו יוצא מידי דפיו לעולם, עד כאן.

ואם בכלי נחושת בשלה ומרק ושטף במים, “But if it was boiled in a copper vessel, it should be purged and rinsed in water.” These words are also governed by the previous rule that this must take place in sacred precincts. Every procedure took place in a מקום קדוש “a holy site,” i.e. the washing, the breaking, or the rinsing. Rashi explains that the reason the earthenware vessel had to be broken is that seeing this is a porous material which does not release what it has once absorbed, the remains of the meat would be נותר, “leftover,” on the day following the offering of that sacrifice, and as such it is subject to destruction by fire (normally, when the meat is identifiable). In this instance the next best way of destroying any vestige of what is left over is to break the vessel. The term ומורק is related to the expression תמרוקי הנשים which we read about in Esther 2,12, i.e. “feminine cosmetics.” The entire procedure of purging and rinsing it is designed to remove any part of it which was absorbed by the copper walls of the vessel in question. Seeing that the walls of an earthenware vessel do not yield up what they have once absorbed, the vessel itself must be destroyed.

הנה הודיענו הכתוב הזה כי כלי נחשת והוא הדין לכל שאר מיני מתכות שנתבשל בהן האסור דינו בהגעלה ולא תספיק בהם הדחה בעלמא, אבל כלי חרש שנתבשל בו אסור אין לו תקנה אלא בשבירה ולא תספיק בו הגעלה. ומן הידוע כי יש למים שלש כחות. והם המים הקרים והפושרים והרותחים. הקרים, אם נתן בהם האסור דין הכשר הוא להדיח הכלים במים קרים. הפושרים, אם נתן בהם האסור אין הכשרו בהדחת מים קרים אלא בהדחת הפושרים. הרותחים, אם נתן בהם האסור אין הכשרו של כלי לא במים קרים ולא בפושרין אלא ברותחים, לפי שהכלי שנתן לתוכו הדבר האסור אין פליטתו אלא כדרך בליעתו, וזהו שאמרו בענין אסור כלים של חמץ בפסח, דברים שנשתמש בהם על ידי צונן כגון כוסות וקיתוניות וצלוחיות מדיחם ומטבילם והן טהורים, דברים שנשתמש בהם ע"י חמין כגון יורות וקומקמוסים ומחמי חמין מגעילן ומטבילן והם טהורים, דברים שנשתמש בהם על ידי האור כגון השפודין והאסכלות מלבנן ומטבילן והם טהורים, הא למדת שאין האיסור נפלט מן הכלי אלא כדרך שנבלע בו. ומה שאמר ישבר ולא אמר תשבר כמו שאמר תכבס, לפי שלשון שבירה ענינו שישבור הכלי שנים ושלשה שברים כדי שלא יצלח למלאכה ההיא שהיה ראוי תחלה, ואלו אמר תשבר היה מתבאר מזה לשוברו שברים קטנים יותר מדאי עד שלא יוכל אדם להשתמש באחד מחלקי השברים לשום דבר בעולם כגון (תהילים מ״ח:ח׳) תשבר אניות תרשיש, (שופטים ז׳:כ׳) וישברו הכדים, ולא בא הכתוב לומר אלא שישברנו שבירה קלה שיתבטל הכלי מתשמישו הראוי. וזהו שכתוב כל אשר בתוכו יטמא ואותו תשבורו, ולא אמר תשברו, וכמו שאמרו רז"ל נשברו טהרו כלומר שכבר יצא מתורת כלי ומותר להשתמש באחד מחלקיו, וכן (שמות י״ב:מ״ו) ועצם לא תשברו בו, אפילו שבירה קלה, שכן דרך בני חורין שלא להתעסק בעצמות. ודרשו רז"ל שהיו החרסים נבלעים בקרקע העזרה, שאם לא כן היתה העזרה כולה מתמלאה חרסים, והיה זה מי"ח נסים שנעשו במקדש, ואלו הן, לא הפילה אשה מריח בשר הקדש מעולם, ולא הסריח בשר הקדש מעולם, ולא אירע קרי לכהן גדול ביום הכפורים, ולא נראה זבוב בבית המטבחים, ולא נמצא פסול בעומר ובשתי הלחם ובלחם הפנים, כלומר שלא אירע בהן מעולם שום פסול טומאה, ושלשתן נחשבין אחד, ולא כבו גשמים אש מעצי המערכה, ולא נצחה הרוח עמוד העשן, כלומר עשן אשו של הדיוט, כענין שכתוב (ויקרא א׳:ז׳) ונתנו בני אהרן הכהן אש על המזבח, שאע"פ שהאש יורד מן השמים מצוה להביא מן ההדיוט, שהרי אש של מעלה אין לה עשן, שכך אמרו במסכת יומא, חמשה דברים נאמרו באש של מערכה, רבוצה כארי, וברה כחמה, ויש בה ממש, ואוכלת לחים ויבשים, ואינה מעלה עשן. רבוצה כארי, והאמר רבי חנינא סגן הכהנים אני ראיתיה רבוצה ככלב, לא קשיא כאן במקדש ראשון כאן במקדש שני, עומדים צפופים ומשתחוים רוחים, לא הזיק נחש ועקרב בירושלים, ולא אמר אדם לחברו צר לי המקום כשאלין בירושלים. אלו הן עשרה נסים הזכירם רבותינו ז"ל במקום אחד ביחד במסכת אבות, נשארו שמונה, ואלו הם, כלים של חרס שנתבשל בהן חטאת והיו החרסים נבלעים בקרקע, מזבח העולה אשר עליו אש תמיד והיה מצופה נחשת כעובי דינר והיה מעצי שטים ולא היה הנחושת נתך ולא העץ נשרף, נרות המערכה היה בכל נר ונר שמן כמדת חברותיה ומעולם לא נכבתה אחת מהן קודם השחר, ואם הלילה היתה קצרה לא הותיר מן השמן, ואם היתה ארוכה לא חסר ממנה, הנר האמצעי לא היה בו שמן אלא כמדת שאר הנרות וממנה היה מדליק לכל השאר ובה היה מסיים, לשון של זהורית היו תולין על פתחו של היכל ביום הכפורים ולערב היה מלבין, השעיר שהיה משולח לעזאזל קודם שיגיע לעקרו של הר לא היה נשאר בו אפילו אבר אחד שלם.

The Torah informs us here that copper vessels as well as vessels made of other kinds of metal in which forbidden food has been cooked are subject to cleansing through boiling water and that mere rinsing out with water is not sufficient for these vessels to become usable again for other foods. By contrast, earthenware vessels cannot be made fit again and thus have to be destroyed. Water possesses three properties (powers), depending on whether it is cold, lukewarm, or boiling. If the forbidden item fell into cold water the metal vessel which contained such a mixture only has to be thoroughly rinsed out before it is again fit for use. If the water in the vessel was lukewarm when the forbidden item fell into it, it does not suffice to rinse it with cold water but the vessel has to be rinsed out with lukewarm water, i.e. of at least the same degree of warmth as the water into which the forbidden object had fallen. If the water in the vessel was boiling-hot when the forbidden item fell into it, neither of the previous two procedures are adequate to cleanse out this vessel and make it fit for use again, but it must be cleansed through being immersed in boiling water. The scientific principle underlying the procedure is that the way to reverse the process of the walls of the metal vessel absorbing some of the forbidden substance is through a repetition of the conditions during which this had occurred in the first place, i.e. כבולעו כך פולטו, “in the same way that it penetrated it will escape.” As a result of such considerations, our sages (Avodah Zarah 75) state that vessels which are normally used cold such as cups, water carafes, etc., need only to be washed out properly before they can be used again on Passover. Pots and kettles which are placed on the stove and used hot need to be immersed in boiling water and afterwards they are considered as having been cleansed. Utensils which are used directly on the fire, such as spits, roasting pans, etc., need to undergo a process of being made red-hot else they cannot be used again for permissible food including Passover. The reason is that whatever has penetrated the pores of the metal will not contract and come out by any other process. After you have heard that the forbidden particles do not resurface except by the application of a reverse process of how they penetrated in the first place, you may ask why the Torah writes concerning such a vessel ישבר, “it shall be broken,” using the third person, indirect speech. When speaking of the need to wash the vessel in verse 20, the Torah used direct speech writing תכבס i.e. ”you shall wash.” The difference is that the procedure of breaking the vessel consists of breaking it into several pieces to ensure it cannot be used again for its original purpose. Had the Torah employed the form תשבר, we would have concluded that it must be broken into such small fragments that it is unfit for further use of any kind. The form תשבר in that sense occurs in Psalms 48,7 תשבר אניות תרשיש, a reference to ships bound for Tarshish which would or did break up utterly to frustrate their attempt to invade the land of Israel. On the other hand, when a relatively minor fracture is described such as in Judges 7,20 where the earthenware broke as a result of sound waves, the author speaks of וישברו הכדים instead of ותשברו הכדים, to tell us that all that happened was that these jars could no longer hold water or wine as a result of becoming fragmented. The shards could be used for other functions. When the Torah writes in Leviticus 11,33: כל אשר בתוכו יטמא ואותו תשבורו, “all that is contained therein becomes defiled, and the vessel itself you shall break,” and it did not say תשברו, “shall be broken,” this means (Keylim 2,1) that the act of their becoming broken purifies the shards for further use. Our sages mean that as soon as the vessel has been broken it no longer bears its original “name,” i.e. connotation, and as such its constituent parts may be used freely. When the Torah writes in connection with eating the Passover in Egypt, (Exodus 12,46) “you must not break a bone of it,” this means that the bones must not even be broken in half. It is typical of free people not to consider the bones as valuable once they have finished eating the meat attached to them. Only slaves, destitute people, try to get at the marrow inside the bones. Our sages (Yuma 21) explained that the shards of such earthenware vessels which had become defiled became miraculously absorbed by the floor of the עזרה, the courtyard of the Tabernacle/Temple. Had this miracle not occurred the floor would have become so filled with these shards as to make walking there impossible. This was also one of the eighteen miracles which we mentioned earlier as occurring regularly in connection with the Temple. Here is a list of all these eighteen miracles: 1) no pregnant woman ever lost her fetus prematurely on account of the smell of the sacrificial meat being burned up. 2) This sacrificial meat never exuded an unpleasant odor. 3) The High Priest was never incapacitated on Yom Kippur due to involuntary emission of semen. 4) There never was found a fly in the area designated for slaughtering and dressing the animals. 5) No blemish which would disqualify the offering of the first two loaves of the new barley harvest (Omer) or the first two loaves of the new wheat harvest (Shtey Halechem) ever occurred. The same applied to the “show-breads” offering presented in the Temple every Sabbath. These three offerings were considered as one in the count of the miracles which occurred. 6) The rains never extinguished the flames on the woodpile of the Altar (which had no roofing). 7) Even the strongest wind would never deflect the column of smoke rising from the offerings being burned. The reference is, of course, to the fire contributed by man, not to that which descended from heaven. The Priests were commanded to contribute their own fire in Leviticus 1,7. Although fire descended from heaven, it was a positive commandment for the Priests to contribute fire of their own (Sifra Vayikra 4 [5,10].The reason for this was that the heavenly fire did not leave behind a trail of smoke, as pointed out in Yuma 21, where five peculiarities of the heavenly fire on the wooodpile of the Altar are listed. This fire is described as: “crouching like a lion, disappearing like the sun, its flame being tangible, consuming the wet and the dry alike, not producing smoke.” Rabbi Chaninah there claimed that when he saw this fire it was not crouching like a lion but like a dog. The Talmud answers this by saying that the fire which descended from heaven during the first Temple crouched like lion; the fire which descended during the second Temple crouched like a dog. 8) Although people stood very close together so that they had to touch one another (during the festivals), when the ritual called for them to prostrate themselves on the ground, they miraculously found adequate room for this. [An aspect of the extra-terrestrial nature of the Temple Mount, as was evident also concerning the size of the wings of the cherubs in the Temple which according to their description could not fit into the terrestrial dimensions described there. Ed.] 9) No scorpion or snake ever bit anybody within Jerusalem. 10) No one was ever heard to complain that there were no lodgings in Jerusalem so that he had to spend the night outside the city. The foregoing are the ten miracles listed in the fifth chapter of Pirke Avot. The remaining eight miracles were as follows: 11) the shards of earthenware vessels which served as pots to boil the remains of the sin-offerings and which had to be burned or destroyed as the tiny fraction absorbed by the walls became נותר, “leftover,” and as such forbidden, were absorbed by the floor of the courtyard of the Temple. 12) The Altar for the burnt-offering (the one in the courtyard) which had a woodpile on it which was kept aflame and which stood on a thin copper overlay, never melted the copper nor damaged the wooden beams underneath it. (Tanchuma Terumah 11). 13) All seven lights of the candlestick in the Sanctuary were constantly at the same level of oil, none burning faster or slower than its counterpart. None of them ever went out before dawn (Shabbat 22). During the long winter nights there was never insufficient oil, nor was there an excess of oil during the short summer nights. The light in the centre shaft had the same amount of oil as those on either side of it. It would be the first one to be lit in the evenings and the last one to be cleaned in the morning. 14) A tongue of red colored wool would be hung at the entrance of the Sanctuary at the beginning of Yom Kippur; this would turn white by evening of the day (Yuma 67). 15) The scapegoat which was thrown off a cliff would break up in innumerable pieces before it ever hit the bottom of the valley into which it was thrown. Not a single of its limbs would remain intact by that time. 16).

וראיתי במדרש תנחומא בתחלת סדר ואתה תצוה, כיון שהיו מדליקין את המנורה כל חצר שבירושלים היתה משתמשת לאורה לכך נאמר (שמות כ״ז:כ׳) ויקחו אליך שמן זית זך כתית למאור. ומשעה שבנה שלמה בית המקדש נטע בו כל מיני מגדים של זהב והיו מוציאין פירות בזמניהם, כן דרשו רז"ל במסכת יומא סוף פרק קמא. ועוד שם, לחם הפנים היה משתמר חמימותו בתוכו שמונה ימים, שנאמר (שמואל א כ״א:ז׳) לשום לחם חם ביום הלקחו, א"ר יהושע בן לוי נס גדול נעשה בלחם הפנים סלוקו כסדורו, שנאמר לשום לחם חם וגו', שהיו מסלקים אותו חם כשם שמסדרים אותו חם. ומקשה, ותו ליכא, והאמר לוי מקום ארון אינו מן המדה, ואמר שמואל כרובים בנס היו עומדים. ומשני, ניסי דבראי קא חשיב ניסי דגואי לא חשיב.

Concerning the Menorah procedure I have seen the following comment in Tanchuma Tetzaveh 3: When the lights of the Menorah in the Sanctuary were kindled in the evening, every courtyard in Jerusalem made use of the illumination provided by it. This is the mystical dimension of Exodus 27,20: “they shall take for you pure olive oil, pressed, to provide illumination.” 17) As soon as Solomon had built the Temple he planted in it all kinds of confections made of gold which would produce fruit at the appropriate seasons. This is what we have been told in Yuma 21. 18) Another miracle related there is that the show-breads which were placed on the Table in the Temple every Sabbath retained their warmth at the same level as when they had come from the oven for the entire week. This is based on Samuel I 21,7 לשום לחם חם ביום הלקחו, “to place bread which was still hot on the day it was shared out” (8 days after it had been baked). Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said that a great miracle occurred with the show-breads, i.e. that it was as hot and fresh when it was removed from the Sanctuary as when it was introduced there. He quotes the verse from Samuel in support of this. The question is raised there: “were there then no other miracles?” Did not Levi say that the place where the Holy Ark stood did not consume terrestrial space, and Samuel (the Amora) said that the cherubs stood by means of a miracle!” The answer given is that only miracles which were visible to the people, i.e. the ones which were manifest outside the actual Sanctuary were included in the count. This does not mean that there were no additional miracles inside the Sanctuary.