Yoma 003: Abba Chanan Omer

[Mordecai Kornfeld]

x-mailing-list: daf-discuss@shemayisrael.com
(Please include header and footer when redistributing this material.)
_________________________________________________________________

                 THE DAFYOMI DISCUSSION LIST

      brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Yerushalayim
             Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
                      [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 [REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE TO DISCUSS THE DAF WITH THE KOLLEL]
________________________________________________________________

Yoma 003: Abba Chanan Omer 

Boruch kahan asked:

He says in the name of R. Elozor about two various pesukim to do with
the Aron. My specific question is if you look both at Rashi in the
Chumash on these two pesukim, as well as Rashi here and Rashi in
other parts of Shaas, what is Rashi's general Shitta as regards how
many Aranos were there both in Moshe Rabbeinu's time as well as
during the times of Shmuel and the Melachim and is there a fixed
opinion of what was contained in each Aron?

Boruch kahan, london u.k.
----------------------------------------------
The Kollel replies:

The main Sugya that deals with the number of Aronos is in Shekalim
(15b). The Yerushalmi there cites a Machlokes as to whether there
were two Aronos: the one (that of Betzalel) containing the second
Luchos and the other (that of Moshe) containing the broken first
ones, or just one containing both. According to the first Lashon, it
was Moshe's Aron that would accompany the army in wartime; according
to the second, no Aron ever went to war, except for the one time that
it did, in the time of Sha'ul, when it was captured.
   
We need to understand, however, how the second Lashon explains the
Pasuk in Eikev, a clear indication that there was a second Aron (the
one which Moshe made)?

The Ramban there explains that, according to that opinion, Moshe's
Aron was used only temporarily, until such time as Betzalel made his
Aron. The moment that the latter Aron arrived on the scene (some two
months later), both the Luchos and the broken Luchos were transferred
into it, and Moshe's Aron was presumably placed in Genizah.

He then cites Rashi on the same Pasuk, who explains that two Aronos
(that of Moshe and that of Betzalel) accompanied Yisrael in the
desert. He also says that the former was the one to accompany the
army to war, and that the only time that the latter was taken to the
battlefield was in the days of Eli, when it was captured. This Rashi,
says the Ramban, follows neither of the two opinions stated in
Shekalim, but is the opinion of the Tanchuma, which Rashi seems to
have adopted in spite of the Gemara. He also concludes that the
second Aron must have contained the broken Luchos (otherwise what
would have been the point of taking it out to war). But that too goes
against the statement in this and other Masechtos, which specifically
places the broken Luchos together with the whole ones inside the Aron.

The Da'as Zekenim mi'Ba'alei Tosfos, citing a Sifri, conforms with
Rashi's opinion, only they reconcile the Sifri with the Gemara in
Bava Basra, which states that 'Luchos ve'Shivrei Luchos Munachin
ba'Aron', by confining it to before the building of the Beis
ha'Mikdash, when there were indeed two Aronos. But once the Beis
ha'Mikdash was built, the broken Luchos were transferred to
Betzalel's Aron which remained in the Kodesh Kodoshim. And they
conclude by citing the Yerushalmi which cites a dispute in the
matter, as we explained. It seems that according to the Da'as
Zekeinim, the opinion in the Yerushalmi that refers to two Aronos
conforms with the Bavli, whereas the opinion that speaks about only
one Aron will conform with the Ramban's explanation.

I thought at first, that Rashi will conform with the opinion of the
Da'as Zekeinim. However, Rashi in Shmuel 1 14:18, comments that when
Shaul asked Achiyah to bring the Aron, he was referring to the Urim
ve'Tumim, which is how the Yerushalmi explains the Pasuk according to
those who hold of only one Aron!?

So I suggest that Rashi learns like the Da'as Zekeinim, with the
difference that, according to him, the opinion that holds of two
Aronos confines this to as long as Yisrael were in the desert. The
moment they entered Eretz Yisrael, the Shivrei Luchos were
transferred to Betzalel's Aron. This would explain Rashi's statement
in Eikev that 'two Aronos accompanied Yisrael 'in the desert''.
According to this assertion, Rashi holds that there was only one
Aron. Note that this is unanimously agreed upon regarding the period
from the building of the Beis ha'Mikdash and onwards.

You also asked what was contained in each Aron. I have already
clarified what was inside Moshe's Aron. As for Betzalel's, everyone
agrees that it contained both sets of Luchos (either right from the
outset or at a later stage, according to the various opinions that we
discussed). R. Meir and R. Yehudah (both there in Shekalim and in
Bava Basra 14b) dispute the location of the Sefer Torah. According to
R. Meir, it was placed inside the Aron too, whereas R. Yehudah
maintains that Betzalel affixed a ledge or a box-like affair to the
side of the Aron to house it.

be'Virchas Kol Tuv
Eliezer Chrysler


_______________________________________________
Daf-discuss mailing list
Daf-discuss@shemayisrael.co.il
http://www.shemayisrael.com/mailman/listinfo/daf-discuss_shemayisrael.co.il