Podcasts about Tamid

Ben Beteira maintains that a Pesach sacrifice slaughtered with the intent of a different offering on the morning of the fourteenth is also disqualified. Rabbi Elazar, citing Rabbi Oshaya, explains that Ben Beteira considers the morning a valid time for offering the Pesach sacrifice. Although the verse uses the phrase “bein ha’arbayim,” typically understood as “afternoon,” Rabbi Oshaya interprets it as “between two evenings,” encompassing the entire day. Several challenges are raised against this interpretation, referencing the timing of the daily afternoon Tamid offering, the incense, and the lighting of the menorah. In each case, it is argued that a separate verse specifies that these rituals must occur specifically in the afternoon. After further scrutiny, Rabbi Oshaya’s interpretation is ultimately rejected. Rabbi Yochanan offers an alternative understanding of Ben Beteira’s position: while the Pesach sacrifice cannot be slaughtered in the morning, that time is still considered “its time” for the purpose of disqualifying a sacrifice offered with the intent of a different offering, since part of the day is designated for the Pesach, the entire day carries implications for intent. Rabbi Abahu challenges this view, arguing that if an animal is designated in the morning or earlier, it becomes disqualified that morning, as it cannot be offered either as a Pesach or a peace offering. This prior disqualification would prevent the animal from being offered later in the afternoon, as it had already been rejected for a period of time. Rabbi Abahu, Abaye, and Rav Papa each propose possible resolutions to this difficulty. Rabbi Zeira ask Rabbi Abahu that base don his previous question it seems that Rabbi Yochanan holds that live animals can be rejected from sacrifice, not only after slaughter. Rabbi Abahu affirms this and supports it with a ruling from Rabbi Yochanan, from which three principles regarding the rejection of offerings are derived, including that live animals can indeed be rejected from the altar. The Gemara continues with additional statements from Rabbi Yochanan about sacrifices that become permanently disqualified, such as when a person renounces the religion or becomes a shoteh (mentally incapacitated). Ben Azai holds that even a burnt offering brought with improper intent is disqualified. Rav Huna attempts to source this opinion from the Torah verse “olah hu” (“it is a burnt offering”). When this is rejected, the reasoning shifts to a kal va’chomer argument: since a burnt offering is more stringent than a sin offering, being entirely consumed, it should be subject to stricter rules. However, this reasoning is also challenged, as both the Pesach and sin offerings have unique stringencies not applicable to burnt offerings.

Ben Beteira maintains that a Pesach sacrifice slaughtered with the intent of a different offering on the morning of the fourteenth is also disqualified. Rabbi Elazar, citing Rabbi Oshaya, explains that Ben Beteira considers the morning a valid time for offering the Pesach sacrifice. Although the verse uses the phrase “bein ha’arbayim,” typically understood as “afternoon,” Rabbi Oshaya interprets it as “between two evenings,” encompassing the entire day. Several challenges are raised against this interpretation, referencing the timing of the daily afternoon Tamid offering, the incense, and the lighting of the menorah. In each case, it is argued that a separate verse specifies that these rituals must occur specifically in the afternoon. After further scrutiny, Rabbi Oshaya’s interpretation is ultimately rejected. Rabbi Yochanan offers an alternative understanding of Ben Beteira’s position: while the Pesach sacrifice cannot be slaughtered in the morning, that time is still considered “its time” for the purpose of disqualifying a sacrifice offered with the intent of a different offering, since part of the day is designated for the Pesach, the entire day carries implications for intent. Rabbi Abahu challenges this view, arguing that if an animal is designated in the morning or earlier, it becomes disqualified that morning, as it cannot be offered either as a Pesach or a peace offering. This prior disqualification would prevent the animal from being offered later in the afternoon, as it had already been rejected for a period of time. Rabbi Abahu, Abaye, and Rav Papa each propose possible resolutions to this difficulty. Rabbi Zeira ask Rabbi Abahu that base don his previous question it seems that Rabbi Yochanan holds that live animals can be rejected from sacrifice, not only after slaughter. Rabbi Abahu affirms this and supports it with a ruling from Rabbi Yochanan, from which three principles regarding the rejection of offerings are derived, including that live animals can indeed be rejected from the altar. The Gemara continues with additional statements from Rabbi Yochanan about sacrifices that become permanently disqualified, such as when a person renounces the religion or becomes a shoteh (mentally incapacitated). Ben Azai holds that even a burnt offering brought with improper intent is disqualified. Rav Huna attempts to source this opinion from the Torah verse “olah hu” (“it is a burnt offering”). When this is rejected, the reasoning shifts to a kal va’chomer argument: since a burnt offering is more stringent than a sin offering, being entirely consumed, it should be subject to stricter rules. However, this reasoning is also challenged, as both the Pesach and sin offerings have unique stringencies not applicable to burnt offerings.

-

In trying to answer whether a burnt offering can atone for positive commandments neglected after the animal was designated (between designation and slaughter) or only for those neglected before designation, the Gemara cites Rabbi Shimon. He explains that the reason two goats are offered on Shavuot is that the second goat atones for impurities in the Temple that occurred after the first goat was offered. If both goats were designated at the same time, this would support the view that an offering can atone for sins committed after designation. A difficulty is raised with that proof because it assumes simultaneous designation; perhaps the second goat needs to be designated only after the first was offered. That possibility is hard to accept because the verse does not indicate a later designation. Rav Papa also rejects the proof, suggesting instead that the court could stipulate from the outset that the second goat will only become sanctified after the blood of the first goat is offered. Two objections are raised to Rav Papa’s reply. First, Rabbi Shimon does not accept the court's stipulations—he therefore would not recognize a court’s postponement of consecration, as shown by his ruling that animals reserved for one year cannot serve as the Tamid in the following year. Second, Rabbi Yirmeya’s question about whether the second goat can cover impurity that occurred between the sprinkling of the first goat’s blood and the second’s implies it was understood that the goat covers from the time of designation. That second difficulty is, however, resolved, and the original question remains unanswered. There is a dispute between Raba and Rav Chisda about a toda (thanksgiving offering) brought on behalf of another who needs to bring a toda. Each presents his reasoning; Raba cites a baraita in support, but his proof is rejected. Rava gives six rulings about issues of incorrect intention during the sacrificial rites and adds a seventh about the nature of the olah (burnt offering). He teaches that the olah does not itself provide atonement; rather, it is a gift to God offered after a person has repented for not fulfilling a positive commandment. If the person has not yet repented, the offering provides no atonement, for the sacrifices of the wicked are despicable. The Mishna states that both a sin offering and a Pesach sacrifice brought for the sake of the wrong sacrifice or for the wrong person are disqualified. The Gemara first adduces the source for this rule for Pesach and then for the sin offering.  

In trying to answer whether a burnt offering can atone for positive commandments neglected after the animal was designated (between designation and slaughter) or only for those neglected before designation, the Gemara cites Rabbi Shimon. He explains that the reason two goats are offered on Shavuot is that the second goat atones for impurities in the Temple that occurred after the first goat was offered. If both goats were designated at the same time, this would support the view that an offering can atone for sins committed after designation. A difficulty is raised with that proof because it assumes simultaneous designation; perhaps the second goat needs to be designated only after the first was offered. That possibility is hard to accept because the verse does not indicate a later designation. Rav Papa also rejects the proof, suggesting instead that the court could stipulate from the outset that the second goat will only become sanctified after the blood of the first goat is offered. Two objections are raised to Rav Papa’s reply. First, Rabbi Shimon does not accept the court's stipulations—he therefore would not recognize a court’s postponement of consecration, as shown by his ruling that animals reserved for one year cannot serve as the Tamid in the following year. Second, Rabbi Yirmeya’s question about whether the second goat can cover impurity that occurred between the sprinkling of the first goat’s blood and the second’s implies it was understood that the goat covers from the time of designation. That second difficulty is, however, resolved, and the original question remains unanswered. There is a dispute between Raba and Rav Chisda about a toda (thanksgiving offering) brought on behalf of another who needs to bring a toda. Each presents his reasoning; Raba cites a baraita in support, but his proof is rejected. Rava gives six rulings about issues of incorrect intention during the sacrificial rites and adds a seventh about the nature of the olah (burnt offering). He teaches that the olah does not itself provide atonement; rather, it is a gift to God offered after a person has repented for not fulfilling a positive commandment. If the person has not yet repented, the offering provides no atonement, for the sacrifices of the wicked are despicable. The Mishna states that both a sin offering and a Pesach sacrifice brought for the sake of the wrong sacrifice or for the wrong person are disqualified. The Gemara first adduces the source for this rule for Pesach and then for the sin offering.  

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

התוכן א' מהחמשה דברים שאירעו בשבעה עשר בתמוז הוא ש"בוטל התמיד", וזה קשור עם חמישי דפ' פינחס שמדובר שם על הציווי של הקרבן תמיד וכו'. וי"ל שבקריאת פ' התמיד, ש"כל העוסק בתורת עולה כאילו הקריב עולה", מרומז התיקון לביטול התמיד וכו'. ויש לקשר זה גם עם המאורע של "הובקעה העיר", כי הנקודה התיכונה והנשמה של כל העיר‏ – ‏ירושלים‏ – ‏היא ביהמ"ק, והנקודה של ביהמ"ק היא הקרבת הקרבנות, אשר, התחלת וסיום הקרבנות הוא עם קרבן תמיד של בוקר ושל צהריים! (ע"ד ענין ה"חומה" שסובבת ומקיפה את הענינים שבתוך העיר וכו'). ועוד‏.‏משיחת יום ה' דפ' פנחס, י"ז בתמוז ה'תשמ"ט ל"הנחה פרטית" או התרגום ללה"ק של השיחה: https://thedailysicha.com/?date=17-07-2025 Synopsis One of the five events that occurred on 17 Tammuz is the cessation of the Tamid offering. This has a special connection to chamishi of parashas Pinchas, which discusses the commandment of the Tamid offering, and being that “Whoever engages in studying the law of the Olah offering is considered as though he brought an Olah offering,” reading the Parashas HaTamid in the Torah also contributes to the undoing of cessation of the Tamid offering. This can also be connected to the fact that on 17 Tammuz the city was breached: the essential point and soul of the entire city of Yerushalayim is the Beis Hamikdash, and the essential point of the Beis Hamikdash is the bringing of the korbanos, which begin and end every day with the Tamid offering in the morning and afternoon (similar to a wall that surrounds and encompasses everything in the city etc.).Excerpt from sichah of Thursday, parashas Pinchas, 17 Tammuz 5749 For a transcript in English of the Sicha: https://thedailysicha.com/?date=17-07-2025 לזכות מנחם מענדל בן שיינא שי' ליום ההולדת שלו כ"א תמוזלשנת ברכה והצלחה, ואריכות ימים ושנים טובות

-

-

-

Harav Yussie Zakutinsky Shlita

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

In this episode of the Prayer Podcast, Rabbi Aryeh Wolbe delves into the significance of the Karbon Tamid, the continual offering brought twice daily in the Temple, as outlined in Numbers 28:1-8. He explains that this offering, purchased with communal half-shekel contributions, was a consistent act of devotion, symbolizing the Jewish people's commitment to fulfilling Hashem's will, likened to a child pleasing a parent. The prayer recited today, which includes Torah verses, Mishnah, and Talmud, serves as a substitute for the physical offering, fulfilling daily Torah study obligations and elevating good deeds to a heavenly account. Rabbi Wolbe highlights the spiritual danger of routine, where consistency can lead to numbness, diminishing appreciation for life's miracles, such as technology or the human body. The Tamid offering counters this by infusing daily actions with divine purpose, ensuring spiritual vitality.Rabbi Wolbe further explores the Kabbalistic dimensions of the Tamid offering, noting its connection to the “Olah” (elevation offering), which counters impurity, represented by the worm-like tendency to consume destructively. The offering's slaughter on the north side of the altar, associated with judgment and the binding of Isaac, reflects the triumph of kindness over harshness, as seen in the ritual of washing the right hand (kindness) before the left (judgment). He emphasizes the need for intentionality in daily routines—eating, working, or sleeping—to serve Hashem, transforming the mundane into the sacred. By reciting this prayer before morning and afternoon services, and beginning evening prayers with a plea for mercy due to the absence of a nightly offering, Jews maintain a continual connection to Hashem. Rabbi Wolbe concludes with a call to infuse daily life with purpose, praying for the Third Temple's rebuilding to restore the Tamid offering._____________This Podcast Series is Generously Underwritten by Dr. Leonard & June GoldbergDownload the Prayer Podcast Worksheets:https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1iBVevW1ydyjSeyeO0iCcina7e8vix3Lt?usp=sharingThis episode (Ep. #35) of the Prayer Podcast by Rabbi Aryeh Wolbe of TORCH is dedicated to my dearest friends, Dr. Leonard & June Goldberg! May Hashem bless you and always lovingly accept your prayer for good health, success and true happiness!!!Recorded in the TORCH Centre - Levin Family Studio (B) to a live audience on June 17, 2025, in Houston, Texas.Released as Podcast on June 22, 2025_____________DONATE to TORCH: Please consider supporting the podcasts by making a donation to help fund our Jewish outreach and educational efforts at https://www.torchweb.org/support.php. Thank you!_____________SUBSCRIBE and LISTEN to other podcasts by Rabbi Aryeh Wolbe: NEW!! Prayer Podcast: https://prayerpodcast.transistor.fm/episodesJewish Inspiration Podcast: https://inspiration.transistor.fm/episodesParsha Review Podcast: https://parsha.transistor.fm/episodesLiving Jewishly Podcast: https://jewishly.transistor.fm/episodesThinking Talmudist Podcast: https://talmud.transistor.fm/episodesUnboxing Judaism Podcast: https://unboxing.transistor.fm/episodesRabbi Aryeh Wolbe Podcast Collection: https://collection.transistor.fm/episodesFor a full listing of podcasts available by TORCH at https://www.TORCHpodcasts.com_____________EMAIL your questions, comments, and feedback: awolbe@torchweb.org_____________Please visit www.torchweb.org to see a full listing of our outreach and educational resources available in the Greater Houston area!_____________#Prayer, #Tefillah, #Siddur, #Offerings, #Tamid, #Consistency, #ThirdTemple, #SpiritualIntention, #Olah ★ Support this podcast ★

In this episode of the Prayer Podcast, Rabbi Aryeh Wolbe delves into the significance of the Karbon Tamid, the continual offering brought twice daily in the Temple, as outlined in Numbers 28:1-8. He explains that this offering, purchased with communal half-shekel contributions, was a consistent act of devotion, symbolizing the Jewish people's commitment to fulfilling Hashem's will, likened to a child pleasing a parent. The prayer recited today, which includes Torah verses, Mishnah, and Talmud, serves as a substitute for the physical offering, fulfilling daily Torah study obligations and elevating good deeds to a heavenly account. Rabbi Wolbe highlights the spiritual danger of routine, where consistency can lead to numbness, diminishing appreciation for life's miracles, such as technology or the human body. The Tamid offering counters this by infusing daily actions with divine purpose, ensuring spiritual vitality.Rabbi Wolbe further explores the Kabbalistic dimensions of the Tamid offering, noting its connection to the “Olah” (elevation offering), which counters impurity, represented by the worm-like tendency to consume destructively. The offering's slaughter on the north side of the altar, associated with judgment and the binding of Isaac, reflects the triumph of kindness over harshness, as seen in the ritual of washing the right hand (kindness) before the left (judgment). He emphasizes the need for intentionality in daily routines—eating, working, or sleeping—to serve Hashem, transforming the mundane into the sacred. By reciting this prayer before morning and afternoon services, and beginning evening prayers with a plea for mercy due to the absence of a nightly offering, Jews maintain a continual connection to Hashem. Rabbi Wolbe concludes with a call to infuse daily life with purpose, praying for the Third Temple's rebuilding to restore the Tamid offering._____________This Podcast Series is Generously Underwritten by Dr. Leonard & June GoldbergDownload the Prayer Podcast Worksheets:https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1iBVevW1ydyjSeyeO0iCcina7e8vix3Lt?usp=sharingThis episode (Ep. #35) of the Prayer Podcast by Rabbi Aryeh Wolbe of TORCH is dedicated to my dearest friends, Dr. Leonard & June Goldberg! May Hashem bless you and always lovingly accept your prayer for good health, success and true happiness!!!Recorded in the TORCH Centre - Levin Family Studio (B) to a live audience on June 17, 2025, in Houston, Texas.Released as Podcast on June 22, 2025_____________DONATE to TORCH: Please consider supporting the podcasts by making a donation to help fund our Jewish outreach and educational efforts at https://www.torchweb.org/support.php. Thank you!_____________SUBSCRIBE and LISTEN to other podcasts by Rabbi Aryeh Wolbe: NEW!! Prayer Podcast: https://prayerpodcast.transistor.fm/episodesJewish Inspiration Podcast: https://inspiration.transistor.fm/episodesParsha Review Podcast: https://parsha.transistor.fm/episodesLiving Jewishly Podcast: https://jewishly.transistor.fm/episodesThinking Talmudist Podcast: https://talmud.transistor.fm/episodesUnboxing Judaism Podcast: https://unboxing.transistor.fm/episodesRabbi Aryeh Wolbe Podcast Collection: https://collection.transistor.fm/episodesFor a full listing of podcasts available by TORCH at https://www.TORCHpodcasts.com_____________EMAIL your questions, comments, and feedback: awolbe@torchweb.org_____________Please visit www.torchweb.org to see a full listing of our outreach and educational resources available in the Greater Houston area!_____________#Prayer, #Tefillah, #Siddur, #Offerings, #Tamid, #Consistency, #ThirdTemple, #SpiritualIntention, #Olah ★ Support this podcast ★

Sunday, 15 June 2025   He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for My sake will find it. Matthew 10:39   “The ‘having found his soul,' he will lose it, and the ‘having lost his soul' because of Me, he will find it” (CG).   In the previous verse, Jesus noted that he who did not take his cross and follow after Him was not worthy of Him. Now, to build upon that, He says, “The ‘having found his soul,' he will lose it.”   The words at first seem paradoxical. However, Jesus is using the thought of the psuché, the soul, in two ways at the same time. The word itself was introduced in Matthew 2:20. It is derived from psucho, breath. The meaning is based on the context, and it can mean the breath of one's life, the seat of affection, the self, a human person, or an individual. The word corresponds to the Hebrew word nephesh.   In the case of Jesus' words, He indicates that a person who has found his soul, meaning his earthly self, will wind up losing his soul, meaning his eternal self. Finding one's earthly self involves looking after oneself, getting the best out of life, advancing in one's career, or whatever motivates a person to ingratiate his existence apart from God's guiding hand.   The problem with this type of life is two-fold. The first and main consideration is that it leaves God, the Creator, out of the picture. It ignores man's responsibilities to Him and sets one's course for self-directed aims. The second problem with this is obvious to all and yet it is ignored most of the time. Man is destined to die.   As this is so, all self-directed advances and aims have an end because the self has an end. Jesus says elsewhere –   “For what profit is it to a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul? Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul?” Matthew 16:26   This is Jesus' intent. The person finds his soul, the epitome of self-satisfaction and aggrandizement, maybe even living to the point of hedonism, but because he has left God out of the equation, he winds up losing his soul. On the other hand, Jesus next says, “and the ‘having lost his soul' because of Me, he will find it.”   The “because of Me” is the key point of His words. Many scholars and philosophers have stated words similar in thought to Jesus' words –   Plato said, “O my friend! I want you to see that the noble and the good may possibly be something different from saving and being saved, and that he who is truly a man ought not to care about living a certain time: he knows, as women say, that we must all die, and therefore he is not fond of life; he leaves all that with God, and considers in what way he can best spend his appointed term” (“Gorgias,” 512). (via Vincent's Word Studies).   Euripides said, “Who knows if life be not death, and death life.” (via Vincent's Word Studies).   The Pulpit Commentary notes, “In Talm. Bab., ‘Tamid,' 32a, Alexander the Great asks ‘the elders of the south' ten questions, among them, ‘What shall a man do that he may live?' They answer, ‘Let him put himself to death.' ‘What shall a man do that he may die?' ‘Let him make himself alive.'”   Such sayings are found in cultures around the world, and many live lifestyles that bear this concept, such as those living as monks or in asceticism, stoicism, etc. The problem with such lives is that such people are still set to die. Without the “because of Me” of Jesus' words, their end is the same as the others. The main difference between them and those in the first half of Jesus' words is that those in the first category probably had a lot more fun in the process.   Jesus is telling His disciples that the pursuit of God in Christ is the key to finding one's soul, meaning his eternal existence in the presence of God.   Life application: It is common for Christians to use Jesus' words here and in similar passages to give up various earthly delights, to reject wealth, to live in hovels when they could live in a mansion, etc.   Some, such as the Judaizers and Hebrew Roots Movement adherents, live for self while claiming they are living for God. They do this by living by precepts of the Law of Moses instead of living in Christ. Their religion is self-directed because it has rejected the fulfillment of the law by Jesus.   Many such paths of existence in Christianity are unbiblical. For example, concerning wealth, Paul says –   “Command those who are rich in this present age not to be haughty, nor to trust in uncertain riches but in the living God, who gives us richly all things to enjoy. 18 Let them do good, that they be rich in good works, ready to give, willing to share, 19 storing up for themselves a good foundation for the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal life.” 1 Timothy 6:17-19   Paul did not say that rich people need to give up their wealth. He instructs them how to use it in a godly manner. People who are attempting to “find life” since the completed work of Jesus need to simply believe in the full, final, finished, and forever work of Christ. That is how one finds his life. Trust. Believing the gospel and trusting God that it is true by faith is how one finds life.   Jesus' words in this verse in Matthew have a context. Our instructions for finding life now, because of His completed work, have a new context. Don't stop part of the way in the redemption story. When you get to the cross and resurrection, you have come to the point where God has brought you for life. Find life by finding the risen Savior and trusting in Him.   Heavenly Father, our lives are short, and we often focus way too much on making the best of our days without considering You in the process. Forgive us for this. Help us to include You in our every thought and action. Whether we are rich or poor, healthy or sick, single or married, or in any other way, may our priority be to include You in our lives and interactions! Amen.